ArticleTransplantation direct2024
Exploring Preservation Modalities in a Split Human Pancreas Model to Investigate the Effect on the Islet Isolation Outcomes.
Article in Transplantation direct, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical Evolution, Outcomes, and Emerging Preservation Technologies in Pancreas and Islet Transplantation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In islet transplantation, the use of dynamic hypothermic preservation techniques is a current challenge. This study compares the efficacy of 3 pancreas preservation methods: static cold storage, hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP), and oxygenated HMP. Methods: A standardized human pancreas split model was employed using discarded organs from both donation after brain death (n = 15) and donation after circulatory death (DCD) (n = 9) donors. The pancreas head was preserved using static cold storage (control group), whereas the tail was preserved using the 3 different methods (study group). Data on donor characteristics, pancreas histology, isolation outcomes, and functional tests of isolated islets were collected. Results: Insulin secretory function evaluated by calculating stimulation indices and total amount of secreted insulin during high glucose stimulation (area under the curve) through dynamic perifusion experiments was similar across all paired groups from both DCD and donation after brain death donors. In our hands, islet yield (IEQ/g) from the pancreas tails used as study groups was higher than that of the pancreas heads as expected although this difference did not always reach statistical significance because of great variability probably due to suboptimal quality of organs released for research purposes. Moreover, islets from DCD organs had greater purity than controls ( Conclusions: For the first time, a comparative analysis was conducted, using a split model, to assess the effects of various preservation methods on islets derived from pancreas donors. Nevertheless, no discernible variances were observed in terms of islet functionality, histological attributes, or isolation efficacy. Further investigations are needed to validate these findings for clinical application.
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.