ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2019
Ten year follow-up of lung transplantations using initially rejected donor lungs after reconditioning using ex vivo lung perfusion.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarkers of standard criteria and marginal donor lungs during ex vivo lung perfusion: A comparative study.JHLT open · 2026Article
- 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 · 2026Review
- North American expert consensus on the clinical role of ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) with acellular perfusate.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Review
- Impact of device variability and protocol differences on kidney function during normothermic machine perfusion: A comparative study using porcine and human kidneys.Artificial organs · 2025Article
- Prolonged dialysis duringFrontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Long-term outcomes of lung transplantation withFrontiers in transplantation · 2024Article
- Design and Implementation of a Rat Ex Vivo Lung Perfusion Model.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2023Article
- Proteomic changes to immune and inflammatory processes underlie lung preservation usingFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Review
- Developments in lung transplantation over the past decade.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2020Review
- Establishing In Situ Closed Circuit Perfusion of Lower Abdominal Organs and Hind Limbs in Mice.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2020Article
- Ex-vivo lung perfusion versus standard protocol lung transplantation-mid-term survival and meta-analysis.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2020Article
- Non-ischemic Heart Preservation via Hypothermic Cardioplegic Perfusion Induces Immunodepletion of Donor Hearts Resulting in Diminished Graft Infiltration Following Transplantation.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Article
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
Abstract
backgroundIn 2006 and 2007 we performed double lung transplantation with marginal donor lungs assessed and reconditioned by Ex Vivo Lung Perfusion (EVLP), using a technique developed by Professor Stig Steen. Here we present a 10-year follow-up comparing the outcomes of lung transplantations performed at our clinic using EVLP lungs vs. conventional lungs.
methodBetween 2006 and 2007, 21 patients (6 EVLP, 15 conventional) underwent double lung transplantation (LTx) with follow-up on May 2017 at Lund University Hospital, Sweden. Pulmonary function was measured at 3/6/12 months, and annually thereafter for a period of 10 years in addition to survival and freedom from chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) being analyzed.
resultsRegarding Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 s (FEV1) and 6MWT at 3, 6, and 12 months and annually thereafter, no difference in median FEV1 nor 6MWT was found for EVLP-LTx vs. conventional-LTx (p > 0.05). No difference was shown in post-operative survival between EVLP-LTx vs. conventional LTx for patients with an overall survival up to 10-years (p > 0.05). The same pattern was shown in sub analyses for patients with a limited survival up to 1 and 5 years (p > 0.05).
conclusionNo superiority was found in conventional-LTx over EVLP-LTx, neither in long-term survival nor pulmonary function. No difference in CLAD-free survival was seen between the two groups. We believe that EVLP is a safe and effective method to use in LTx, greatly increasing the donor pool by improving marginal lungs and providing an objective assessment of the viability of marginal donor lungs.
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.