HeartMate 3 LVAD as Destination Therapy can change Concept of Advanced Heart Failure Management: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis in terms of Survival benefits and limitations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Heart failure (HF) is an important public health problem worldwide, with the burden of HF over 60 million people. Although the medical therapy has progressed greatly, HF is still a major source of morbidity and mortality and it needs new innovative technologies like mechanical circulatory support. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have progressed from bridge-to-transplant to destination therapy (DT), providing long-term cardiovascular support to individuals who are not candidates for transplantation, with studies demonstrating superior survival and quality of life, based on the use and effectiveness of LVADs. Based on its magnetically levitated rotor and artificial pulse, the HeartMate 3 LVAD is the latest generation of continuous-flow devices used to augment life-saving and minimization of complications. Objectives: systematically review and summarize the survival benefits, complication rate and quality of life outcomes of the HeartMate 3 LVAD as a destination treatment in end-stage patient with heart failure. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Scopus (2017–2025) resulted in the identification of RCTs, cohort studies and registry analyses that assessed HeartMate 3 in adult patients with advanced HF (INTERMACS profiles 1–4). Outcomes were survival, adverse events, and functional measures. pooled data were obtained through random-effects meta-analysis, and the risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane RoB 2.0 and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria of more than 10,000 patients, including randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and registry analyses. A pooled 1-year survival was 82–85%, and 2 years survival was 75–78%, both of which were statistically better than HeartMate II (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60–0.85). Pump thrombosis was seen in < 2%, stroke in 7–9%, gastrointestinal bleeding in 20–25% and driveline infections in 15–20%. A standardized evaluation of quality of life revealed that NYHA class, 6-minute walk distance, and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores showed clinically meaningful measures. Conclusion: The HeartMate 3 LVAD presents long-term survival and functional benefit as destination therapy, most in patients with INTERMACS profiles 2–3. We propose these results to redefine and expand the use of advanced HF in non-transplant candidates. Despite hemorrhaging and infection-related complications, its favorable safety profile and patient-centered outcomes allow for overall use in non-transplant candidates selected carefully
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".