SynthesisFuture cardiology2025
Optimizing left ventricular assist device speed: a systematic review for the heart failure clinician.
Synthesis in Future cardiology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLeft ventricular assist devices have been demonstrated to improve both quality of life and improve survival in patients with end-stage heart failure. Ideal speed setting of these devices is necessary to provide adequate left ventricular unloading while not disadvantaging the right heart. This highlights the potential utility of speed titration studies.
methodsPubMed, Scopus, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases were searched for: (LVAD) OR (Left Ventricular Assist Device) OR (VAD) OR (Ventricular Assist Device) AND (Speed Optimization) OR (Ramp Study) from inception to April 2025.
results22 studies with 749 total patients were included, 45% of whom had a Heart Mate 3. Outcomes of interest included mortality, readmission, RV function, speed change at conclusion of the study, and quality of life. Only 1 out of 22 studies reported all 5 outcomes, with 64% reporting 2 or fewer outcomes of interest.
conclusionThere exists limited data on speed optimization in the HM3, and that which has been reported lacks a standardization regarding method of evaluation as well as outcomes reporting. Prospective studies, with a standard method of speed optimization and more detailed outcomes reporting, are necessary in order to define best practices.
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.