ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Pulmonary artery reconstruction using cryopreserved allograft for lung cancer: a bi-centric comparative study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Pulmonary artery (PA) reconstruction during lung cancer surgery is a recognized parenchymal-sparing alternative to pneumonectomy. However, the use of cryopreserved allografts for PA reconstruction remains limited. This study aims to evaluate the surgical morbidity and mid-term performances of three different PA reconstruction techniques, including cryopreserved grafting, direct suture and end-to-end anastomosis, in lung cancer surgery. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent PA reconstruction following lung lobectomy with en-bloc vascular resection over a 20-year period in two tertiary lung surgery centers. The patients were assigned to three groups: patch closure of the PA (group 1, n=60), end-to-end anastomosis (group 2, n=24), and cryopreserved grafting (group 3, n=23). Results: The groups were comparable in terms of demographics, comorbidities, preoperative functional tests, and tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage. Overall morbidity was 44.9%, and overall mortality was 1.9%. There were no significant differences between the groups in postoperative mortality (P=0.10) or morbidity (P=0.30). There was no significant difference in perfusion of the remaining lobe (P=0.19) or the contralateral lung (P=0.12) between the groups. The patency rate was 96% in group 1, 95% in group 2, and 100% in group 3, although this difference was not statistically significant. Over a follow-up period of 32 months, the recurrence rate was 44.9% for the entire cohort. The risk factors for recurrence were pN+ status, squamous cell carcinoma histology and adjuvant therapy, while the type of PA reconstruction was not. Conclusions: Cryopreserved allografts are a suitable material for PA reconstruction in lung cancer surgery providing mid-term performance without increasing operative risk when compared to other reconstructive techniques.
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.