ReviewCardiology and therapy2026
Anticoagulation in Mechanical Circulatory Support: Contemporary Challenges and Future Directions in Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy.
Review in Cardiology and therapy, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is increasingly used in patients with cardiogenic shock, advanced heart failure, and severe respiratory failure; however, anticoagulation management remains challenging due to the competing risks of thrombosis, bleeding, hemolysis, and device dysfunction. In this review, we synthesize contemporary evidence on anticoagulant selection, monitoring strategies, and device-specific management across major MCS platforms, including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, temporary ventricular assist devices, Impella devices, and durable left ventricular assist devices. Unfractionated heparin remains the cornerstone anticoagulant across most MCS platforms, while anti-factor Xa-guided monitoring is increasingly incorporated into clinical practice in many centers alongside activated partial thromboplastin time and other monitoring modalities. Direct thrombin inhibitors represent important alternatives, particularly for patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia or heparin resistance. Recent advances include bicarbonate-based purge strategies for Impella support and evolving antithrombotic approaches in HeartMate 3 recipients, introduced by the ARIES-HM3 trial. Emerging investigational strategies, including direct oral anticoagulants, factor XI/XII inhibition, and precision anticoagulation approaches, show promise for improving hemocompatibility; however, current evidence remains limited, and further prospective studies are required before these strategies can be routinely adopted. Overall, contemporary evidence supports an individualized approach to anticoagulation based on device characteristics, patient-specific risk profiles, and current guideline recommendations, while highlighting important knowledge gaps that warrant further high-quality prospective investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42886412What 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.