Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41522104›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2025

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

Wei-Yang Chen, Zhi-Qiang Deng, Hao-Ji Yan, Xiang-Yun Zheng, Zeng-Wei Yu, Xiao-Han Jin, Xin-Yue Zhang, Ze-Hui Liu, Ya-Ling Liu, Jia-Sheng Zhao 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Research advances in consistency and variability inJournal of thoracic disease · 2026
    Review
  2. 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.

Wei-Yang Chen *Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zhi-Qiang Deng *Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Hao-Ji YanDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Xiang-Yun ZhengDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zeng-Wei YuLung Transplant Research Laboratory, Institute of Thoracic Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xiao-Han JinWest China Medical School, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xin-Yue ZhangWest China Medical School, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ze-Hui LiuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Ya-Ling LiuLung Transplant Research Laboratory, Institute of Thoracic Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jia-Sheng ZhaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Shi-Xiang LiuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Bo-Yang XiaDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yang ZhaoHeart and Lung Transplant Research Laboratory, North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China.
Yang LiHeart and Lung Transplant Research Laboratory, North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China.
Xian HeHeart and Lung Transplant Research Laboratory, North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China.
Wen-Ya LiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Masaaki SatoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Dong TianDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article provides a systematic analysis and commentary on the North American Expert Consensus regarding the clinical role of ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) using acellular perfusate. The consensus outlines key recommendations, including general statements on EVLP, criteria for donor lung selection, critical assessment parameters during perfusion, and a decision-making framework for transplantation. It emphasizes that current clinical practice relies heavily on small-scale, non-randomized, single-center studies, which often require substantial reliance on clinical judgment and institutional experience. As a result, the consensus calls for further, more rigorous research to establish evidence-based guidelines for EVLP-related decisions. By integrating the consensus recommendations with recent advancements in both basic and clinical EVLP research, this article examines the clinical relevance of various decision-making criteria and evaluation frameworks. It also explores EVLP management strategies within specific clinical contexts identified in the consensus. Additionally, the article discusses the inherent logistical and economic challenges associated with implementing EVLP in clinical settings. By clarifying both established principles and ongoing controversies, this review aims to bridge the gap between theoretical consensus and clinical practice, and to provide a useful reference for standardizing EVLP protocols, improving donor lung quality, expanding the donor pool, and enhancing transplant outcomes.

Indexed as

acellular perfusatedonor lung evaluationexpert consensusex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP)Lung transplant

Identifiers

PMID41522104
PMCPMC12780431

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.