Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42942212›Full record

ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2026

One Pressure, Many Targets: Left Ventricular Filling Pressure as a Candidate Effect Modifier for Non-Invasive Ventilation in Acute Coronary Syndromes.

Marek Tomala

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Marek TomalaFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Applied Sciences in Nowy Sącz, 33-300 Nowy Sącz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-7882-9255

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-invasive ventilation relieves acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema and reduces intubation. Whether it saves lives is disputed; restricting the pooled record to the least biased trials leaves neither endpoint significant. My hypothesis: raising pleural pressure subtracts venous return; whether that subtraction is banked as unloading or paid as lost output depends on preload responsiveness, for which left ventricular filling pressure is a candidate effect modifier and not a measure. One radiographic label may contain two gas-exchange phenotypes, proposed for groups, not patients: carbon dioxide accumulates far more slowly than an ischemia-driven presentation floods the alveolus, and the remodeled ventricle arrives hypercapnic. Applied pressure inflates flooded air spaces without removing lung water, lowers left ventricular transmural pressure, and reaches two cardiac submechanisms. The left ventricular arm follows the sign rule; the renal arm follows it only through volume status; and in right ventricular infarction, the recorded filling pressure misleads, while the pulmonary arm does not reverse. In acute coronary syndromes, the first prediction fails if transmural pressure falls no more in the elevated than in the normal stratum, or if stroke volume index does not fall in the latter. The outer boundary is the requirement for emergency reperfusion, a limit inferred rather than measured directly.

Indexed as

acute coronary syndromealveolar recruitmentcardiogenic pulmonary edemacontinuous positive airway pressureheart-lung interactionischemic mitral regurgitationnon-invasive ventilationtransmural pressureventricular interdependence

Identifiers

PMID42942212
PMCPMC13705974

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.