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: HLA matching for cadaver renal transplantation in SEOPF: the impact of cyclosporine. Southeastern Organ Procurement Foundation.
    Author: Sanfilippo F, Vaughn WK, Lefor WM.
    Journal: Clin Transpl; 1986; ():109-20. PubMed ID: 3154372.
    Abstract:
    Since the introduction of CsA in 1983, several changes in SEOPF activity have been observed: 1. Organ recovery has increased at a rate slower than candidate registration, whereas the utilization rate has increased substantially. 2. Overall organ sharing has decreased for both CsA and non-CsA-treated patients. 3. The percentage of poor HLA-A,B matched recipients has increased for both CsA- and non-CsA-treated patients. 4. The use of cold storage preservation has increased for both CsA- and non-CsA-treated patients. 5. The use of ALS has decreased, predominantly in CsA-treated patients. 6. A majority of diabetics are being treated with CsA. 7. There is substantial individual variation in SEOPF center preferences for CsA use, HLA matching, and use of shared kidneys. In terms of graft outcome, the following associations have been observed: 1. The incidence of delayed graft function has increased with shared kidneys only, suggesting sharing of poorer quality as well as fewer kidneys. 2. First transplant recipients receiving CsA tend to have lower delayed graft function rates, possibly as a result of treatment selection. However, the risk of graft failure associated with delayed function is greater in patients receiving CsA. 3. By univariate analysis, there is an additive benefit of HLA-A,B matching and CsA use in patients receiving local kidneys with immediate function. 4. By multivariate analysis, there is a significant relative risk of graft rejection associated with poor HLA-A,B matching in patients receiving CsA. 5. By multivariate analysis, there is an apparent risk of graft loss associated with shared organs, but only in patients receiving CsA. One possible explanation is that poorer quality kidneys are being accepted for patients treated with CsA. 6. By multivariate subset analysis, there is a significant benefit of CsA use in patients whose HLA is poorly matched, but no observed benefit in well-matched patients. 7. Definitive evaluation of the relative effects of CsA and HLA matching on cadaver renal allograft survival must await long-term follow-up data on survival and function, and the ability to control for center bias in sharing, HLA matching, and CsA use.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]