ReviewTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2026
Post-lung transplant surveillance in 2026: current practice, variability, and the need for standardization.
Review in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Post-lung transplant surveillance remains highly heterogeneous, with no universally accepted standard guiding organisation of care or the use of physiological testing, imaging, bronchoscopy, laboratory monitoring, and emerging biomarkers. This narrative review synthesises current surveillance practices across these domains and addresses key limitations, sources of inter-centre variability, and evidence gaps that hinder timely detection of allograft dysfunction. We summarize established and evolving approaches to organisation of care, lung function monitoring, radiological assessment, invasive diagnostics, and laboratory parameters, along with novel biomarkers, highlighting where evidence supports routine use and where tools remain investigational. Fragmentation of follow-up strategies, inconsistent interpretation of longitudinal data, and limited integration of novel diagnostics contribute to delayed recognition of graft injury and variable outcomes. Advancing post-transplant care will require consensus-driven definition of minimum surveillance standards, trajectory-based interpretation frameworks, and rational incorporation of validated biomarkers and digital technologies into harmonised follow-up pathways.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.