ArticleThe Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2024
In the era of outpatient ventricular assist devices, is it time to reconsider the practice of bridging older children to transplant on outpatient inotropes?
Article in The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveVentricular assist devices (VADs) and inotropes are feasible modalities to bridge children to heart transplant (HT) in outpatient settings. However, it is unclear which modality yields superior clinical status at HT and posttransplant survival.
methodsThe United Network for Organ Sharing was used to identify patients aged 18 years or younger, weighing >25 kg, from 2012 to 2022 who were outpatients at HT (n = 835). Patients were grouped by bridging modality at HT: VAD (n = 235 [28%]), inotropes (n = 176 [21%]), or neither (no support) (n = 424 [50%]).
resultsVAD patients were of similar age (P = .260) but heavier (P = .007) and more likely to have dilated cardiomyopathy (P < .001) than their inotrope counterparts. VAD patients had similar clinical status at HT but superior functional status (performance scale >70%) (59% vs 31%) (P < .001). Overall posttransplant survival in VAD patients (1-year and 5-year survival, 97% and 88%, respectively) was comparable to patients with no support (93% and 87%, respectively) (P = .090) and those on inotropes (98% and 83%, respectively) (P = .089). One-year conditional survival was superior for VAD vs inotrope (2-year and 6-year survival, 96% and 91%, respectively vs 97% and 79%, respectively) (P = .030) and 5-year conditional survival for VAD patients was superior to inotrope (7-year and 10-year survival, 100% and 100%, respectively vs 100% and 88%, respectively) (P = .022) and no support (100% and 83%, respectively) (P = .011).
conclusionsConsistent with prior studies, short-term outcomes for pediatric patients bridged to HT in the outpatient setting with VAD or inotropes is excellent. However, compared with outpatients bridged to HT on inotropes, outpatient VAD support allowed for better functional status at HT and superior late posttransplant survival.
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.