Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 314

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Machine Perfusion Versus Cold Storage for the Preservation of Kidneys Donated After Cardiac Death: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Open access
Jochmans, Ina, Moers, Cyril, Smits, Jacqueline M., Leuvenink, Henri G. D., Treckmann, Jürgen, Paul, Andreas, Rahmel, Axel, Squifflet, Jean-Paul, van Heurn, Ernest, Monbaliu, Diethard, Ploeg, Rutger J., Pirenne, Jacques·2010·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Hypothermic machine perfusion may improve outcome after transplantation of kidneys donated after cardiac death (DCD), but no sufficiently powered prospective studies have been reported. Because organ shortage has led to an increased use of DCD kidneys, we aimed to compare hypothermic machine perfusion with the current standard of static cold storage preservation. METHODS: Eighty-two kidney pairs from consecutive, controlled DCD donors 16 years or older were included in this randomized controlled trial in Eurotransplant. One kidney was randomly assigned to machine perfusion and the contralateral kidney to static cold storage according to computer-generated lists created by the permuted block method. Kidneys were allocated according to standard rules, with concealment of the preservation method. Primary endpoint was delayed graft function (DGF), defined as dialysis requirement in the first week after transplantation. All 164 recipients were followed until 1 year after transplantation. RESULTS: Machine perfusion reduced the incidence of DGF from 69.5% to 53.7% (adjusted odds ratio: 0.43; 95% confidence interval 0.20-0.89; P = 0.025). DGF was 4 days shorter in recipients of machine-perfused kidneys (P = 0.082). Machine-perfused kidneys had a higher creatinine clearance up to 1 month after transplantation (P = 0.027). One-year graft and patient survival was similar in both groups (93.9% vs 95.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Hypothermic machine perfusion was associated with a reduced risk of DGF and better early graft function up to 1 month after transplantation. Routine preservation of DCD kidneys by hypothermic machine perfusion is therefore advisable.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/sla.0b013e3181ffc256

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 314

Metadata

Authors
Jochmans, I., Moers, C., Smits, J. M., Leuvenink, H. G. D., Treckmann, J., Paul, A., Rahmel, A., Squifflet, J.-P., van Heurn, E., Monbaliu, D., Ploeg, R. J., & Pirenne, J.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2010-11
Volume
252
Issue
5
Pages
756-764
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2122076120
Cited by
314
References
0
FWCI
22.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Machine Perfusion Versus Cold Storage for the Preservation of Kidneys Donated After Cardiac Death: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e3181ffc256
The paper
Jochmans, I., Moers, C., Smits, J. M., Leuvenink, H. G. D., Treckmann, J., Paul, A., Rahmel, A., Squifflet, J.-P., van Heurn, E., Monbaliu, D., Ploeg, R. J., & Pirenne, J. (2010). Machine Perfusion Versus Cold Storage for the Preservation of Kidneys Donated After Cardiac Death: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e3181ffc256

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.