Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40400975›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2025

North American expert consensus on the clinical role of ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) with acellular perfusate.

Matthew Bacchetta, Christian A Bermudez, Ankit Bharat, A Whitney Brown, Marie M Budev, Marcelo Cypel, Caitlin T Demarest, Daniel F Dilling, Bartley P Griffith, John C Haney and 8 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Research advances in consistency and variability inJournal of thoracic disease · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Hippo to the rescue? Advancing technologies in ex vivo lung perfusion.American journal of respiratory cell and molecular biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
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

18 authors.

Matthew BacchettaDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4456-4484
Christian A BermudezDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Ankit BharatDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1248-0457
A Whitney BrownAdvanced Lung Disease and Transplant Program, Inova Lung Services, Inova Fairfax Hospital, Fairfax, VA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4332-4112
Marie M BudevLung and Heart-Lung Transplant Program, Transplant Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1575-3980
Marcelo CypelAjmera Transplant Centre, Department of Surgery, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5652-1938
Caitlin T DemarestDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6948-1103
Daniel F DillingDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Stritch School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9723-510X
Bartley P GriffithDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3015-9322
John C HaneyDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4002-0909
Shaf KeshavjeeAjmera Transplant Centre, Department of Surgery, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4547-8094
Zachary N KonDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Northwell Health, Manhasset, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3720-3445
Tiago N MachucaDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Rede D'Or São Luiz, Sao Paolo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0748-7590
Jorge M MalleaLung Transplant Program, Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4962-8838
Si M PhamDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Northwell Health, Manhasset, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7396-8344
Thomas K WaddellAjmera Transplant Centre, Department of Surgery, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3235-9208
Bryan A WhitsonDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0040-3638
Kenneth R McCurryDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2512-992X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) of donor lungs not otherwise acceptable for transplantation can provide outcomes similar to standard-criteria lung transplantation and has been reported to increase transplant volume by approximately 20% in some transplant centers. Evidence to support decisions about use of EVLP is limited, so expert opinion can be a useful decision aid. This study developed expert consensus recommendations for EVLP with acellular perfusate using a modified Delphi method. Methods: A panel of 18 physicians with expertise in lung transplantation and EVLP who practice in North America completed three surveys on EVLP: Survey 1 used open-ended questions; Survey 2 used primarily Likert-scale questions; and Survey 3 repeated Survey 2 while providing panelists with the Survey 2 results. A follow-up meeting after Survey 3 probed open questions. Results: The primary goal for EVLP is expanding the number of donor lungs available for transplant. Lungs that are acceptable after EVLP are equivalent to lungs that met standard criteria initially. Lungs with unclear or marginal quality should be placed on EVLP for evaluation, including lungs received from third party organizations with incomplete or concerning information. Decisions on whether to put lungs on EVLP require nuanced clinical judgement and should consider compliance and deflation, the ratio of PaO2 to fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F ratio), peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), edema on imaging, and bronchoscopy, with additional parameters considered as appropriate if lung quality is unclear. EVLP lungs are appropriate for transplant if all relevant parameters are acceptable and may be appropriate if some parameters are borderline depending on clinical judgment. Decisions about transplanting EVLP lungs should consider radiography, delta PO2, overall movement, STEEN Solution™ loss, bronchoscopy, peak airway pressure, and palpation, along with other parameters as appropriate. Key open areas for research include evidence-based criteria for lung selection and assessment, the role of biomarkers, and enhanced techniques and perfusion solutions. In addition, the role of EVLP is unclear in lungs with pulmonary emboli and lungs procured with normothermic regional perfusion (NRP), as is the maximal duration of cold ischemia time (CIT). Conclusions: Decisions about EVLP require nuanced consideration of numerous parameters. Expert opinion from this study may help optimize use of EVLP.

Indexed as

acellular perfusatedonor lung evaluationex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP)Lung transplant

Identifiers

PMID40400975
PMCPMC12090176

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.