ArticleJHLT open2026
Interpreting central hemodynamics in durable biventricular circulatory support patients.
Article in JHLT open, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Progressive developments in mechanical circulatory support devices have seen the increasing use of devices which directly augment pulmonary blood flow, including the deployment of durable pumps in the biventricular configuration (BiVAD). This paradigm introduces complex haemodynamic interactions which have not been fully characterized, compared to LVAD alone. We sought to investigate the effect of BiVAD support on central hemodynamics with particular regard to assessing pulmonary flow and vascular properties. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included LVAD and BiVAD patients who had right heart catheterization (RHC) performed within 6 months prior to MCS implantation and thereafter. Traditional RHC parameters, native LV and RV stroke volume (SV), and measures of pulmonary vascular function, including pulmonary arterial compliance (PAC) and elastance (E Results: A total of 62 patients, 13 (21%) BiVAD and 49 (79%) LVAD patients, were studied. At follow-up, despite similar baseline values, the BiVAD vs LVAD cohort had significantly higher pulmonary artery pressures (mmHg): sPAP (37 ± 14 vs 28 ± 11, Conclusion: The presence of combined pulsatile and continuous flow in BiVAD patients significantly influences the hemodynamic profile compared to LVAD patients, particularly in regard to pulmonary pressures. Our study highlights the potential challenges in applying conventional pulmonary vascular hemodynamic indices in patients with continuous flow components.
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.