ArticleClinical transplantation2025
Use of Normothermic Regional Perfusion in Circulatory Death Donors for Lung Transplantation in the United States.
Article in Clinical transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Back in Circulation: A Review of the Implementation of Thoracoabdominal Normothermic Regional Perfusion in Donation After Circulatory Death in Lung Transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026Review
- Normothermic regional perfusion for donation after circulatory death in lung transplantation.Frontiers in cardiovascular 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionUse of normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) to recover donation after circulatory death (DCD) organs demonstrates increased heart utilization with favorable outcomes. Conversely, DCD lung allograft use when NRP was employed remains controversial. This is a contemporary analysis of DCD lung recipient outcomes in which NRP was used.
methodsUtilizing the STAR-OPTN database, all adult DCD lung recipients in the United States between January 1, 2020, and June 30, 2024 were identified. NRP use was defined if the time between donor death and aortic clamp time was greater than 30 min. Recipient outcomes, including 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality, grade-3 primary graft dysfunction (PGD), and postoperative length of stay were compared using multivariable logistic regression controlling for donor and recipient covariates. Survival analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazard modeling.
resultsOf 987 DCD lung transplants, 92 (9.4%) utilized NRP. There were no differences in recipient characteristics between direct recovery and NRP cohorts. No difference in 30-, 60-, or 90-day mortality, grade-3 PGD, or length of stay was found between cohorts. 12-month survival was equivalent.
conclusionsOutcomes between NRP lung recipients were equivalent to DCD direct recovery recipients. Thus, donor lungs may be considered for transplantation following NRP donation procedures.
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.