Suppr超能文献

活体供体与尸体供体肾移植中急性排斥反应的发生率及严重程度。

Frequency and severity of acute rejection in live- versus cadaveric-donor renal transplants.

作者信息

Campbell Scott B, Hothersall Emma, Preston John, Brown Allison M, Hawley Carmel M, Wall Darryl, Griffin Anthony D, Isbel Nicole M, Nicol David L, Johnson David W

机构信息

Renal Transplant Unit, University of Queensland, Princess Alexandra Hopital, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, Australia.

出版信息

Transplantation. 2003 Nov 27;76(10):1452-7. doi: 10.1097/01.TP.0000083895.64198.10.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Live donors are an increasingly important source of kidneys for transplantation in Australia. The aim of this study was to compare the rate and severity of rejection between patients receiving kidney transplants from live versus cadaveric donors.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was undertaken of all patients receiving live-donor (n=109) and cadaveric-donor (n=389) renal transplants at our institution between April 1, 1994, and March 31, 2000. Follow-up was completed on all patients until graft loss, death, or May 31, 2001.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of the live-donor and cadaveric groups were similar, except for recipient age (mean+/-SD, 36.3+/-15.6 vs. 44.5+/-14.4 years, respectively; P<0.001); donor age (46.1+/-11.3 vs. 36.1+/-16.4 years, P<0.001); pretransplant dialysis duration (1.36+/-2.1 vs. 3.4+/-4.4 years, P<0.001); and the proportions of patients receiving first allografts (95% vs. 88%, respectively; P<0.05), antibody induction (8% vs. 20%, P<0.01), and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (60% vs. 37%, P<0.001). Acute rejection was observed in 48 (44%) live-donor and 108 (28%) cadaveric transplants (P=0.001). Cadaveric donor type was independently predictive of less acute rejection both on logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.73; P=0.001) and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model analysis (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.34-0.69; P<0.001). Patients receiving cadaveric-donor transplants were also significantly less likely to receive antibody therapy for rejection (univariate, 18% vs. 9%; P=0.006; multivariate AOR, 0.45; 95% CI, -0.25-0.82; P<0.01), independent of recipient age, gender, race, transplant number, human leukocyte antigen mismatch, sensitization, induction therapy, delayed graft function, MMF use, tacrolimus or cyclosporine A use, sirolimus-everolimus use, year of transplant, donor age, or dialysis duration. However, donor type did not independently influence graft survival, immunologic graft survival, or patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Live-donor kidney transplant recipients had a higher rate and severity of rejection and a shorter rejection-free period than cadaveric renal transplant recipients. Further consideration of the reasons for this difference and the use of alternative immunosuppressive strategies for live-donor transplants are recommended.

摘要

背景

在澳大利亚,活体供者日益成为肾脏移植的重要供肾来源。本研究旨在比较接受活体供肾与尸体供肾移植患者的排斥反应发生率及严重程度。

方法

对1994年4月1日至2000年3月31日在本机构接受活体供肾移植(n = 109)和尸体供肾移植(n = 389)的所有患者进行回顾性分析。对所有患者进行随访,直至移植肾失功、患者死亡或2001年5月31日。

结果

活体供者组和尸体供者组的基线特征相似,但受者年龄(均值±标准差,分别为36.3±15.6岁和44.5±14.4岁;P<0.001)、供者年龄(46.1±11.3岁和36.1±16.4岁,P<0.001)、移植前透析时间(1.36±2.1年和3.4±4.4年,P<0.001)以及接受首次同种异体移植的患者比例(分别为95%和88%;P<0.05)、抗体诱导治疗(8%和20%,P<0.01)和霉酚酸酯(MMF)(60%和37%,P<0.001)存在差异。48例(44%)活体供肾移植和108例(28%)尸体供肾移植发生了急性排斥反应(P = 0.001)。尸体供者类型在逻辑回归分析(调整优势比[AOR],0.47;95%置信区间[CI],0.30 - 0.73;P = 0.001)和多变量Cox比例风险模型分析(风险比,0.49;95% CI,0.34 - 0.69;P<0.001)中均独立预测急性排斥反应较少。接受尸体供肾移植的患者因排斥反应接受抗体治疗的可能性也显著较低(单变量分析,18%对9%;P = 0.006;多变量AOR,0.45;95% CI, - 0.25 - 0.82;P<0.01),且不受受者年龄、性别、种族、移植次数、人类白细胞抗原错配、致敏状态、诱导治疗、移植肾功能延迟、MMF使用、他克莫司或环孢素A使用、西罗莫司 - 依维莫司使用、移植年份、供者年龄或透析时间的影响。然而,供者类型并未独立影响移植肾存活、免疫性移植肾存活或患者存活。

结论

与尸体供肾移植受者相比,活体供肾移植受者的排斥反应发生率和严重程度更高,无排斥反应期更短。建议进一步考虑这种差异的原因,并对活体供肾移植采用替代免疫抑制策略。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验