...
首页> 外文期刊>Transplantation: Official Journal of the Transplantation Society >Living unrelated donors in kidney transplants: better long-term results than with non-HLA-identical living related donors?
【24h】

Living unrelated donors in kidney transplants: better long-term results than with non-HLA-identical living related donors?

机译:肾脏移植中与生命无关的供体:与非HLA相同的生命相关供体相比,长期效果更好?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND: Given the severe organ shortage and the documented superior results obtained with living (vs. cadaver) donor kidney transplants, we have adopted a very aggressive policy for the use of living donors. Currently, we make thorough attempts to locate a living related donor (LRD) or a living unrelated donor (LURD) before proceeding with a cadaver transplant. METHODS: We compared the results of our LURD versus LRD transplants to determine any significant difference in outcome. RESULTS: Between 1/1/84 and 6/30/98, we performed 711 adult kidney transplants with non-HLA-identical living donors. Of these, 595 procedures used LRDs and 116 used LURDs. Immunosuppression for both groups was cyclosporine-based, although LURD recipients received 5-7 days of induction therapy (antilymphocyte globulin or antithymocyte globulin), whereas LRD recipients did not. LURD recipients tended to be older, to have inferior HLA matching, and to have older donors than did the LRD recipients (all factors potentially associated with decreased graft survival). Short-term results, including initial graft function and incidence of acute rejection, were similar in the two groups. LURD recipients had a slightly higher incidence of cytomegalovirus disease (P=NS). We found no difference in patient and graft survival rates. However, the incidence of biopsy-proven chronic rejection was significantly lower among LURD recipients (16.7% for LRD recipients and 10.0% for LURD recipients at 5 years posttransplant; P=0.05). LRD recipients also had a greater incidence of late (>6 months posttransplant) acute rejection episodes than did the LURD recipients (8.6% vs. 2.6%, P=0.04). The exact reason for these findings is unknown. CONCLUSION: Although LURD recipients have poorer HLA matching and older donors, their patient and graft survival rates are equivalent to those of non-HLA-identical LRD recipients. The incidence of biopsy-proven chronic rejection is lower in LURD transplants. Given this finding and the superior results of living donor (vs. cadaver) transplants, a thorough search should be made for a living donor-LRD or LURD-before proceeding with a cadaver transplant.
机译:背景:鉴于严重的器官短缺和活体(相对于尸体)供体肾移植取得的有记录的优异结果,我们对活体供体的使用采取了非常积极的政策。当前,在进行尸体移植之前,我们进行了彻底的尝试来寻找与生命相关的供体(LRD)或与生命无关的供体(LURD)。方法:我们比较了LURD和LRD移植的结果,以确定结果的任何显着差异。结果:在1/1/84到6/30/98之间,我们用非HLA活体供体进行了711例成人肾脏移植。其中,有595种程序使用LRD,有116种程序使用LURD。两组的免疫抑制都是基于环孢素的,尽管LURD受体接受了5-7天的诱导治疗(抗淋巴细胞球蛋白或抗胸腺细胞球蛋白),而LRD受体则没有。与LRD接受者相比,LURD接受者倾向于年龄更大,HLA匹配较差且供体年龄更大(所有可能与移植物存活率降低有关的因素)。两组的短期结果(包括初始移植功能和急性排斥反应的发生率)相似。 LURD接受者的巨细胞病毒病发病率略高(P = NS)。我们发现患者和移植物的存活率没有差异。但是,经活检证实的慢性排斥反应的发生率在LURD接受者中明显较低(移植后5年,LRD接受者为16.7%,LURD接受者为10.0%; P = 0.05)。与LURD接受者相比,LRD接受者在晚期(移植后> 6个月)急性排斥反应发生率也更高(8.6%vs. 2.6%,P = 0.04)。这些发现的确切原因尚不清楚。结论:尽管LURD受体的HLA匹配较差,且供体年龄较大,但其患者和移植物存活率与非HLA相同的LRD受体相同。经活检证实的慢性排斥反应的发生率在LURD移植中较低。鉴于这一发现以及活体供体(相对于尸体)移植的优异结果,在进行尸体移植之前,应彻底搜索活体供体-LRD或LURD。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号