Transplantation proceedings · 2019
Once- vs Twice-Daily Tacrolimus: Survival Rates and Side Effects: Single-Center Experience.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Turunc Volkan, Ari Elif, Guven Bahtisen, Tabendeh Babek, Yildiz Aladdin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine whether de novo, prolonged-release tacrolimus- (PR-tacro) based immunosuppressive regimen affected graft and patient survival when compared to an immediate-release, twice-daily, tacrolimus- (IR-tacro) based regimen in kidney transplant recipients. We also aimed to determine the difference between the frequency of side effects, including diabetes control, in study groups.
METHODS: A total of 115 standard risk kidney transplant recipients were enrolled in this single center, retrospective study. Fifty-two patients received PR-tacro and 63 patients received IR-tacro as a calcineurin inhibitor. The primary outcome measures included incidence of graft loss and delayed graft function (DGF), biopsy-proven acute rejection , graft and patient survival, and creatinine clearance. Secondary outcome measures included the incidence of non-adherence, drug-induced tremor; post-transplant diabetes mellitus diagnosis rate; and control of diabetes in pre-transplant diabetic patients.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics and mean tacrolimus trough levels were comparable between groups. Incidence of graft loss, DGF, and graft and patient survival were similar between groups (P > .05). Mean creatinine clearance level was also similar (P > .05). Mean serum levels of fasting glucose (P < .05) and A1C (P < .05) were lower in PR-tacro group when compared to IR-tacro group. Post-transplant diabetes mellitus diagnosis rate was also lower in PR-tacro group when compared to IR-tacro group (P = .040).
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that there is no statistically significant difference between PR-tacro and IR-tacro in terms of patient and graft survival, DGF, and biopsy-proven acute rejection rates in kidney transplant recipients. Post-transplant diabetes mellitus frequency is lower in non-diabetic patients, and glucose metabolism control is better in diabetic patients.
METHODS: A total of 115 standard risk kidney transplant recipients were enrolled in this single center, retrospective study. Fifty-two patients received PR-tacro and 63 patients received IR-tacro as a calcineurin inhibitor. The primary outcome measures included incidence of graft loss and delayed graft function (DGF), biopsy-proven acute rejection , graft and patient survival, and creatinine clearance. Secondary outcome measures included the incidence of non-adherence, drug-induced tremor; post-transplant diabetes mellitus diagnosis rate; and control of diabetes in pre-transplant diabetic patients.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics and mean tacrolimus trough levels were comparable between groups. Incidence of graft loss, DGF, and graft and patient survival were similar between groups (P > .05). Mean creatinine clearance level was also similar (P > .05). Mean serum levels of fasting glucose (P < .05) and A1C (P < .05) were lower in PR-tacro group when compared to IR-tacro group. Post-transplant diabetes mellitus diagnosis rate was also lower in PR-tacro group when compared to IR-tacro group (P = .040).
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that there is no statistically significant difference between PR-tacro and IR-tacro in terms of patient and graft survival, DGF, and biopsy-proven acute rejection rates in kidney transplant recipients. Post-transplant diabetes mellitus frequency is lower in non-diabetic patients, and glucose metabolism control is better in diabetic patients.