These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Long-term outcomes of kidney transplantation from expanded criteria deceased donors at a single center: comparison with standard criteria deceased donors.
    Author: Hwang JK, Park SC, Kwon KH, Choi BS, Kim JI, Yang CW, Kim YS, Moon IS.
    Journal: Transplant Proc; 2014; 46(2):431-6. PubMed ID: 24655981.
    Abstract:
    Our objective was to compare the clinical outcomes of adult kidney transplants from expanded criteria deceased donors (ECD) with those from concurrent standard criteria deceased donors (SCD). Between January 2000 and December 2011, we transplanted 195 deceased donor renal transplants into adult recipients, including 31 grafts (15.9%) from ECDs and 164 grafts (84.1%) from SCDs. ECDs were classified using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) definitions. Donor and recipient risk factors were analyzed separately and their correlation with recipient graft function and survival was evaluated (minimum 6-month follow-up). ECDs were older (56.8 ± 6.3 years), showed an increased incidence of hypertension, diabetes, and cerebrovascular brain death, and had a higher preretrieval serum creatinine level than SCDs. ECD kidney recipients had a shorter waiting time (P = .019) but other baseline characteristics (age, gender, body mass index [BMI], cause of end-stage renal disease, type of renal replacement therapy, incidence of diabetes and hypertension, number of HLA antigen mismatches, positivity for panel-reactive antigen, and cold ischemic time) were not significantly different from those of SCD kidney recipients. Mean glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years after transplantation was significantly lower in recipients of ECD transplants than recipients of SCD transplants, but the GFR level at 5 and 10 years was not significantly different between ECD and SCD recipient groups (P = .134 and .702, respectively). Incidence of acute rejection episodes and surgical complications did not differ significantly between the 2 recipient groups, but the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) and infectious complications was higher in ECD kidney recipients than SCD kidney recipients (P = .007 and P = .008, respectively). Actual patient and graft survival rates were similar between the 2 recipient groups with a mean follow-up of 43 months. There were no significant differences in graft survival (P = .111) or patient survival (P = .562) between the 2 groups. Although intermediate-term renal function followed longitudinally was better in SCD kidney recipients, graft and patient survival of ECD kidney recipients were comparable with those of SCD kidney recipients. In conclusion, use of renal grafts from ECDs is a feasible approach to address the critical organ shortage.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]