MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Feasibility of a novel implantable device to provide heart failure therapy and left atrial pressure monitoring in a chronic animal study

2025· article· en· W7127924106 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S Ge, H Yu, H Xu, B Li, K Liu, T Zhang, J Zhang, M Jiang, Q Sun, L Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShuntingPulmonary wedge pressureShunt (medical)Heart failurePulmonary arteryCentral venous pressureImplantPressure sensor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Pulmonary Artery Pressure Monitoring (PAPM) has been shown to reduce rehospitalization in heart failure (HF) patients. Interatrial Shunting Therapy (IST) is in clinical studies for similar purposes. However, current available devices provide either PAPM or IST, but not both in the same device. Purpose A novel implantable device system has been developed to provide IST and Left Atrial Pressure (LAP) monitoring. The system consists of an implant, a delivery system, and an external Monitoring Unit (MU). The MU works with the battery-less MEMS pressure sensor, as part of the implant, to provide the measured LAP to user. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of the system and accuracy of measured LAP as compared to the Swan-Ganz measured Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure (PCWP) in a chronic canine study. Methods The implant is designed to integrate the interatrial shunting and LAP sensing. It is designed to be placed on the atrial septum with the fixation by three pairs of nitinol anchors. The device was implanted in 10 healthy dogs (Labrador, 30-35 Kg), with 4 observed for 1 month and 6 for 3 months, all under general anesthesia. Procedure success, safety outcome, shunt patency (via TEE) and pressure accuracy were evaluated. In order to achieve various pressure levels, phenylephrine (0.05-2.00 mg) was injected during implant and at the end of each follow up (FU) before termination. Pressure waveforms of PCWP and LAP from the device sensor were recorded for more than 10 seconds simultaneously by PowerLab (PLC01) and MU respectively. Correlation and agreement between LAP and PCWP from implant and FU were assessed with Pearson’s correlation analysis and Bland-Altman plots. Results The implant was successful in all dogs and the shunt was patent at 1 or 3 months. No device related adverse event was observed during FU periods and gross anatomical findings at termination at 1 or 3 months were all acceptable. Pressure points were obtained at each time for each dog, with a total of 42 pairs of pressure measurements ranging from 0 to 22 mmHg from all dogs. Fig. 1a shows an example of the gross anatomy of encapsulation of the device by a thin layer of endothelium at 3 months. Representative simultaneous waveform recordings, correlation and Bland-Altman plot are shown in Fig.1b-d. The PCWP and LAP measurements correlated well (R²=0.87), with an average difference of 0.33±1.80 mmHg. In the Bland-Altman plot, 40 of 42 pairs fell inside the 95% limit of agreement, indicating good agreement between PCWP measured by Swan-Ganz and LAP by the MEMS pressure sensor of the device. Conclusions This preliminary chronic canine study demonstrated the feasibility of this implantable device and the accuracy of LAP from the MEMS sensor as compared to PCWP. Further studies are warranted. This novel device with interatrial shunting therapy and hemodynamics may provide clinicians with more options for managing HF patients.Fig.1

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207