Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 361

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Development of Aortic Insufficiency in Left Ventricular Assist Device-Supported Patients

Open access
Cowger, Jennifer, Pagani, Francis D., Haft, Jonathan W., Romano, Matthew A., Aaronson, Keith D., Kolias, Theodore J.·2010·Circulation: Heart Failure

Abstract

Background—: Aortic insufficiency (AI) following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement can affect device performance. The aim of this study was to examine AI development following LVAD implantation. Methods and Results—: Echocardiograms (n=315) from 78 subjects undergoing HeartMate-XVE (n=25 [32%]) or HeartMate-II (n=53 [68%]) implantations from 2004 to 2008 were reviewed. Studies were obtained preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after surgery. AI was graded on an interval scale (0=none, 0.5=trivial, 1=mild, 1.5=mild-moderate, 2=moderate, 2.5=moderate-severe, 3=severe), and the change in AI at follow-up was analyzed with significance tests. Kaplan–Meier estimates for freedom from moderate or worse AI at follow-up were generated. Mixed-model linear regression was used to identify correlates of AI progression during LVAD support. The median (25th, 75th percentile) duration of LVAD support was 239 (112, 455) days, and preoperative AI grade was 0.0 (0.0, 0.0). At 6 months, 89±4% of subjects (n=49 at risk) were free from moderate or worse AI, but this was reduced to 74±7% (n=29 at risk) and 49±13% (n=13 at risk) by 12 and 18 months, respectively. Correlates (slope±SE) of AI progression included female sex (0.002±0.001; P =0.01), smaller body surface area (−0.003±0.001 per m 2 ; P =0.0017), and HeartMate-II model type (0.002±0.001; P =0.039). Correlates (β±SE) of progressive AI on postoperative echocardiogram included increasing aortic sinus diameter (0.04±0.01 per mm; P =0.001), an aortic valve that remained closed (0.42±0.06; P <0.001) or only intermittently opened (0.34±0.09; P <0.001), and lower left ventricular diastolic (−0.002±0.0004 per cm 3 ; P <0.001) and systolic (−0.002±0.0004 per cm 3 ; P <0.001) volumes. Conclusions—: AI progresses over time in LVAD-supported patients. As we move toward an era of long-term cardiac support, more studies are needed to determine the clinical significance of these findings.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circheartfailure.109.917765

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 361

Metadata

Authors
Cowger, J., Pagani, F. D., Haft, J. W., Romano, M. A., Aaronson, K. D., & Kolias, T. J.
Venue
Circulation: Heart Failure
Published
2010-11
Volume
3
Issue
6
Pages
668-674
ISSN
  • 1941-3289 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-3297
OpenAlex
W2151998588
Cited by
361
References
4
FWCI
15.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Development of Aortic Insufficiency in Left Ventricular Assist Device-Supported Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circheartfailure.109.917765
The paper
Cowger, J., Pagani, F. D., Haft, J. W., Romano, M. A., Aaronson, K. D., & Kolias, T. J. (2010). The Development of Aortic Insufficiency in Left Ventricular Assist Device-Supported Patients. Circulation: Heart Failure. https://doi.org/10.1161/circheartfailure.109.917765

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.