ReviewJHLT open2024
Generation of Pulsatile Flow using Clinical Continuous Flow Pumps.
Review in JHLT open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pulsatility as a Potential Regulator of Cardiovascular Biology: Molecular, Cellular, and Hemodynamic Remodeling During Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Support and Following Heart Transplantation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Antioxidative and Regenerative Potential of Sea Cucumber: Focus on Bioactive Compounds and Exosome-Based Strategies for Combating Skin Oxidative Stress.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2025Review
- The evolutionary origins of dementia.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the increasing use of mechanical circulatory support for long-term augmentation of cardiopulmonary function, the need for safer devices is apparent. Pump thrombosis and failure, inadequate ventricular unloading, progressive right-sided dysfunction, and end-organ hypoperfusion are seen with long-term mechanical circulatory support devices. Generation of pulsatile flow has been proposed to mitigate some of these risks by providing physiologic flow and pressure profiles to the vascular system and end-organs. Modification of continuous flow devices to provide pulsatility may prove a cheap and effective way to achieve physiologic flow; however, effective use of such a technique has yet to be demonstrated. This work aims to describe these efforts, as well as mechanical arguments regarding the challenges to be overcome in achieving this goal. Methods: Prior literature and textbooks were used to develop the theoretical basis for the paper. Results: Attempts at generating pulsatile flow with continuous flow devices have been marred by difficulty in mitigating viscous effects on oscillating mechanical systems. Currently available devices and research setups have been unable to generate truly physiologic pulsatile flow systems. New devices are needed that utilize various forms of positive displacement in order to generate true pulsatile flow that mimic native waveforms generated by the heart. Conclusions: The mechanical challenges in generating pulsatile flow with continuous flow devices have precluded their widespread adoption in clinical practice. New pulsatile pumps are needed to achieve adequate physiologic pulsatility with improved side-effect profile.
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.