ReviewClinical transplantation and research2024
Review in Clinical transplantation and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimized cellular perfusate increases lung viability ex vivo and extends the duration of ex vivo lung perfusion.The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2026Article
- Review
- Engineering Neutrophil Vesicles for Synergistic Protection against Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury after Lung Transplant.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Heart Transplant: A Never-Ending Story.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Lipid metabolism-related genes regulate the immune microenvironment during ex vivo lung perfusion for lung transplants.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Enhanced Donor Lung Viability During ProlongedTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025Article
- Animal models for transplant immunology: bridging bench to bedside.Clinical transplantation and research · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the increasing prevalence of heart failure and end-stage lung disease, there is a sustained interest in expanding the donor pool to alleviate the thoracic organ shortage crisis. Efforts to extend the standard donor criteria and to include donation after circulatory death have been made to increase the availability of suitable organs. Studies have demonstrated that outcomes with extended-criteria donors are comparable to those with standard-criteria donors. Another promising approach to augment the donor pool is the improvement of organ preservation techniques. Both
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.