ArticleJACC. Advances2026
Comparison of Microcirculation in Chronic Heart Failure, Cardiogenic Shock, LVAD, and Heart Transplantation.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2026. 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.
- Assessing Microcirculation in Heart Failure: No Sweet Without Sweat.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMicrocirculatory dysfunction (MCD) contributes to systemic hypoperfusion and end-organ damage. Prior studies have shown MCD in heart failure (HF), but comparative data across HF severity and heart replacement therapies remain limited.
objectivesWe aimed to assess MCD across the spectrum of advanced HF.
methodsWe prospectively enrolled adults with stable chronic HF, cardiogenic shock (CS), HeartMate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device support, heart transplant (HT), and healthy controls (HCs), between August 2023 and December 2024. Sublingual microcirculation was assessed using handheld vital microscopy and GlycoCheck software. Primary outcomes were between-group differences in: vessel density; capillary blood volume; perfused boundary region; capillary blood flow; and microvascular health score.
resultsA total of 376 patients (120 HF, 81 CS, 43 HM3, and 132 HT) and 44 HC were included. The median age was 62 years and one-third were females. Microvascular density was significantly lower in CS and HT vs HF and left ventricular assist device. Flow was higher in HM3 than CS and HT (P = 0.039). CS and HT had lower capillary blood volume than HF (P < 0.01). Perfused boundary region was highest in HT patients. Microvascular health score was significantly lower in all patient cohorts compared to HC (all P < 0.01), with HT also showing lower scores than HM3 (P < 0.001).
conclusionsMCD is variably expressed across the spectrum of HF and its treatments, with particularly severe impairment in patients resuscitated from CS and postheart transplantation. These results suggest that restoration of macrohemodynamics does not equate to microvascular recovery and underscore the need for further investigation into the mechanisms, prognostic significance, and therapeutic targeting of systemic microvascular health in advanced cardiovascular disease.
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.