4.1 Article

Advanced Donor Age Alone Is Not a Risk Factor for Graft Survival in Kidney Transplantation

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 1537-1543

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2011.03.014

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. The use of kidneys from elderly deceased donors has substantially increased organ supply, although it is associated with worse graft function and survival rates. The risk of kidneys from elderly donors as well as expanded criteria donors (ECDs) on kidney transplant outcome was investigated. Patients and methods. Seventy-five kidney transplants from ECDs over a 5-year period were reviewed retrospectively. Old age and increased donor risk variables were analyzed separately in relation to graft function and survival. Results. Sixty-four of 75 (85.3%) recipients had functioning grafts 5 years posttransplant. The overall actuarial graft survivals from 1 to 5 years were 87.5%, 68.1%, 57.3%, 55.4%, and 47.3%, respectively. Early graft function gave 47 (62.7%) kidneys remarkable actuarial survivals of 100.0%, 88.3%, 75.8%, 75.8%, and 68.4% at 1 to 5 years posttransplant, and 28 (37.3%) kidneys had delayed graft function with substantially decreased actuarial survival rates, ranging from 66.7% to 23.2%. Kidneys from elderly donors had considerable actuarial graft survival rates of 100.0%, 83.3%, 76.9%, 76.9%, and 67.0% from 1 to 5 years, respectively; these were the best graft survival rates compared with kidneys from the other donor categories. The other donor risk variables when associated with advanced age of any had an adverse effect on recipient graft function and survival, but no single risk variable alone, or a combination of any two, showed any statistically significant variability. Conclusion. Elderly kidney donors provided a substantial organ pool expansion without affecting patient and graft survival in many patients. ECDs can be utilized safely if adequate measures are taken.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据