Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27129409›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons2016

Machine Perfusion of Donor Livers for Transplantation: A Proposal for Standardized Nomenclature and Reporting Guidelines.

S A Karangwa, P Dutkowski, P Fontes, P J Friend, J V Guarrera, J F Markmann, H Mergental, T Minor, C Quintini, M Selzner and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Small animalWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Time as a Therapeutic Ally: The Promise of Long-Term Solid Organ and Tissue Perfusion.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Beyond preservation: future machine perfusion for liver assessment and repair.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

S A KarangwaSection of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
P DutkowskiDepartment of Surgery & Transplantation, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
P FontesThomas E. Starzl Transplantation Institute Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
P J FriendNuffield Department of Surgery, Oxford Transplant Centre, University of Oxford, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK.
J V GuarreraDepartment of Surgery, Center for Liver Disease and Transplantation, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.
J F MarkmannTransplant Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
H MergentalLiver Unit, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5480-9380
T MinorDepartment of Surgical Research, Clinic for General Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
C QuintiniDepartment of Surgery, Transplant Center, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH.
M SelznerDepartment of Surgery, Multi Organ Transplant Program, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
K UygunDepartment of Surgery, Center for Engineering in Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
C J WatsonUniversity of Cambridge Department of Surgery and the NIHR Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Organ Donation and Transplantation University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
R J PorteSection of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With increasing demand for donor organs for transplantation, machine perfusion (MP) promises to be a beneficial alternative preservation method for donor livers, particularly those considered to be of suboptimal quality, also known as extended criteria donor livers. Over the last decade, numerous studies researching MP of donor livers have been published and incredible advances have been made in both experimental and clinical research in this area. With numerous research groups working on MP, various techniques are being explored, often applying different nomenclature. The objective of this review is to catalog the differences observed in the nomenclature used in the current literature to denote various MP techniques and the manner in which methodology is reported. From this analysis, we propose a standardization of nomenclature on liver MP to maximize consistency and to enable reliable comparison and meta-analyses of studies. In addition, we propose a standardized set of guidelines for reporting the methodology of future studies on liver MP that will facilitate comparison as well as clinical implementation of liver MP procedures.

Indexed as

PerfusionTerminology as TopicGuidelines as TopicHumansLiver TransplantationMeta-Analysis as TopicOrgan PreservationResearch ReportTissue Donorsclinical research/practicedonors and donation: extended criteriaguidelinesliver transplantation/hepatologyorgan perfusion and preservation

Identifiers

PMID27129409
PMCPMC5132023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.