210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21401721)
1. Differential impact on post-transplant outcomes between pulsatile- and continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices.
Ventura PA; Alharethi R; Budge D; Reid BB; Horne BD; Mason NO; Stoker S; Caine WT; Rasmusson B; Doty J; Clayson SE; Kfoury AG
Clin Transplant; 2011; 25(4):E390-5. PubMed ID: 21401721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Post-cardiac transplant survival after support with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: impact of duration of left ventricular assist device support and other variables.
John R; Pagani FD; Naka Y; Boyle A; Conte JV; Russell SD; Klodell CT; Milano CA; Rogers J; Farrar DJ; Frazier OH
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2010 Jul; 140(1):174-81. PubMed ID: 20447659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Improved survival and decreasing incidence of adverse events with the HeartMate II left ventricular assist device as bridge-to-transplant therapy.
John R; Kamdar F; Liao K; Colvin-Adams M; Boyle A; Joyce L
Ann Thorac Surg; 2008 Oct; 86(4):1227-34; discussion 1234-5. PubMed ID: 18805167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Outcomes in advanced heart failure patients with left ventricular assist devices for destination therapy.
Park SJ; Milano CA; Tatooles AJ; Rogers JG; Adamson RM; Steidley DE; Ewald GA; Sundareswaran KS; Farrar DJ; Slaughter MS;
Circ Heart Fail; 2012 Mar; 5(2):241-8. PubMed ID: 22282104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The association of pretransplant HeartMate II left ventricular assist device placement and heart transplantation mortality.
Donneyong M; Cheng A; Trivedi JR; Schumer E; McCants KC; Birks EJ; Slaughter MS
ASAIO J; 2014; 60(3):294-9. PubMed ID: 24614355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Risk assessment for continuous flow left ventricular assist devices: does the destination therapy risk score work? An analysis of over 1,000 patients.
Teuteberg JJ; Ewald GA; Adamson RM; Lietz K; Miller LW; Tatooles AJ; Kormos RL; Sundareswaran KS; Farrar DJ; Rogers JG
J Am Coll Cardiol; 2012 Jul; 60(1):44-51. PubMed ID: 22541834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Changing outcomes in patients bridged to heart transplantation with continuous- versus pulsatile-flow ventricular assist devices: an analysis of the registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation.
Nativi JN; Drakos SG; Kucheryavaya AY; Edwards LB; Selzman CH; Taylor DO; Hertz MI; Kfoury AG; Stehlik J
J Heart Lung Transplant; 2011 Aug; 30(8):854-61. PubMed ID: 21571550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Does continuous flow left ventricular assist device technology have a positive impact on outcome pretransplant and posttransplant?
Klotz S; Stypmann J; Welp H; Schmid C; Drees G; Rukosujew A; Scheld HH
Ann Thorac Surg; 2006 Nov; 82(5):1774-8. PubMed ID: 17062246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effects of centrifugal, axial, and pulsatile left ventricular assist device support on end-organ function in heart failure patients.
Kamdar F; Boyle A; Liao K; Colvin-adams M; Joyce L; John R
J Heart Lung Transplant; 2009 Apr; 28(4):352-9. PubMed ID: 19332262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Should patients 60 years and older undergo bridge to transplantation with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices?
Allen JG; Kilic A; Weiss ES; Arnaoutakis GJ; George TJ; Shah AS; Conte JV
Ann Thorac Surg; 2012 Dec; 94(6):2017-24. PubMed ID: 22858277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of concurrent surgical valve procedures in patients receiving continuous-flow devices.
John R; Naka Y; Park SJ; Sai-Sudhakar C; Salerno C; Sundareswaran KS; Farrar DJ; Milano CA
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2014 Feb; 147(2):581-9; discussion 589. PubMed ID: 24418362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Transplant registrants with implanted left ventricular assist devices have insufficient risk to justify elective organ procurement and transplantation network status 1A time.
Dardas T; Mokadam NA; Pagani F; Aaronson K; Levy WC
J Am Coll Cardiol; 2012 Jul; 60(1):36-43. PubMed ID: 22541833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Results of the post-U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approval study with a continuous flow left ventricular assist device as a bridge to heart transplantation: a prospective study using the INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support).
Starling RC; Naka Y; Boyle AJ; Gonzalez-Stawinski G; John R; Jorde U; Russell SD; Conte JV; Aaronson KD; McGee EC; Cotts WG; DeNofrio D; Pham DT; Farrar DJ; Pagani FD
J Am Coll Cardiol; 2011 May; 57(19):1890-8. PubMed ID: 21545946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Does the type of ventricular assisted device influence survival, infection, and rejection rates following heart transplantation?
Shuhaiber J; Hur K; Gibbons R
J Card Surg; 2009; 24(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 19438776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. End-organ function in patients on long-term circulatory support with continuous- or pulsatile-flow assist devices.
Radovancevic B; Vrtovec B; de Kort E; Radovancevic R; Gregoric ID; Frazier OH
J Heart Lung Transplant; 2007 Aug; 26(8):815-8. PubMed ID: 17692785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Left ventricular assist device in patients with body mass index greater than 30 as bridge to weight loss and heart transplant candidacy.
Yanagida R; Czer LS; Mirocha J; Rafiei M; Esmailian F; Moriguchi J; Kobashigawa JA; Trento A
Transplant Proc; 2014 Dec; 46(10):3575-9. PubMed ID: 25498092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effects of pulsatile- and continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices on left ventricular unloading.
Garcia S; Kandar F; Boyle A; Colvin-Adams M; Lliao K; Joyce L; John R
J Heart Lung Transplant; 2008 Mar; 27(3):261-7. PubMed ID: 18342746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Right ventricular failure in patients with the HeartMate II continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: incidence, risk factors, and effect on outcomes.
Kormos RL; Teuteberg JJ; Pagani FD; Russell SD; John R; Miller LW; Massey T; Milano CA; Moazami N; Sundareswaran KS; Farrar DJ;
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2010 May; 139(5):1316-24. PubMed ID: 20132950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical outcome and bridge to transplant rate of left ventricular assist device recipient patients: comparison between continuous-flow and pulsatile-flow devices.
Garatti A; Bruschi G; Colombo T; Russo C; Lanfranconi M; Milazzo F; Frigerio M; Vitali E
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2008 Aug; 34(2):275-80; discussion 280. PubMed ID: 18375138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Neurocognitive function in destination therapy patients receiving continuous-flow vs pulsatile-flow left ventricular assist device support.
Petrucci RJ; Rogers JG; Blue L; Gallagher C; Russell SD; Dordunoo D; Jaski BE; Chillcott S; Sun B; Yanssens TL; Tatooles A; Koundakjian L; Farrar DJ; Slaughter MS
J Heart Lung Transplant; 2012 Jan; 31(1):27-36. PubMed ID: 22153550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
