ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2024
Trends in Survival for Adult Organ Transplantation.
Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 2024. 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.
- Clinical outcomes of solid organ transplant patients after total joint arthroplasty: a propensity-matched analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Skin Cancer in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Review.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2026Review
- Novel association between graft rejection and post-transplant malignancy in solid organ transplantation.World journal of transplantation · 2025Article
- Radiological distribution patterns in restrictive chronic lung allograft dysfunction: Impact on survival across all phenotypes.JHLT open · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Intent-to-treat analysis follows patients from listing to death, regardless of their transplant status, and aims to provide a more holistic scope of the progress made in adult solid-organ transplantation. Background: Many studies have shown progress in waitlist and post-transplant survival for adult kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplants, but there is a need to provide a more comprehensive perspective of transplant outcomes for patients and their families. Methods: Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to analyze factors contributing to intent-to-treat survival in 813,862 adults listed for kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplants. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to examine changes in waitlist, post-transplant, and intent-to-treat survival. Transplantation rates were compared using χ Results: Intent-to-treat survival has steadily increased for liver, heart, and lung transplants. The percentage of patients transplanted within 1 year significantly increased for heart (57.4% from 52.9%) and lung (73.5% from 33.2%). However, the percentage of patients transplanted within 1 year significantly decreased from 35.8% to 21.2% for kidney transplant. Notably, intent-to-treat survival has decreased for kidneys despite increases in waitlist and post-transplant survival, likely because of the decreased transplant rate. Conclusion: Intent-to-treat survival steadily improved for liver, heart, and lung transplant over the 30-year study period. Continued advancements in allocation policy, immunosuppression, and improved care of patients on the waitlist may contribute to further progress in outcomes of all organs, but the increasing discrepancy in supply and demand of donor kidneys is alarming and has impeded the progress of kidney intent-to-treat survival.
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.