Cited by 1,020

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Machine Perfusion or Cold Storage in Deceased-Donor Kidney Transplantation

Moers, Cyril, Smits, Jacqueline M., Maathuis, Mark-Hugo J., Treckmann, Jürgen, van Gelder, Frank, Napieralski, Bogdan P., van Kasterop-Kutz, Margitta, van der Heide, Jaap J. Homan, Squifflet, Jean-Paul, van Heurn, Ernest, Kirste, Günter R., Rahmel, Axel, Leuvenink, Henri G.D., Paul, Andreas, Pirenne, Jacques, Ploeg, Rutger J.·2009·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Background Static cold storage is generally used to preserve kidney allografts from deceased donors. Hypothermic machine perfusion may improve outcomes after transplantation, but few sufficiently powered prospective studies have addressed this possibility. Methods In this international randomized, controlled trial, we randomly assigned one kidney from 336 consecutive deceased donors to machine perfusion and the other to cold storage. All 672 recipients were followed for 1 year. The primary end point was delayed graft function (requiring dialysis in the first week after transplantation). Secondary end points were the duration of delayed graft function, delayed graft function defined by the rate of the decrease in the serum creatinine level, primary nonfunction, the serum creatinine level and clearance, acute rejection, toxicity of the calcineurin inhibitor, the length of hospital stay, and allograft and patient survival. Results Machine perfusion significantly reduced the risk of delayed graft function. Delayed graft function developed in 70 patients in the machine-perfusion group versus 89 in the cold-storage group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; P=0.01). Machine perfusion also significantly improved the rate of the decrease in the serum creatinine level and reduced the duration of delayed graft function. Machine perfusion was associated with lower serum creatinine levels during the first 2 weeks after transplantation and a reduced risk of graft failure (hazard ratio, 0.52; P=0.0…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa0802289

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A range of other technologies are in use or being studied to prolong preservation times for kidneys and other organs, including hypothermic machine perfusion, normothermic machine perfusion, subnormothermic machine perfusion, high subzero supercooling, and partial freezing.

    “Further, a range of other technologies are in use or are being studied to prolong preservation times for kidneys and other organs, including hypothermic machine perfusion37, normothermic machine perfusion25, subnormothermic machine perfusion38, high subzero supercooling39,40, and partial freezing41.”
  • These other technologies extend preservation for broader organ sharing but only increase preservation by hours to a few days and do not achieve prolonged banking for months and potentially years.

    “While these extend preservation for broader organ sharing, they only increase preservation by hours to a few days and do not achieve prolonged banking for months and potentially years.”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07749-8 · DOI
  2. 10.1111/j.1432-2277.1997.tb00528.x · DOI
  3. 10.1093/ndt/gfh506 · DOI
  4. 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2007.00455.x · DOI
  5. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01312.x · DOI
  6. 10.1016/0140-6736(92)93212-6 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17406-0 · DOI
  8. 10.1097/00007890-199310000-00015 · DOI
  9. Wight J, 2003, Health Technol Assess, 7, 1, 10.3310/hta7250 · DOI
  10. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2005.00910.x · DOI
  11. 10.1034/j.1399-0012.2003.00077.x · DOI
  12. Kootstra G, 1995, Transplant Proc, 27, 2893
  13. Belzer FO, 1982, Transplantation, 33, 322
  14. 10.1016/j.trre.2004.04.004 · DOI
  15. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980730)17:14<1623::AID-SIM871>3.0.CO;2-S · DOI
  16. 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05673.x · DOI
  17. 10.1097/00007890-199504150-00007 · DOI
  18. 10.1034/j.1399-0012.1999.130308.x · DOI
  19. Buyse ME, Staquet MJ, Sylvester RJ. Cancer clinical trials: methods and practice. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1992.
  20. 10.1034/j.1600-6143.3.s4.11.x · DOI
  21. 10.1097/01.tp.0000265586.66475.cc · DOI
  22. 10.1097/01.tp.0000251781.36117.27 · DOI
  23. 10.1097/00007890-199008000-00011 · DOI
  24. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2007.01877.x · DOI
  25. 10.1016/S0041-1345(00)02343-5 · DOI
  26. Daemen JH, 1997, Transpl Int, 10, 317
  27. 10.1097/00007890-199401001-00028 · DOI
  28. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2007.01993.x · DOI
  29. 10.1097/01.tp.0000243733.77706.99 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Moers, C., Smits, J. M., Maathuis, M.-H. J., Treckmann, J., van Gelder, F., Napieralski, B. P., van Kasterop-Kutz, M., van der Heide, J. J. H., Squifflet, J.-P., van Heurn, E., Kirste, G. R., Rahmel, A., Leuvenink, H. G. D., Paul, A., Pirenne, J., & Ploeg, R. J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2009-01
Volume
360
Issue
1
Pages
7-19
ISSN
  • 0028-4793
  • 1533-4406
Cited by
1,020
References
2
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review