ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
How to Select Patients for Left Ventricular Assist Devices? A Guide for Clinical Practice.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiac index, SvOCritical care (London, England) · 2025Trial
- Depression and Suicidality in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices and Advanced Cardiac Therapies: Mechanisms, Risk Factors, and Clinical Management.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Early clinical outcomes and quality of life assessment after HeartMate 3 implantation: A single-centre descriptive study.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2026Article
- Cardiac Rehabilitation After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The Total Artificial Heart: A Historical Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The Prognostic Role of Pulmonary Arterial Elastance in Patients Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, a significant improvement in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology has occurred, and the continuous-flow devices currently used can last more than 10 years in a patient. Current studies report that the 5-year survival rate after LVAD implantation approaches that after a heart transplant. However, the outcome is influenced by the correct selection of the patients, as well as the choice of the optimal time for implantation. This review summarizes the indications, the red flags for prompt initiation of LVAD evaluation, and the principles for appropriate patient screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.