ArticleJTCVS open2026
The changing landscape of temporary mechanical circulatory support devices in the new heart allocation system: A US nationwide analysis.
Article in JTCVS 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
Objective: The 2018 change in the US heart transplant allocation system was associated with a significant increase in the use of short-term mechanical circulatory support. Using a large national database, we aimed to analyze changes in mechanical circulatory support device use and clinical outcomes after the allocation change. Methods: According to the United Network for Organ Sharing database, 5325 adult patients were identified who underwent heart transplantation in 2019 or 2024 (2019: n = 2226; 2024: n = 3099). Mechanical circulatory support type at registration and transplant, patient demographics, and 90-day unadjusted and adjusted survival were compared between the groups. Results: Compared with 2019, patients being registered for heart transplantation in 2024 were more likely to have an Impella device (26.4% vs 3.3%, Conclusions: Since the adoption of the new allocation system, there has been a dramatic increase in the use of Impella devices. Overall and device-specific survival remain unchanged.
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.