ArticleJournal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs2023
A novel metrics to predict right heart failure after left ventricular assist device implantation.
Article in Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally Invasive Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence on Clinical Outcomes and Surgical Approaches.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Observational
- Prediction of Right Heart Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device: Opening Pandora's Box.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Echocardiographic predictors of right ventricular failure following left ventricular assist device implantation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Global cardiology science & practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRight Heart Failure (RHF) is a severe complication that can occur after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, increasing early and late mortality. Although numerous RHF predictive scores have been developed, limited data exist on the external validation of these models. We therefore aimed at comparing existent risk score models and identifying predictors of severe RHF at our center.
methodsIn this retrospective, single-center analysis, clinical, biological and functional data were collected in patients implanted with a LVAD between 2011 and 2020. Early severe RHF was defined as the use of inotropes for ≥ 14 days, nitric oxide use for ≥ 48 h or unplanned right-sided circulatory support. Risk models were evaluated for the primary outcome of RHF or RVAD implantation by means of logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves.
resultsAmong 92 patients implanted, 24 (26%) developed early severe RHF. The EUROMACS-RHF risk score performed the best in predicting RHF (C = 0.82-95% CI: 0.68-0.90), compared with the other scores (Michigan, CRITT). In addition, we developed a new model, based on four variables selected for the best reduced logistic model: the INTERMACS level, the number of inotropes used, the ratio of right atrial/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and the ratio of right ventricle/left ventricle diameters by echocardiography. This model demonstrated significant discrimination of RHF (C = 0.9-95% CI: 0.76-0.96).
conclusionAmongst available risk scores, EUROMACS-RHF performs best to predict the occurrence of RHF after LVAD implantation. Our model's performance compares well to the EUROMACS-RHF score, adding a more objective parameter to RV function evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.