ArticleJTCVS techniques2026
Passive versus active right ventricular support during lung transplantation: Insights from a porcine pulmonary ischemia-reperfusion injury model.
Article in JTCVS techniques, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Bilateral lung transplantation might require venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for intraoperative support. However, the impact of extracorporeal life support modalities on right ventricular function and pulmonary ischemia-reperfusion injury remains poorly understood. This study aimed to compare the effects of passive and active extracorporeal life support strategies on right ventricular performance, pulmonary injury, and systemic inflammation. Methods: By using a validated porcine surrogate bilateral lung transplantation model, animals were divided into 3 groups: no extracorporeal life support group (clamping, n = 9), passive extracorporeal circuit group without a mechanical pump but with a low-resistance oxygenator (pulmonary artery to left atrium bypass strategy, n = 7) between the pulmonary artery and left atrium, and a centrally cannulated venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation group (n = 7). Pulmonary injury, hemodynamic parameters, and inflammatory markers were comprehensively assessed. Results: Pulmonary edema was greater in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation versus a pulmonary artery to left atrium bypass strategy (wet-to-dry weight ratio, Conclusions: Both pulmonary artery to left atrium bypass and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation prevented right ventricular failure in a setting of severe pulmonary ischemia-reperfusion injury. Our results suggest that pulmonary artery to left atrium bypass might provide better pulmonary protection and cause less inflammation than extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. These findings may guide further investigation of pumpless extracorporeal life support strategies for lung transplantation.
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.