Left ventricular assist devices: A comprehensive review of major clinical trials, devices, and future directions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart failure is an increasingly prevalent medical condition associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In spite of optimal medical therapy, a large number of patients continue to deteriorate clinically and could potentially benefit from advanced therapies. While cardiac transplantation is an established therapy for end-stage heart failure, there are a limited number of donor hearts, and many patients may not be candidates. Over the past two decades, mechanical circulatory support and left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have altered the heart failure management landscape. Herein we review the indications for LVAD implantation and how they have changed over time. We will also outline major technological evolutions in LVADs and summarize the landmark clinical trials pertaining to them. We also highlight the adverse events associated with LVADs and assess the limitations of the existing literature. Finally, we look ahead to the future of LVAD therapy for patients with advanced heart failure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it