ReviewBrazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery2022
Mechanical Circulatory Assist Devices: Which Is the Best Device as Bridge to Heart Transplantation?
Review in Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging to orthotopic heart transplant: Reducing the risk of intra-operative blood loss.JHLT open · 2025Article
- Safety and efficacy of SGLT2i administration in dilated cardiomyopathy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Ventricular Assist Device Research and Development in Brazil: A Long and Promising Relationship Between Medicine and Engineering.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2023Article
- The Use of Cardioprotective Devices and Strategies in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Procedures and Cardiac Surgery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHeart transplantation is the recommended treatment method for patients with advanced heart failure that is refractory to clinical treatment. Due to the progressive severity of these patients and the impossibility of performing the transplant in a short term, there are mechanical circulatory assist devices that can offer necessary hemodynamic support and clinical stability in the period preceding the heart transplant surgery. The present study aims to address and describe the main devices used as bridges for heart transplantation, as well as to analyze their advantages and disadvantages.
methodsThis work is a literature review, developed with scientific production in the period from 2010 to 2020, that focus on circulatory assist devices as a bridge for heart transplantation.
resultsThese devices are characterized as a bridge for transplantation. Short-term or temporary devices are those used for hemodynamic support to stabilize the individual clinically in the presence of refractory cardiogenic shock. And long-term devices are indicated for stable patients with long-term strategic planning.
conclusionAccording to the present study, it is possible to observe that there is a wide variety of devices available on the market, enabling the most appropriate choice according to the patient's need.
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.