ArticleJTCVS open2026
Outcomes of staged single versus bilateral lung transplantation in the modern era.
Article in JTCVS open, 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
Objective: Staged single-lung transplantation (SSLT) has been proposed as a strategy for high-risk patients amid donor organ shortages. We aimed to compare modern SSLT versus bilateral lung transplantation (BLT) outcomes and identify factors associated with SSLT long-term survival. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing registry for all adult lung transplants from 2005 to 2021. Propensity-matched outcomes of SSLT (2 sequential, contralateral single-lung transplants) were compared with BLT. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to assess survival, and multivariable analysis identified independent predictors of mortality after SSLT. Results: Among 188 recipients of SSLT and 2948 recipients of BLT, recipients of SSLT were older and more likely to have interstitial lung disease. Despite greater 1-year survival among recipients of SSLT (92.0% vs 87.5%), median overall survival was significantly shorter compared with the BLT cohort (5.8 vs 7.1 years), and both 5-year (54.8% vs 63.8%) and 10-year (27.4% vs 43.6%) survival estimates were lower ( Conclusions: In the modern era, BLT is associated with superior long-term survival compared with SSLT. SSLT can achieve acceptable early outcomes in select patients or donor-scarce situations, but BLT should remain the preferred approach when feasible.
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.