Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39960351›Full record

SynthesisXenotransplantation

Systematic Review and Comparative Outcomes Analysis of NHP Liver Allotransplants and Xenotransplants.

Kasra Shirini, Raphael P H Meier

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Xenotransplantation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Kasra ShiriniDivision of Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Raphael P H MeierDivision of Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9050-0436

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with fulminant liver failure ineligible for transplantation have a high mortality rate. With recent progress in genetic modifications and clinical achievements, using pig livers as a bridge-to-transplant has regained popularity. Preclinical testing has been done in small cohorts of nonhuman primates (NHP), and maximum survival is limited to 1-month. We conducted a systematic review and comparative outcomes analysis of NHP-liver xenotransplantation and gathered 203 pig-to-NHP and NHP-to-NHP transplants reported in 23 studies. Overall, NHP survival after pig-liver xenotransplantation was limited (1, 3, 4 weeks: 18.0%, 5.6%, 1.1%), compared to NHPs after allotransplantation (1, 3, 4 weeks: 60.6%, 47.4%, 45.4%). A focus on pigs with genetic modifications evidenced some short-term survival benefits (1, 3, 4 weeks: 29.1%, 9.1%, 1.8%). The use of the auxiliary transplant technique was also associated with better short-term results (1, 3, 4 weeks: 40.9%, 9.1%, 4.5%). Causes of graft and animal loss were mostly rejection and liver failure in allotransplants, while bleeding, liver, and respiratory failure predominated in xenotransplants. Notably, the 1-month survival rate for NHP-allotransplants was significantly lower than the national > 98% rate for human liver transplants. This data confirms the short-term improvements brought by genetic modifications and auxiliary implantation in the NHP model, which remains imperfect.

Indexed as

HeterograftsLiver TransplantationTransplantation, HeterologousAnimalsGraft RejectionGraft SurvivalHumansLiverPrimatesSwineTransplantation, Homologousgenetically modified pigliver allotransplantationliver transplantationliver xenotransplantationnonhuman primate (NHP)nonhuman primate transplantationxenotransplantation

Identifiers

PMID39960351
PMCPMC11832012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.