Kidney international reports · 2020
Intensive Home Hemodialysis Survival Comparable to Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Nishio-Lucar Angie G, Bose Subhasish, Lyons Genevieve, Awuah Kwabena T, Ma Jennie Z, Lockridge Robert S
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Kidney transplantation (KT) remains the treatment of choice for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), but access to transplantation is limited by a disparity between supply and demand for suitable organs. This organ shortfall has resulted in the use of a wider range of donor kidneys and, in parallel, a reexamination of potential alternative renal replacement therapies. Previous studies comparing Canadian intensive home hemodialysis (IHHD) with deceased donor (DD) KT in the United States reported similar survival, suggesting IHHD might be a plausible alternative.
METHODS: Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and an experienced US-based IHHD program in Lynchburg, VA, we retrospectively compared mortality outcomes of a cohort of IHHD patients with transplant recipients within the same geographic region between October 1997 and June 2014.
RESULTS: We identified 3073 transplant recipients and 116 IHHD patients. Living donor KT (n = 1212) had the highest survival and 47% reduction in risk of death compared with IHHD (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-0.83). Survival of IHHD patients did not statistically differ from that of DD transplant recipients (n = 1834) in adjusted analyses (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.62-1.48) or when exclusively compared with marginal (Kidney Donor Profile Index >85%) transplant recipients (HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 0.84-2.16).
CONCLUSION: Our study showed comparable overall survival between IHHD and DD KT. For appropriate patients, IHHD could serve as bridging therapy to transplant and a tenable long-term renal replacement therapy.
METHODS: Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and an experienced US-based IHHD program in Lynchburg, VA, we retrospectively compared mortality outcomes of a cohort of IHHD patients with transplant recipients within the same geographic region between October 1997 and June 2014.
RESULTS: We identified 3073 transplant recipients and 116 IHHD patients. Living donor KT (n = 1212) had the highest survival and 47% reduction in risk of death compared with IHHD (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-0.83). Survival of IHHD patients did not statistically differ from that of DD transplant recipients (n = 1834) in adjusted analyses (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.62-1.48) or when exclusively compared with marginal (Kidney Donor Profile Index >85%) transplant recipients (HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 0.84-2.16).
CONCLUSION: Our study showed comparable overall survival between IHHD and DD KT. For appropriate patients, IHHD could serve as bridging therapy to transplant and a tenable long-term renal replacement therapy.