ReviewBiomedicines2024
Heart Transplant Rejection: From the Endomyocardial Biopsy to Gene Expression Profiling.
Review in Biomedicines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regulatory T cells in cardiac allograft vasculopathy: from mechanistic insights to clinical tolerance.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Transcriptomic signatures and immune microenvironment of acute rejection after heart transplantation: an integrated bioinformatics analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Allograft Transplantation: Exaggerated Hope or Cautious Reality?Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Transforming heart transplantation care with multi-omics insights.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Macrophage metabolism in inflammatory heart disease: new insights and therapeutic implications.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Diagnosis of rejection following heart transplantation: diving into the future.Frontiers in transplantation · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart transplant prolongs life for patients with end-stage heart failure but rejection remains a complication that reduces long-term survival. The aim is to provide a comprehensive overview of the current status in HT rejection. EMB is an invasive diagnostic tool, consisting in the sampling of a fragment of myocardial tissue from the right ventricular septum using fluoroscopic guidance. This tissue can later be subjected to histopathological, immunohistochemical or molecular analysis, providing valuable information for cardiac allograft rejection, but this procedure is not without complications. To increase the accuracy of the rejection diagnosis, EMB requires a systematic evaluation of endocardium, myocardium, interstitium and intramural vessels. There are three types of rejection: hyperacute, acute or chronic, diagnosed by the histopathological evaluation of EMB as well as by new diagnostic methods such as DSA, ddcfDNA and gene expression profiling, the last having a high negative predictive value. More than 50 years after the introduction of EMB in medical practice, it still remains the "gold standard" in monitoring rejection in HT recipients but other new, less invasive diagnostic methods reduce the number of EMBs required.
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.