ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2025
Association Between Left Ventricular Assist Device Infections and Number of Shared Patients Among Care Providers: A Network Analysis.
Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2025. 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.
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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFor patients on durable left ventricular assist devices, prior work has documented that more shared patients among clinicians (connectedness) is associated with improved long-term outcomes. This study examines the association between preadmission clinician connectedness, patient acuity, and postimplant outcomes including infections.
methodsThe Society of Thoracic Surgeons Intermacs National Database was linked to Medicare claims to identify patients undergoing durable left ventricular assist device implantation between 2009 and 2017. Patients were stratified by terciles (low, moderate, high) of provider connectedness. The association between provider connectedness and major infections within 180 days of implant was evaluated by regression analysis, with an interaction term to assess effect modification by patient acuity via Intermacs Patient Profile.
resultsOf the 4985 patients across 127 hospitals, those within networks of low vs high provider connectedness were more commonly Intermacs Profile 1 (12.6% vs 6.7%, P < .001), and designated for destination therapy (3.4% vs 0.7%, P = .002). Patients cared for in centers with high connectedness had a lower risk of infection (β = -0.100, P < .026) and fewer total infections (β = -0.215, P = .014). The risk of infection was most pronounced in higher acuity Intermacs Profile 1 patients (P = .006).
conclusionsPatients in networks with lower clinician connectedness (fewer shared patients) presented with higher acuity. After adjusting for preimplantation risk, lower clinician connectedness was associated with an increased risk of major infections, particularly among high-acuity patients. Measuring and improving network connectedness may be an important quality metric for timely access to advanced heart failure treatment and reducing complications.
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.