2016
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-016-1492-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Identification of patients at risk for renal impairment after living donor kidney transplantation

Abstract: Broadening the donor pool with non-blood related donors seems to be legitimate, although with respect to careful medical selection, since donor age in combination with male recipient sex were shown to be risk factors for decreased graft function. Warm ischemic time and waiting time need to be kept as short as possible to avoid delayed graft function. Transplantation across HLA and ABO borders did not affect outcome significantly.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 34 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A total of 6656 records underwent title and abstract screening. The full-text review was undertaken for 886 eligible articles; of these 78 articles discussed HLA incompatibility at the level of the antigen mismatch only, 64-141 whereas 163 articles assessed incompatibility by molecular genotyping, molecular mismatch analysis, and/or pretransplant DSA verification by solid-phase and/or by cell-based assays. 3,142-303 The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses diagram outlining the article selection process is provided in Figure 1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A total of 6656 records underwent title and abstract screening. The full-text review was undertaken for 886 eligible articles; of these 78 articles discussed HLA incompatibility at the level of the antigen mismatch only, 64-141 whereas 163 articles assessed incompatibility by molecular genotyping, molecular mismatch analysis, and/or pretransplant DSA verification by solid-phase and/or by cell-based assays. 3,142-303 The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses diagram outlining the article selection process is provided in Figure 1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%