Journal of endourology · 2013
Recipient graft failure or death impact on living kidney donor quality of life based on the living organ donor network database.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Watson Justin M, Behnke Martha K, Fabrizio Michael D, McCune Thomas R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is a paucity of prospective long-term data on living kidney donor (LKD) quality of life (QoL). The Living Organ Donor Network (LODN) database follows donors longitudinally and cross-references with United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data to assess factors that affect donor QoL.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Short Form (SF)-36 was sent to donors at 6 months and yearly thereafter. Recipient outcomes were determined from the UNOS database. Of 2219 donors, 1030 returned ≥ 1 QoL survey in the first year. Seven-hundred and thirty-one donors returned at least two surveys with 51 associated with a nonfunctioning graft and 38 with recipient death.
RESULTS: Initial QoL scores were not different between donors whose recipients were alive with graft function, and those whose recipients died (88.9 vs 89.2, P = 0.87). For donors whose recipient died, QoL in the year after recipient death averaged 6 points lower than the initial QoL (88.9 vs 82.9, P = 0.01). Thirty-one donors returned surveys an average of 4.1 years after their recipient's death. Final QoL score increased by 2.5 points, no longer significantly lower than the initial QoL (85.4 vs 88.9, P = 0.16). Thirty-eight donors returned surveys in the year after their recipient's graft failure and their QoL decreased by 5.6 points on average (86.9 vs 81.2, P = 0.07). Twenty-eight of these donors returned future surveys and final QoL was unchanged (81.2 vs 81.2, P = 0.99).
CONCLUSIONS: Donor QoL declines after recipient death but recovers with time. Graft failure resulted in decreased QoL without recovery. The LODN database identifies factors affecting LKD QoL and provides a model for a national registry.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Short Form (SF)-36 was sent to donors at 6 months and yearly thereafter. Recipient outcomes were determined from the UNOS database. Of 2219 donors, 1030 returned ≥ 1 QoL survey in the first year. Seven-hundred and thirty-one donors returned at least two surveys with 51 associated with a nonfunctioning graft and 38 with recipient death.
RESULTS: Initial QoL scores were not different between donors whose recipients were alive with graft function, and those whose recipients died (88.9 vs 89.2, P = 0.87). For donors whose recipient died, QoL in the year after recipient death averaged 6 points lower than the initial QoL (88.9 vs 82.9, P = 0.01). Thirty-one donors returned surveys an average of 4.1 years after their recipient's death. Final QoL score increased by 2.5 points, no longer significantly lower than the initial QoL (85.4 vs 88.9, P = 0.16). Thirty-eight donors returned surveys in the year after their recipient's graft failure and their QoL decreased by 5.6 points on average (86.9 vs 81.2, P = 0.07). Twenty-eight of these donors returned future surveys and final QoL was unchanged (81.2 vs 81.2, P = 0.99).
CONCLUSIONS: Donor QoL declines after recipient death but recovers with time. Graft failure resulted in decreased QoL without recovery. The LODN database identifies factors affecting LKD QoL and provides a model for a national registry.