Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35407575›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Influence of Intraoperative Hemodynamic Parameters on Outcome in Simultaneous Pancreas-Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Robert Sucher, Tina Schiemanck, Hans Michael Hau, Sven Laudi, Sebastian Stehr, Elisabeth Sucher, Sebastian Rademacher, Daniel Seehofer, Nora Jahn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Robert SucherDepartment of Visceral, Transplantation, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Tina SchiemanckDepartment of Visceral, Transplantation, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Hans Michael HauDepartment of Visceral, Transplantation, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Sven LaudiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Sebastian StehrDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0635-5112
Elisabeth SucherDepartment of Oncology, Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Pneumology and Infectiology, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Sebastian RademacherDepartment of Visceral, Transplantation, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Daniel SeehoferDepartment of Visceral, Transplantation, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Nora JahnDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
University Hospital Leipzig · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Adequate organ perfusion, as well as appropriate blood pressure levels at the time of unclamping, is crucial for early and long-term graft function and outcome in simultaneous pancreas−kidney transplantation (SPKT). However, the optimal intraoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) level has not well been defined. Methods: From a prospectively collected database, the medical data of 105 patients undergoing SPKT at our center were retrospectively analyzed. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was preliminarily performed for optimal cut-off value for MAP at reperfusion, to predict early pancreatic graft function. Due to these results, we divided the patients according to their MAP values at reperfusion into <91 mmHg (n = 47 patients) and >91 mmHg (n = 58 patients) groups. Clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes, as well as early graft function and long-term survival, were retrospectively analyzed. Results: Donor and recipient characteristics were comparable between both groups. Rates of postoperative complications were significantly higher in the <91 mmHg group than those in the >91 mmHg group (vascular thrombosis of the pancreas: 7 (14%) versus 2 (3%); p = 0.03; pancreatitis/intraabdominal abscess: 10 (21%) versus 4 (7%); p = 0.03; renal delayed graft function (DGF): 11 (23%) versus 5 (9%); p = 0.03; postreperfusion urine output: 106 ± 50 mL versus 195 ± 45 mL; p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in intraoperative volume repletion, central venous pressure (CVP), use of vasoactive inotropic agents, and the metabolic outcome. Five-year pancreas graft survival was significantly higher in the >91 mmHg group (>91 mmHg: 82% versus <91 mmHg: 61%; p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in patient and kidney graft survival at 5 years between both groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis affirmed MAP < 91 mmHg as an independent prognostic predictor for renal DGF (HR 3.49, 1.1−10.8, p = 0.03) and pancreas allograft failure (HR 2.26, 1.0−4.8, p = 0.01). Conclusions: A MAP > 91 mmHg at the time point of reperfusion was associated with a reduced rate of postoperative complications, enhancing and recovering long-term graft function and outcome and thus increasing long-term survival in SPKT recipients.

Indexed as

graft outcomehemodynamic monitoringmean arterial pressurepatient outcomesimultaneous pancreas–kidney transplantation

Identifiers

PMID35407575
PMCPMC8999645
OpenAlexW4223633043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.