ReviewJHLT open2025
Right ventricular mechanical support as a bridge to lung transplantation: A literature review of current practices.
Review in JHLT open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessment of Right Ventricular Adaptability to Pressure Overloading for Critical Therapeutic Decision-Making Processes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) serves as a bridge to lung transplantation (BTT) for patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) or right ventricular (RV) dysfunction/failure (RVD/RVF). Proper assessment and management of RV function in BTT patients are crucial for successful outcomes. However, there is a lack of consensus on standardized RV assessment strategies or optimal ECLS configurations. We aim to synthesize current evidence on RVD/RVF assessment and management in BTT patients requiring ECLS, providing a foundation to aid development of standardized clinical algorithms. A scoping literature search across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and grey literature was performed. Inclusion criteria comprised human studies reporting on RV assessment and/or management in BTT patients. Data on patient characteristics, RV assessment methods, and ECLS strategies were extracted. A total of 280 patients were identified. Acute respiratory failure (ARF) was the most common BTT indication (40.4%), followed by RVF (33.2%) and RVD (17.9%). Echocardiography (52.5%) and right heart catheterization (43.2%) were the primary RV assessment tools. However, reporting of specific parameters of RV assessment was inconsistent. Furthermore, we report important variability of practice in ECLS strategies: VV-ECMO (38.8%) was the most common ECLS strategy, followed by VA-ECMO (31.1%), VAV-ECMO (8.2%), and OxyRVAD (13.2%). Based on our findings, bridging strategies currently lack guidance. As BTT is often confronted with dynamic changes over time, respiratory and circulatory ECLS indications may be overlapping. Therefore, a personalized patient approach is needed. We recommend implementing institutional guidelines and international standards to systematically capture this practice.
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.