Suppr超能文献

供者扩展标准肾移植对临床结果和生存的影响:单中心经验。

Impact of donor expanded criteria kidney transplantation on clinical outcomes and survival: A single-center experience.

机构信息

Faculty of Medical Sciences, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.

Faculty of Medical Sciences, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.

出版信息

Transpl Immunol. 2024 Oct;86:102116. doi: 10.1016/j.trim.2024.102116. Epub 2024 Sep 2.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The scarcity of suitable donor organs has led to the inclusion of Expanded Criteria Donor (ECD) kidneys to augment the donor pool, despite potential concerns regarding post-transplant outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed the clinical outcomes of a cohort of 317 kidney transplant recipients from deceased donors at a single center between 2008 and 2018. Patients were categorized into ECD and Standard Criteria Donor (SCD) groups, with primary nonfunctioning grafts excluded. Comprehensive laboratory evaluations were conducted, including HLA typing and serum creatinine levels. Immunosuppressive regimens were standardized, and statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS program.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 83 (26.18%) patients who received kidney transplants from ECDs and 234 (73.82%) from SCDs. The ECD group showed a longer cold ischemia time (p = 0.019) and a higher rate of delayed graft function (DGF) compared with the SCD group. No significant differences were observed in graft survival (p = 0.370) or patient survival (p = 0.993) between the ECD and SCD groups. However, differences in graft survival were noted between the groups when stratified by DGF status: ECD with DGF vs. ECD without DGF (p = 0.029), ECD with DGF vs. SCD with DGF (p = 0.188), ECD with DGF vs. SCD without DGF (p = 0.022), ECD without DGF vs. SCD with DGF (p = 0.014), ECD without DGF vs. SCD without DGF (p = 0.340), and SCD with DGF vs. SCD without DGF (p = 0.195). No differences in patient survival rates were observed among these groups for all pairwise comparisons (p > 0.05) when stratified by donor criteria and DGF status.

CONCLUSIONS

Graft and patient survival rates were comparable between ECD and SCD kidney transplant recipients.

摘要

简介

由于合适供体器官的短缺,已经开始使用扩展标准供体(ECD)肾脏来增加供体库,尽管这可能会引起人们对移植后结果的担忧。

方法

本回顾性研究分析了 2008 年至 2018 年间,一家单中心的 317 例来自已故供体的肾移植受者的临床结果。患者被分为 ECD 和标准标准供体(SCD)组,排除了原发性无功能移植物。进行了全面的实验室评估,包括 HLA 分型和血清肌酐水平。免疫抑制方案标准化,并使用 SPSS 程序进行统计分析。

结果

该样本包括 83 例(26.18%)接受 ECD 肾移植的患者和 234 例(73.82%)接受 SCD 肾移植的患者。ECD 组冷缺血时间较长(p=0.019),且延迟移植物功能(DGF)的发生率较高。ECD 组和 SCD 组在移植物存活率(p=0.370)或患者存活率(p=0.993)方面无显著差异。然而,当按 DGF 状态分层时,ECD 组和 SCD 组在移植物存活率方面存在差异:ECD 伴 DGF 与 ECD 无 DGF(p=0.029),ECD 伴 DGF 与 SCD 伴 DGF(p=0.188),ECD 伴 DGF 与 SCD 无 DGF(p=0.022),ECD 无 DGF 与 SCD 伴 DGF(p=0.014),ECD 无 DGF 与 SCD 无 DGF(p=0.340),SCD 伴 DGF 与 SCD 无 DGF(p=0.195)。当按供体标准和 DGF 状态分层时,所有这些组在所有两两比较中,患者存活率均无差异(p>0.05)。

结论

ECD 和 SCD 肾移植受者的移植物和患者存活率相当。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验