ReviewWorld journal of transplantation2019
Histological and clinical evaluation of marginal donor kidneys before transplantation: Which is best?
Review in World journal of transplantation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting Kidney Transplantation Outcomes from Donor and Recipient Characteristics at Time Zero: Development of a Mobile Application for Nephrologists.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Identification of Subtypes and a Delayed Graft Function Predictive Signature Based on Ferroptosis in Renal Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Article
- Combining Clinical Parameters and Acute Tubular Injury Grading Is Superior in Predicting the Prognosis of Deceased-Donor Kidney Transplantation: A 7-Year Observational Study.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Observational
- Deep learning segmentation of glomeruli on kidney donor frozen sections.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2021Article
- Deep Learning Algorithms for the Prediction of Posttransplant Renal Function in Deceased-Donor Kidney Recipients: A Preliminary Study Based on Pretransplant Biopsy.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Organ shortage represents one of the major limitations to the development of kidney transplantation. To increase the donor pool and to answer the ever increasing kidney request, physicians are recurring to marginal kidneys as kidneys from older donors, from hypertensive or diabetic donors and from non-heart beating donors. These kidneys are known to have frequently a worse outcome in the recipients. To date major problem is to evaluate such kidneys in order to use or to discard them before transplantation. The use of such kidneys create other relevant question as whether to use them as single or dual transplant and to allocate them fairly according transplant programs. The pre-transplant histological evaluation, the clinical evaluation of the donor or both the criteria joined has been used and according the time each criterion prevailed over the others. Aim of this review has been to examine the advantages and the drawbacks of any criterion and how they have changed with time. To date any criterion has several limitations and several authors have argued for the development of new guidelines in the field of the kidney evaluation for transplantation. Several authors argue that the use of omic technologies should improve the organ evaluation and studies are ongoing to evaluate these technologies either in the donor urine or in the biopsies taken before transplantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.