Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35325280›Full record

ReviewPediatric cardiology2022

Patient and Device Selection in Pediatric MCS: A Review of Current Consensus and Unsettled Questions.

Joshua M Friedland-Little, Anna Joong, Svetlana B Shugh, Matthew J O'Connor, Neha Bansal, Ryan R Davies, Michelle S Ploutz

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Joshua M Friedland-LittleDivision of Cardiology, Seattle Children's Hospital, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. Joshua.friedland-little@seattlechildrens.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6161-7651
Anna JoongDivision of Cardiology, Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Svetlana B ShughHeart Institute, Joe DiMaggio Children's Hospital, Hollywood, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3069-4683
Matthew J O'ConnorChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3012-5464
Neha BansalDivision of Pediatric Cardiology, Children's Hospital at Montefiore, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7026-3058
Ryan R DaviesUT Southwestern Medical Center and Children's Health, Dallas, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4631-9685
Michelle S PloutzUniversity of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0848-3900
Albert Einstein College of Medicine · USChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia · USJoe DiMaggio Children's Hospital · USLurie Children's Hospital · USSeattle Children's Hospital · USSouthwestern Medical CenterUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of pediatric ventricular assist device (VAD) support has expanded significantly over the past 20 years, with one third of pediatric heart transplant recipients currently being bridged to transplant with a VAD. Despite increased pediatric VAD utilization, however, there remains little formalized guidance for patient or device selection. The population of children with advanced heart failure is quite heterogeneous, and the available data suggest that VAD outcomes vary significantly based upon patient size, anatomy, level of illness, and type of device implanted. In an effort to better understand current practice patterns and identify populations for whom there does not appear to be a consensus approach to achieving optimal VAD outcomes, the Advanced Cardiac Therapies Improving Outcomes Network (ACTION) has surveyed clinical decision-making among member sites and conducted a review of the available literature regarding patient population-specific VAD outcomes and center-specific practices related to patient and device selection. Rather than aiming to provide clinical guidelines, this document offers an overview of contemporary approaches to patient and device selection, highlighting specific populations for whom there is not a consensus approach to achieving reliably good VAD outcomes, as these populations may benefit most from future research and quality improvement efforts directed toward identifying best practice.

Indexed as

Heart-Assist DevicesHeart FailureChildConsensusHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeHeart failureMechanical circulatory supportPediatricVentricular assist device

Identifiers

PMID35325280
OpenAlexW4220729593

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.