ReviewNature reviews. Nephrology2025
Improving outcomes in kidney transplantation through advances in donor organ perfusion.
Review in Nature reviews. Nephrology, 2025. 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.
- Comparison of a New Fully Synthetic Perfusion Solution to Belzer MPS for 24-H Hypothermic Oxygenated Perfusion of Porcine Kidneys: A Feasibility Study.Transplantation direct · 2026Article
- Natural product therapy in diabetic kidney disease: emerging multiomics-mediated signalling pathway and molecular target.Chinese medicine · 2026Review
- Rescue by Hypothermic Oxygenated Machine Perfusion for Unexpected Long Prolongation of Cold Preservation Time in Expanded Criteria Donor Kidneys Can Achieve Favorable 2-Year Outcomes.Clinical transplantation · 2026Article
- Kidney allograft outcomes in combined kidney with other solid organ transplantation.World journal of transplantation · 2026Review
- Advancements inFrontiers in transplantation · 2026Review
- Gut microbial-derived metabolites: key players in kidney disease and renal fibrosis.International journal of biological sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global shortage of suitable donor kidneys is the primary challenge in kidney transplantation, and it is exacerbated by ageing donors with increased numbers of health issues. Improving organ assessment, preservation and conditioning could enhance organ utilization and patient outcomes. Hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) is associated with better results than static cold storage by reducing delayed graft function and improving short-term graft survival, especially in kidneys recovered from marginal-quality donors. Although HMP is useful for organ preservation, it is difficult to assess organ viability during HMP because of the reduced metabolic activity at low temperatures, and the adoption of HMP has faced logistical challenges. The addition of oxygen during HMP is aimed at reducing ischaemia-reperfusion injury, but has shown mixed results in kidney transplantation, often depending on the duration of perfusion, although some studies found that the addition of oxygen improved outcomes in higher-risk donors. Normothermic machine perfusion helps to restore kidney function by delivering oxygen and nutrients at body temperature, potentially reducing ischaemia-reperfusion injury. Early studies suggest its safety, but clinical benefits remain unproven. Normothermic machine perfusion also holds promise for assessing organ viability pre-transplantation by enabling real-time evaluation. In this Review, we will summarize the different methods of kidney preservation, providing details of the effect that each method has on graft and patient outcomes and the strengths and limitations of each method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40926043What 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.