ArticleArtificial organs2026
Comparison of Intraoperative Doppler Flow Measurements and Algorithmic Flow Estimations in Patients Undergoing Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.
Article in Artificial organs, 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLeft ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have become an established therapy for end-stage heart failure over the last three decades. In currently available devices, the blood flow is estimated using a power consumption algorithm. In this study, intraoperative direct LVAD flow measurement with an ultrasonic flow probe was analyzed.
methodsAs part of our routine evaluation of optimal LVAD flow, intraoperative direct flow measurement at the outflow graft was performed using a 14-mm ultrasonic flow probe. Direct LVAD flow measurements were performed at different speed levels: 4400 rpm, 4800 rpm, 5200 rpm, and the optimal flow setting before chest closure. In twenty consecutive patients who underwent a durable LVAD implantation via median sternotomy in our institution between January and April 2025, direct flow measurement was compared with the estimated flow provided by the device.
resultsMedian age was 63 [60;68] years, 17 (85%) were male, 8 (40%) had a history of acute myocardial infarction. Temporary mechanical circulatory support with a microaxial flow pump was necessary in 8 (40%) patients prior to durable LVAD implantation. Destination therapy was indicated in 12 (60%) cases. Mean flows at 4400 rpm were 2.9 ± 0.3 and 3.4 ± 0.4 L/min calculated by the pump and measured by the probe, respectively. Mean difference between the measurements was 0.56 L/min (95% CI [0.40, 0.70], p < 0.001). Mean flows at 4800 rpm were 3.5 ± 0.3 and 4.1 ± 0.5 L/min, respectively. Mean difference between the measurements was 0.55 L/min (95% CI [0.33, 0.77], p < 0.001). Mean flows at 5200 rpm were 4.2 ± 0.3 and 4.7 ± 0.5 L/min, respectively. Mean difference between the measurements was 0.53 L/min (95% CI [0.40, 0.70], p = 0.001). Mean optimal speed for patients was 5400 rpm, mean difference between the measurements was 0.49 L/min (95% CI [0.23, 0.74], p = 0.001).
conclusionLVAD flow measured with an ultrasonic flow probe shows significantly higher results (approximately +0.5 L/min) compared to the flow estimated by the device. The difference remains constant at different LVAD speed modes. Intraoperative flow measurement employing an ultrasonic flow probe is a valuable tool for hemodynamic evaluation during implantation of a durable LVAD.
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.