ArticleArtificial organs2025
Influence of Preoperative Anatomical Characteristics on the Direction of Inflow Cannula in HeartMate 3.
Article in Artificial organs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- CT-based cannula position predicts neurological risk in patients with HeartMate 3 LVAD.JHLT open · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe influence of inflow cannula (IC) direction in HeartMate 3 (HM3) remains unclear. We investigated preoperative anatomical characteristics related to IC direction by analyzing computed tomography (CT) images and assessed the relationship between prognosis and IC direction in HM3.
methodsWe evaluated 48 patients who underwent HM3 implantation and categorized them based on the IC direction: anterior/lateral wall (group A, n = 18), mitral/aortic valve (B, n = 21), and posterior/inferior wall (C, n = 9). In preoperative CT, the positional relationship between the mitral valve, left ventricle (LV) apex, chest wall, and diaphragm was evaluated. The survival rate and freedom rate from complications after HM3 implantation in each group were evaluated.
resultsOn preoperative CT, group A had a higher mitral valve height from the LV apex than group B (68 ± 13 and 52 ± 14 mm, respectively; p < 0.01). Group C had a longer distance between the LV apex and chest wall than group B (20 ± 9 and 9 ± 6 mm, p < 0.01). Group C had a shorter thoracic depth from the LV apex than did group B (24 ± 9 and 39 ± 11 mm, p < 0.01). The 3-year survival rates after HM3 implantation for groups A, B, and C were 88%, 90%, and 100%, respectively. The rates of freedom from complications after HM3 implantation at 3 years in groups A, B, and C were 50%, 43%, and 20%, respectively.
conclusionsThe IC direction in HM3 was influenced by the preoperative position of the mitral valve, LV apex, chest wall, and diaphragm. The IC direction in HM3 did not significantly affect survival rates.
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.