ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
Uncontrolled Donation after Circulatory Death Only Lung Program: An Urgent Opportunity.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unlocking the potential of uncontrolled DCD in lung transplantation: A review of 2 decades of experience.JHLT open · 2025Review
- Lung Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury in Lung Transplant Surgery: Where Do We Stand?Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients: Different Donor Pathways for an Existing Donor Pool Still Underestimated-Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Strategies for Maximising Lung Utilisation in Donors After Brain and Cardiac Death: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD) represents a potential source of lungs, and since Steen's 2001 landmark case in Sweden, lungs have been recovered from uDCD donors and transplanted to patients in other European countries (France, the Netherlands, Spain and Italy) with promising results. Disparities still exist among European countries and among regions in Italy due to logistical and organizational factors. The present manuscript focuses on the clinical experiences pertaining to uDCD lungs in North America and European countries and on different lung maintenance methods. Existing experiences (and protocols) are not uniform, especially with respect to the type of lung maintenance, the definition of warm ischemic time (WIT) and, finally, the use of ex vivo perfusion (available in the last several years in most centers). In situ lung cooling may be superior to protective ventilation, but this process may be difficult to perform in the uDCD setting and is also time-consuming. On the other hand, the "protective ventilation technique" is simpler and feasible in every hospital. It may lead to a broader use of uDCD lung donors. To date, the results of lung transplants performed after protective ventilation as a preservation technique are scarce but promising. All the protocols comprise, among the inclusion criteria, a witnessed cardiac arrest. The detectable differences included preservation time (240 vs. 180 min) and donor age (<55 years in Spanish protocols and <65 years in Toronto protocols). Overall, independently of the differences in protocols, lungs from uDCD donors show promising results, and the possibility of optimizing ex vivo lung perfusion may broaden the use of these organs.
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.