ArticleTexas Heart Institute journal2023
Clinical Predictors and Outcomes After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation and Tracheostomy.
Article in Texas Heart Institute journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Characteristics and Mortality-Associated Factors in Trauma Patients Undergoing Permanent Versus Temporary Tracheostomy.Clinics and 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
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative respiratory failure is a major complication that affects up to 10% of patients who undergo cardiac surgery and has a high in-hospital mortality rate. Few studies have investigated whether patients who require tracheostomy for postoperative respiratory failure after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation have worse survival outcomes than patients who do not.
objectiveTo identify risk factors for respiratory failure necessitating tracheostomy in CF-LVAD recipients and to compare survival outcomes between those who did and did not require tracheostomy.
methodsConsecutive patients who underwent primary CF-LVAD placement at a single institution between August 1, 2002, and December 31, 2019, were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching accounted for baseline differences between the tracheostomy and nontracheostomy groups. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify tracheostomy risk factors and 90-day survival; Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess midterm survival.
resultsDuring the study period, 664 patients received a CF-LVAD; 106 (16.0%) underwent tracheostomy for respiratory failure. Propensity score matching produced 103 matched tracheostomy-nontracheostomy pairs. Patients who underwent tracheostomy were older (mean [SD] age, 57.9 [12.3] vs 54.6 [13.9] years; P = .02) and more likely to need preoperative mechanical circulatory support (61.3% vs 47.8%; P = .01) and preoperative intubation (27.4% vs 8.8%; P < .001); serum creatinine was higher in the tracheostomy group (mean [SD], 1.7 [1.0] vs 1.4 [0.6] mg/dL; P < .001), correlating with tracheostomy need (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.21-2.56; P = .003). Both before and after propensity matching, 30-day, 60-day, 90-day, and 1-year survival were worse in patients who underwent tracheostomy. Median follow-up was 0.8 years (range, 0.0-11.2 years). Three-year Kaplan-Meier survival was significantly worse for the tracheostomy group before (22.0% vs 61.0%; P < .001) and after (22.4% vs 48.3%; P < .001) matching.
conclusionGiven the substantially increased probability of death in patients who develop respiratory failure and need tracheostomy, those at high risk for respiratory failure should be carefully considered for CF-LVAD implantation. Comprehensive management to decrease respiratory failure before and after surgery is critical.
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.