↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Machine perfusion following static cold storage preservation in kidney transplantation: donor‐matched pair analysis of the prognostic impact of longer pump time
Published in
Transplant International, October 2011
DOI 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2011.01364.x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The impact of machine perfusion (MP) time on kidney transplant outcome is mixed in previous studies using multivariable analyses. In an analysis of 66 pairs of donor-matched adult, first transplant recipients (N = 132) with identical donor characteristics except for pump time, tests of association of shorter versus longer pump time (first versus second kidney removed) by delayed graft function(DGF), slow graft function(SGF), and biopsy proven acute rejection(BPAR) were performed using McNemar's test. Freedom-from-BPAR, graft and patient survival, and renal function were also compared. Mean ± SD pump times for paired recipients with first and second kidneys were 22.7 ± 7.3 h and 31.2 ± 7.9 h, respectively (mean difference: 8.5 ± 4.5 h, P < .000001). There was no significant impact of pump time on DGF or SGF, with discordant pairs favoring less SGF with longer pump time (N.S.). The incidence of BPAR during the first 12 months post-transplant yielded a borderline difference favoring longer pump time (P = .09), and freedom-from-BPAR during the first 12 months was significantly more favorable for longer pump times (95% vs. 84%, P = 0.04). No differences were observed in graft and patient survival, and renal function. While offering significantly favorable protection from BPAR, this analysis of donor-matched recipient pairs corroborates longer MP (pump) times having no unfavorable effect on other clinical outcomes.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 20 41%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 37%
Psychology 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 20 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 October 2011.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Transplant International
#1,404
of 1,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,521
of 148,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transplant International
#13
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 148,515 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.