ArticleJournal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs2025
Clinical outcomes of modified left ventricular assist device driveline management.
Article in Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs, 2025. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are implanted in patients with heart failure to support cardiac circulation. However, no standardized methods have been established for LVAD driveline exit site management for the prevention of infections. Therefore, this study evaluated the efficacy of modified driveline management compared with that of conventional driveline management. We retrospectively assessed the outcomes of 262 patients who underwent continuous-flow LVAD implantation between January 2005 and March 2023 at Osaka University in Japan. In conventional driveline management, an LVAD driveline penetrates the skin along the body surface and is fixed near the penetration site (n = 224). In contrast, in our modified fixation method, the LVAD driveline vertically penetrates the skin to prevent ischemia at the driveline exit site and is fixed at a distant abdominal site to prevent the movement of the driveline exit site due to body movement (n = 38). The rates of freedom from LVAD driveline infection in patients with conventional driveline management were 86, 75, and 63% at 1, 2, and 3 years after LVAD implantation, respectively. The rate of freedom from LVAD driveline infection in patients managed by the modified fixation method was 91% at 1, 2, as well as 3 years after LVAD implantation. The freedom rates from LVAD driveline infection in the patients with modified fixation method was lower than in the patients with the conventional method (p = 0.04). Our study revealed that the modified fixation method may offer the possibility for preventing LVAD driveline infection.
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.