Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Muralidharan A, White S
    Transplantation, 2015 Mar;99(3):476-81.
    PMID: 25680089 DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000000657
    Epidemiological and demographic transitions are shifting the burden of modifiable risk factors for chronic and end-stage kidney disease to low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). This shifting burden of disease--combined with economic transitions and health system reforms--has led to the rapid growth of dialysis populations in LMIC including Malaysia, Tunisia, Turkey, Chile, Mexico, and Uruguay. Yet, compared to 1.5 million on dialysis in LMIC, only approximately 33,000 kidney transplants were performed in 2012. Reasons include health system factors (personnel, infrastructure, system coordination, and financing) and cultural factors (public and professional attitudes and the legal environment). The size of the dialysis populations, however, is generally a poor indicator of the potential need for kidney transplantation in LMIC. Population needs for kidney transplantation should instead be assessed based on the epidemiology of the actual underlying burden of disease (both treated and untreated), and the costs and benefits of treatment as well as prevention strategies relative to existing service provision. Here, we review current data on the global burden of end-stage kidney disease and the distribution of major risk factors, and compare this to access to kidney transplantation in 2012.
    Matched MeSH terms: Kidney Transplantation*
  2. Vethakkan SR, Walters JM, Gooley JL, Boston RC, Kay TW, Goodman DJ, et al.
    Transplantation, 2014 Jan 27;97(2):e9-11.
    PMID: 24434489 DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000437565.15965.67
    Matched MeSH terms: Islets of Langerhans Transplantation*
  3. Khan JF, Shah DM, Sivapakiam S, Mokhtar S, Subramaniam M, Raman K, et al.
    Transplantation, 2021 Dec 01;105(12):2507-2512.
    PMID: 34818304 DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000003591
    Matched MeSH terms: Liver Transplantation*
  4. Lim WH, Ng CH, Tan DJH, Xiao J, Fu CE, Ong C, et al.
    Transplantation, 2024 Feb 01;108(2):473-482.
    PMID: 37439778 DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000004718
    BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation (LT) offers patients with decompensated cirrhosis the best chance at long-term survival. With the rising prevalence of diabetes, further clarity is needed on the impact of receiving a liver allograft from a donor with diabetes on post-LT outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the impact of donor diabetes on clinical outcomes after LT.

    METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing registry data of LT recipients from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2021. Outcomes analysis was performed using Cox proportional model for all-cause mortality and graft failure. Confounding was reduced by coarsened exact matching causal inference analysis.

    RESULTS: Of 66 960 donors identified, 7178 (10.7%) had diabetes. Trend analysis revealed a longitudinal increase in the prevalence of donor diabetes ( P  

  5. Vijayan K, Schroder HJ, Hameed A, Hitos K, Lo W, Laurence JM, et al.
    Transplantation, 2024 Feb 16.
    PMID: 38361237 DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000004937
    BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD) is a potential additional source of donor kidneys. This study reviewed uDCD kidney transplant outcomes to determine if these are comparable to controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD).

    METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched. Data on demographic information and transplant outcomes were extracted from included studies. Meta-analyses were performed, and risk ratios (RR) were estimated to compare transplant outcomes from uDCD to cDCD.

    RESULTS: Nine cohort studies were included, from 2178 uDCD kidney transplants. There was a moderate degree of bias, as 4 studies did not account for potential confounding factors. The median incidence of primary nonfunction in uDCD was 12.3% versus 5.7% for cDCD (RR, 1.85; 95% confidence intervals, 1.06-3.23; P = 0.03, I2 = 75). The median rate of delayed graft function was 65.1% for uDCD and 52.0% for cDCD. The median 1-y graft survival for uDCD was 82.7% compared with 87.5% for cDCD (RR, 1.43; 95% confidence intervals, 1.02-2.01; P = 0.04; I2 = 71%). The median 5-y graft survival for uDCD and cDCD was 70% each. Notably, the use of normothermic regional perfusion improved primary nonfunction rates in uDCD grafts.

    CONCLUSIONS: Although uDCD outcomes may be inferior in the short-term, the long-term outcomes are comparable to cDCD.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links