SynthesisFrontiers of medicine2016
Machine perfusion versus cold storage of livers: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers of medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment of Machine Perfusion Systems for Human Liver Transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2022Pooled it
- Mitochondrial Consequences of Organ Preservation Techniques during Liver Transplantation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Pooled it
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Machine Perfusion vs. Static Cold Storage of Liver Allografts on Liver Transplantation Outcomes: The Future Direction of Graft Preservation.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Optimizing Livers for Transplantation Using Machine Perfusion versus Cold Storage in Large Animal Studies and Human Studies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BioMed research international · 2018Pooled it
- Tissue conservation for transplantation.Innovative surgical sciences · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Different organ preservation methods are key factors influencing the results of liver transplantation. In this study, the outcomes of experimental models receiving donation after cardiac death (DCD) livers preserved through machine perfusion (MP) or static cold storage (CS) were compared by conducting a meta-analysis. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to compare pooled data from two animal species. Twenty-four studies involving MP preservation were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with CS preservation, MP can reduce the levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and hyaluronic acid (HA) and the changes in liver weight. By contrast, MP can enhance bile production and portal vein flow (PVF). Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels and histological changes significantly differed between the two preservation methods. In conclusion, MP of DCD livers is superior to CS in experimental animals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.