ArticleJHLT open2025
Risk prediction model for waitlist mortality in patients with left ventricular assist devices.
Article 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.
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
Background: Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are a bridge to heart transplantation (HT). Given limited donor organs, assessment of risk of waitlist mortality is important for waitlist prioritization for HT. We sought to derive and validate a risk prediction model for waitlist mortality in LVAD patients. Methods: Adult patients with a continuous-flow, centrifugal, durable LVAD listed or likely to be listed for HT in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) were included. The outcome was time to all-cause mortality within 2 years from implant. We considered 41 candidate predictors at 3 months post-implant. Univariate Fine-Gray models and 4 logistic regression techniques (logistic, LASSO, random forest, gradient boosting) were used to select variables for a final survival model using the Fine-Gray method. The model was validated in INTERMACS and in an independent cohort (European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support [EUROMACS]). Model discrimination and calibration were evaluated. Results: The INTERMACS cohort included 2364 patients with 268 (11%) deaths. A risk prediction model for waitlist mortality at 2 years was derived with area-under-the-curve (AUC) of 0.72 (95% CI 0.67-0.77). The EUROMACS cohort included 577 patients with 70 (12%) deaths. The model AUC was 0.62 (95% CI 0.55-0.70). The model predicted waitlist mortality when divided into low-, medium-, or high-risk groups in the INTERMACS (p<0.001) and EUROMACS (p=0.0099) cohorts. Conclusions: We derived and validated a risk prediction model for waitlist mortality in LVAD patients using 2 independent cohorts. Our risk assessment model can inform HT prioritization in LVAD patents.
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.