SynthesisActa cirurgica brasileira2026
Normothermic machine perfusion versus static cold storage for liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the effectiveness of normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) with static cold storage (SCS) in preserving transplantable livers, focusing on early postoperative complications.
methodsA PRISMA 2020-compliant search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science identified comparative studies of NMP versus SCS. Five studies met the criteria (two randomized controlled trials, and three observational cohorts; 630 recipients). Random-effects meta-analysis was performed in RStudio, reporting risk ratio (RR), 95% confidence interval (95%CI), p-value and heterogeneity (I2).
resultsNMP significantly lowered the incidence of composite early postoperative complications versus SCS (RR = 0.60; 95%CI 0.47-0.75; p < 0.0001), corresponding to a 40% relative risk reduction. Between-study heterogeneity was negligible (I2 = 0 %). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant effect modification by study design (p = 0.75), donation after circulatory death proportion (p = 0.91), preservation duration (p = 0.51), donor age (p = 0.59) or perfusion technique (p = 0.37).
conclusionNMP demonstrates clinically superior graft preservation compared with SCS, consistently reducing early complications after liver transplantation. Adoption of NMP may expand the use of marginal organs and improve post-transplant outcomes.
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.