Helge Bruns1, Peter Schemmer. 1. Department of General and Transplant Surgery, Ruprecht Karls University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Machine perfusion (MP) in solid organ transplantation has been a topic of variable importance for decades. At the dawn of organ transplantation, MP was one of the standard techniques for preservation; today's gold standard for organ preservation for transplantation is cold storage (CS). The outcome after transplantation of solid organs has tremendously improved over the last five decades. MP has been continuously under investigation and may be an option for organ preservation in selected cases; however, there is only little evidence from clinical trials that can be used to advocate for MP as a routine organ preservation method. METHODS: This article reviews the current knowledge on MP in the field of solid organ transplantation with special focus on findings from clinical trials. CONCLUSION: Especially in heart and lung transplantation, MP seems to be a promising tool to improve postoperative outcome, but a general evidence-based recommendation for or against an application of MP cannot be given due to the lack of the highest level of clinical evidence. Gold standards such as CS should not be left behind without good reason. Randomized clinical trials are desperately needed to further improve outcome and for better understanding of the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms.
BACKGROUND: Machine perfusion (MP) in solid organ transplantation has been a topic of variable importance for decades. At the dawn of organ transplantation, MP was one of the standard techniques for preservation; today's gold standard for organ preservation for transplantation is cold storage (CS). The outcome after transplantation of solid organs has tremendously improved over the last five decades. MP has been continuously under investigation and may be an option for organ preservation in selected cases; however, there is only little evidence from clinical trials that can be used to advocate for MP as a routine organ preservation method. METHODS: This article reviews the current knowledge on MP in the field of solid organ transplantation with special focus on findings from clinical trials. CONCLUSION: Especially in heart and lung transplantation, MP seems to be a promising tool to improve postoperative outcome, but a general evidence-based recommendation for or against an application of MP cannot be given due to the lack of the highest level of clinical evidence. Gold standards such as CS should not be left behind without good reason. Randomized clinical trials are desperately needed to further improve outcome and for better understanding of the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms.
Authors: J de Boer; J De Meester; J M Smits; A F Groenewoud; A Bok; O van der Velde; I I Doxiadis; G G Persijn Journal: Transpl Int Date: 1999 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: James V Guarrera; Scot D Henry; Sean W C Chen; Tod Brown; Eugenia Nachber; Ben Arrington; Jason Boykin; Benjamin Samstein; Robert S Brown; Jean C Emond; H Thomas Lee Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2010-02-21 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Marcelo Cypel; Jonathan C Yeung; Mingyao Liu; Masaki Anraku; Fengshi Chen; Wojtek Karolak; Masaaki Sato; Jane Laratta; Sassan Azad; Mindy Madonik; Chung-Wai Chow; Cecilia Chaparro; Michael Hutcheon; Lianne G Singer; Arthur S Slutsky; Kazuhiro Yasufuku; Marc de Perrot; Andrew F Pierre; Thomas K Waddell; Shaf Keshavjee Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-04-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Hongzhi Xu; Tim Berendsen; Karen Kim; Alejandro Soto-Gutiérrez; Francios Bertheium; Martin L Yarmush; Martin Hertl Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2011-10-24 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: M R Alijani; J A Cutler; C J DelValle; D N Morres; A Fawzy; B W Pechan; G B Helfrich Journal: Transplantation Date: 1985-12 Impact factor: 4.939