ArticleClinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology2026
Efficacy and Safety of Implantable Left Ventricular Assist Devices for Destination Therapy: A Peruvian Health Technology Assessment.
Article in Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology, 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
Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the HeartMate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as a destination therapy (DT) for patients with end-stage heart failure (HF) ineligible for transplantation, from a Peruvian healthcare perspective. Methods: A health technology assessment (HTA) was conducted, which included a systematic review of clinical effectiveness and safety, complemented by a critical appraisal of relevant evidence. Searches were performed in 3 databases, complemented by manual searches in HTA organizations and clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) repositories. The search included CPGs, HTAs, randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and high-quality observational studies evaluating LVADs for DT. Cost-effectiveness analyses and device costs specific to the Peruvian context were also reviewed. Results: All the CPGs supported the use of the HM3 LVAD, emphasizing its significant survival benefits demonstrated in primary studies. The HM3 showed a 5-year survival rate exceeding 50%, compared to 25% at 1 year and 8% at 2 years with optimal medical therapy (OMT). Functional and quality of life outcomes also improved significantly. However, common adverse events included bleeding and infections. Cost-effectiveness analyses from high-income settings indicated that the HM3 exceeded conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds but highlighted its critical clinical benefits for high-risk patients with no alternative therapies. Conclusion: The HM3 LVAD offers significant survival and quality of life improvements for patients with end-stage HF ineligible for transplantation. Despite challenges in cost-effectiveness, the adoption of the HM3 as DT in Peru is justified to address a critical unmet clinical need, provided robust medical device surveillance is implemented.
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.