Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39263600›Full record

Observational studyTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2024

Benefits of Living Over Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation in Elderly Recipients. A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of a Large European Registry Cohort.

Néstor Toapanta, Jordi Comas, Ignacio Revuelta, Anna Manonelles, Carme Facundo, María José Pérez-Saez, Anna Vila, Emma Arcos, Jaume Tort, Magali Giral and 6 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Néstor ToapantaKidney Transplant Unit, Nephrology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute (VHIR), Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Jordi ComasCatalan Transplantation Organization, Barcelona, Spain.
Ignacio RevueltaKidney Transplant Unit, Nephrology Department, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain.
Anna ManonellesKidney Transplant Unit, Nephrology Department, Bellvitge University Hospital, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona University (UB), Barcelona, Spain.
Carme FacundoKidney Transplant Unit, Nephrology Department, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain.
María José Pérez-SaezKidney Transplant Unit, Nephrology Department, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Anna VilaKidney Transplant Unit, Nephrology Department, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain.
Emma ArcosCatalan Transplantation Organization, Barcelona, Spain.
Jaume TortCatalan Transplantation Organization, Barcelona, Spain.
Magali GiralCRTI UMR 1064, Inserm, Université de Nantes, ITUN, CHU Nantes, RTRS Centaure, Nantes, France.
Maarten NaesensDepartment of Microbiology, Immunology, and Transplantation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Dirk KuypersDepartment of Microbiology, Immunology, and Transplantation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Anders AsbergDepartment of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Francesc Moreso *Kidney Transplant Unit, Nephrology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute (VHIR), Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Oriol Bestard *Kidney Transplant Unit, Nephrology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute (VHIR), Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
EKITE consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although kidney transplantation from living donors (LD) offers better long-term results than from deceased donors (DD), elderly recipients are less likely to receive LD transplants than younger ones. We analyzed renal transplant outcomes from LD versus DD in elderly recipients with a propensity-matched score. This retrospective, observational study included the first single kidney transplants in recipients aged ≥65 years from two European registry cohorts (2013-2020, n = 4,257). Recipients of LD (n = 408), brain death donors (BDD, n = 3,072), and controlled cardiocirculatory death donors (cDCD, n = 777) were matched for donor and recipient age, sex, dialysis time and recipient diabetes. Major graft and patient outcomes were investigated. Unmatched analyses showed that LD recipients were more likely to be transplanted preemptively and had shorter dialysis times than any DD type. The propensity score matched Cox's regression analysis between LD and BDD (387-pairs) and LD and cDCD (259-pairs) revealing a higher hazard ratio for graft failure with BDD (2.19 [95% CI: 1.16-4.15],

Indexed as

Graft SurvivalKidney TransplantationLiving DonorsPropensity ScoreRegistriesAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsEuropeFemaleGraft RejectionHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTissue DonorsTreatment Outcomedeceased donorelderly renal transplantliving donorpropensity score analysissurvival

Identifiers

PMID39263600
PMCPMC11387891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.