4.6 Article

Kidney and Pancreas Transplantation in the United States, 1999-2008: The Changing Face of Living Donation

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 10, Issue 4, Pages 987-1002

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03022.x

Keywords

Deceased donors; expanded criteria donors; kidney transplantation; living donors; OPTN; paired donation; pancreas transplantation; pediatric kidney transplantation; retransplantation; simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation; SRTR; survival; waiting list

Funding

  1. Health Resources and Services Administration [234-2005-37009C]
  2. US Department of Health and Human Services

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The waiting list for kidney transplantation continued to grow between 1999 and 2008, from 41 177 to 76 089 candidates. However, active candidates represented the minority of this increase (36 951-50 624, a 37% change), while inactive candidates increased over 500% (4226-25 465). There were 5966 living donor (LD) and 10 551 deceased donor (DD) kidney transplants performed in 2008. The total number of pancreas transplants peaked at 1484 in 2004 and has declined to 1273. Although the number of LD transplants increased by 26% from 1999 to 2008, the total number peaked in 2004 at 6647 before declining 10% by 2008. The rate of LD transplantation continues to vary significantly as a function of demographic and geographic factors, including waiting time for DD transplant. Posttransplant survival remains excellent, and there appears to be greater use of induction agents and reduced use of corticosteroids in LD recipients. Significant changes occurred in the pediatric population, with a dramatic reduction in the use of LD organs after passage of the Share 35 rule. Many strategies have been adopted to reverse the decline in LD transplant rates for all age groups, including expansion of kidney paired donation, adoption of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and use of incompatible LD

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available