ReviewFrontiers in transplantation2025
Diagnosis of rejection following heart transplantation: diving into the future.
Review in Frontiers in transplantation, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the standardization of the grading system for pathologic diagnosis of antibody-mediated and acute cellular rejection, endomyocardial biopsy has remained the gold-standard. However, biopsies are invasive, costly, and limited by sampling error. As such, adjuvant non-invasive methods including cardiac biomarkers, imaging including cardiac magnetic resonance and echocardiography, and donor-specific antibodies and non-HLA antibodies have been traditionally used. However, all these techniques are limited by either sensitivity or specificity. More recently, there has been a shift to other contemporary non-biopsy surrogate markers for rejection surveillance including donor-derived cell free DNA, gene expression profiling, and messenger RNA and micro-RNA in tissue. Herein we review the methods currently utilized to diagnose rejection and their limitations. We find that while there have been significant advancements in technology and non-invasive techniques, no current method alone adequately diagnoses rejection (Central Image). Thus, future studies are warranted to investigate new strategies involving a multi-modal approach that incorporates non-invasive diagnostic methods and personalized medicine to monitor postoperative progression in heart transplant patients.
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.