Transplantation · 2020
Kidney After Liver Transplantation Matched-pair Analysis: Are Kidneys Allocated to Appropriate Patients to Maximize Their Survival?
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.
Eerhart Michael J, Reyes José A, Leverson Glen E, Danobeitia Juan S, Blanton Casi L, Zitur Laura J, Chlebeck Peter J, Fernandez Luis A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Kidney after liver transplantation (KALT) is the best therapeutic option for patients with end-stage renal disease after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). New allocation policies prioritize kidneys to patients in renal failure within the first year following OLT. There is little data on how kidney quality, measured by kidney donor profile index (KDPI), impacts KALT survival outcomes.
METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult KALT recipients from 1988 to 2015 and compared to their paired kidney transplant alone (KTA) recipients. Seven hundred forty-five pairs were stratified into 3 KDPI subgroups and compared patient survival, graft survival, and death-censored graft survival among matched-paired recipients.
RESULTS: Overall, KTA recipients had superior patient and graft survival compared with the KALT group. KTA patient survival was superior for all 3 KDPI subgroups analysis. KTA graft survival was superior compared with KALT recipients of KDPI 21%-85% kidneys. Inferior graft half-life was observed in KALT versus KTA recipients with KDPI 21%-85% and >85%.
CONCLUSIONS: From a utilitarian perspective, it is important that kidneys are allocated to recipients that are able to maximize their benefit from the full life of the organ. In KTA recipients, graft quality correlates directly to graft survival. However, in KALT patients receiving the matched-pair kidneys of the KTA recipients, patient mortality, rather than kidney quality, dictates graft survival significantly. As allocation practices continue developing, utilization of expanded criteria kidneys that better match anticipated patient and graft survival should be strongly considered to maximize the benefits of limited resources for the greatest number of patients.
METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult KALT recipients from 1988 to 2015 and compared to their paired kidney transplant alone (KTA) recipients. Seven hundred forty-five pairs were stratified into 3 KDPI subgroups and compared patient survival, graft survival, and death-censored graft survival among matched-paired recipients.
RESULTS: Overall, KTA recipients had superior patient and graft survival compared with the KALT group. KTA patient survival was superior for all 3 KDPI subgroups analysis. KTA graft survival was superior compared with KALT recipients of KDPI 21%-85% kidneys. Inferior graft half-life was observed in KALT versus KTA recipients with KDPI 21%-85% and >85%.
CONCLUSIONS: From a utilitarian perspective, it is important that kidneys are allocated to recipients that are able to maximize their benefit from the full life of the organ. In KTA recipients, graft quality correlates directly to graft survival. However, in KALT patients receiving the matched-pair kidneys of the KTA recipients, patient mortality, rather than kidney quality, dictates graft survival significantly. As allocation practices continue developing, utilization of expanded criteria kidneys that better match anticipated patient and graft survival should be strongly considered to maximize the benefits of limited resources for the greatest number of patients.