ArticleCureus2026
From Challenge to Opportunity: ABO-Incompatible Kidney Transplantation to Expand the Donor Pool at a Single Center.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation (ABOiKT) has emerged as a viable option whenever there is non-availability of a compatible donor. Traditionally considered a contraindication due to the high risk of antibody-mediated rejection, advancements in desensitization protocols, immunosuppressive therapy, and post-transplant monitoring have significantly improved the outcomes. In this study, we have detailed our experience of ABOiKT performed in a tertiary care hospital in North India. Methodology It was a single-center retrospective cohort study. All consecutive ABOiKT performed from 2014 to 2021 were screened. Recipients younger than 15 years of age, with dual-organ transplants, and with highly sensitized transplants were excluded from the study. Three years of follow-up data from the hospital records were collected and analyzed. The primary objective was to study the incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejections (BPARs), and secondary objectives were to study the incidence of graft loss and infectious complications. Results A total of 93 ABOiKTs meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in the study. Fourteen (15.1%) kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) experienced BPAR, the majority of which were antibody-mediated (10 out of 14; 71.42%). Overall, 8 (8.6%) KTRs experienced graft loss. The rejection-free survival at six months, one year, and three years was 84 (90.3%), 83 (89.2%), and 79 (84.9%), respectively. Correspondingly, graft survival at six months, one year, and three years was 90 (96.8%), 87 (93.5%), and 85 (91.4%), respectively. Urinary tract infection was the most common infection encountered in 35 (37.6%) cases. There was no significant difference in incidence of acute rejection or graft loss between the two cohorts with basiliximab/nil or rabbit antithymocyte globulin as the induction agent. In regression analysis, anti-A/B antibody titer or the type of induction agent used did not predict acute rejection; however, delayed graft function was significantly associated with rejection episodes (OR: 43.33, 95% CI: 4.54-413.27, p<0.05). Conclusions With careful recipient selection and vigilant post-transplant monitoring, patient and graft outcomes can be improved substantially after ABOiKT. This approach offers a promising solution to reduce waiting times and expand the donor pool for potential KTRs.
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.