ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Short-term and long-term outcomes of lung transplantation from marginal donors: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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.
- Selective Removal of Neutrophil Extracellular Traps (NETs) Combined with Ex Vivo Lung Perfusion (EVLP): Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To expand the donor pool, medical centers worldwide are applying marginal donor lungs in clinical settings. We carried out this research to reveal the short-term and long-term outcomes of marginal lung donor transplantation. Methods: We performed retrospective research using data from patients who underwent lung transplantation (LT) in The Affiliated Wuxi People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Jiangsu Province, China, between 2018 and 2022 to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of standard donors and marginal donors. Results: A total of 553 cases were incorporated in this study. The perioperative mortality of recipients who received marginal donor lungs was around 20.8%, compared with 13.4% in the standard donor recipients (P=0.03). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, occurrence of primary graft dysfunction, and prevalence of acute rejection. The 1-year survival rate for recipients in the standard group and marginal group was 71.7% and 54.2% (P<0.001), respectively. There was a worse survival rate in the subgroups of age >55 years, smoking ≥20 pack-years, and abnormal chest radiographs; however, the 1-year survival rate in the subgroup analysis of donors with ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO Conclusions: Our findings suggest that marginal donor recipients can expect to have a lower survival rate than standard donor recipients. However, marginal lung transplant recipients could also gain benefit equivalent to that provided by standard donor LTs in both the short- and long-term when proper assessment and management strategies are implemented.
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.