ArticleTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2026
Improving outcomes in donation after circulatory death vs. donation after brain death liver transplantation for acute-on-chronic liver failure.
Article in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) carries high short-term mortality, and liver transplantation (LT) remains the curative treatment. Donation after circulatory death (DCD) grafts expand the donor pool but carry higher risks of dysfunction compared to donation after brain death (DBD) grafts, and data directly comparing their outcomes in ACLF are limited. Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 67,201 adult LT recipients from 2004 to 2023, stratified into three eras (Era 1: 2004-2012, Era 2: 2013-2018, Era 3: 2019-2023). Patients with prior LT, fulminant liver failure (status 1A), active hepatocellular carcinoma, or multivisceral transplants (excluding liver-kidney) were excluded. Estimated ACLF (EST-ACLF) severity was defined using EASL-CLIF criteria. One-year graft failure and survival were assessed using multivariable Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Of 67,201 recipients, 62,510 received DBD and 4,691 DCD grafts. DCD grafts did not show clinically meaningful differences in 1-year hazards of graft failure compared to DBD grafts. One-year graft survival in EST-ACLF-2/3 improved over time from 87.2% in Era 1%-96.0% in Era 3, approaching the 97.5% observed with DBD grafts. DCD grafts may represent a viable and increasingly safe strategy for expanding LT access in ACLF.
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.