ArticleCryobiology2024
CPA toxicity screening of cryoprotective solutions in rat hearts.
Article in Cryobiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Learning from the kidney: improving heart recovery from hypothermia.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Physical vitrification and nanowarming at liter-scale CPA volumes: toward organ cryopreservation.Nature communications · 2025Article
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
In clinical practice, donor hearts are transported on ice prior to transplant and discarded if cold ischemia time exceeds ∼5 h. Methods to extend these preservation times are critically needed, and ideally, this storage time would extend indefinitely, enabling improved donor-to-patient matching, organ utilization, and immune tolerance induction protocols. Previously, we demonstrated successful vitrification and rewarming of whole rat hearts without ice formation by perfusion-loading a cryoprotective agent (CPA) solution prior to vitrification. However, these hearts did not recover any beating even in controls with CPA loading/unloading alone, which points to the chemical toxicity of the cryoprotective solution (VS55 in Euro-Collins carrier solution) as the likely culprit. To address this, we compared the toxicity of another established CPA cocktail (VEG) to VS55 using ex situ rat heart perfusion. The CPA exposure time was 150 min, and the normothermic assessment time was 60 min. Using Celsior as the carrier, we observed partial recovery of function (atria-only beating) for both VS55 and VEG. Upon further analysis, we found that the VEG CPA cocktail resulted in 50 % lower LDH release than VS55 (N = 4, p = 0.017), suggesting VEG has lower toxicity than VS55. Celsior was a better carrier solution than alternatives such as UW, as CPA + Celsior-treated hearts spent less time in cardiac arrest (N = 4, p = 0.029). While we showed substantial improvement in cardiac function after exposure to vitrifiable concentrations of CPA by improving both the CPA and carrier solution formulation, further improvements will be required before we achieve healthy cryopreserved organs for transplant.
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.