10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Criteria for and Appropriateness of Renal Transplantation in Elderly Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease : A Literature Review and Position Statement on Behalf of the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Descartes Working Group and European Renal Best Practice

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          During the last 20 years, waiting lists for renal transplantation (RT) have grown significantly older. However, elderly patients (ie ≥65 years of age) are still more rarely referred or accepted to waiting lists and, if enlisted, have less chances of actually receiving a kidney allograft, than younger counterparts. In this review, we looked at evidence for the benefits and risks of RT in the elderly trying to answer the following questions: Should RT be advocated for elderly patients? What should be the criteria to accept elderly patients on the waiting list for RT? What strategies might be used to increase the rate of RT in waitlisted elderly candidates? For selected elderly patients, RT was shown to be superior to dialysis in terms of patient survival. Virtually all guidelines recommend that patients should not be deemed ineligible for RT based on age alone, although a short life expectancy generally might preclude RT. Concerning the assessment of comorbidities in the elderly, special attention should be paid to cardiac evaluation and screening for malignancy. Comorbidity scores and frailty assessment scales might help the decision making on eligibility. Psychosocial issues should also be evaluated. To overcome the scarcity of organ donors, elderly RT candidates should be encouraged to consider expanded criteria donors and living donors, as alternatives to deceased standard criteria donors. It has been demonstrated that expanded criteria donor RT in patients 60 years or older is associated with higher survival rates than remaining on dialysis, whereas living donor RT is superior to all other options.

          Related collections

          Most cited references69

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A study of the quality of life and cost-utility of renal transplantation.

          The objective of this study was to assess the cost-utility of renal transplantation compared with dialysis. To accomplish this, a prospective cohort of pre-transplant patients were followed for up to two years after renal transplantation at three University-based Canadian hospitals. A total of 168 patients were followed for an average of 19.5 months after transplantation. Health-related quality of life was assessed using a hemodialysis questionnaire, a transplant questionnaire, the Sickness Impact Profile, and the Time Trade-Off Technique. Fully allocated costs were determined by prospectively recording resource use in all patients. A societal perspective was taken. By six months after transplantation, the mean health-related quality of life scores of almost all measures had improved compared to pre-transplantation, and they stayed improved throughout the two years of follow up. The mean time trade-off score was 0.57 pre-transplant and 0.70 two years after transplantation. The proportion of individuals employed increased from 30% before transplantation to 45% two years after transplantation. Employment prior to transplantation [relative risk (RR) = 23], graft function (RR 10) and age (RR 1.6 for every decrease in age by one decade), independently predicted employment status after transplantation. The cost of pre-transplant care ($66,782 Can 1994) and the cost of the first year after transplantation ($66,290) were similar. Transplantation was considerably less expensive during the second year after transplantation ($27,875). Over the two years, transplantation was both more effective and less costly than dialysis. This was true for all subgroups of patients examined, including patients older than 60 and diabetics. We conclude that renal transplantation was more effective and less costly than dialysis in all subgroups of patients examined.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Significance of frailty among dialysis patients.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Deceased-donor characteristics and the survival benefit of kidney transplantation.

              Transplantation using kidneys from deceased donors who meet the expanded criteria donor (ECD) definition (age > or =60 years or 50 to 59 years with at least 2 of the following: history of hypertension, serum creatinine level >1.5 mg/dL [132.6 micromol/L], and cerebrovascular cause of death) is associated with 70% higher risk of graft failure compared with non-ECD transplants. However, if ECD transplants offer improved overall patient survival, inferior graft outcome may represent an acceptable trade-off. To compare mortality after ECD kidney transplantation vs that in a combined standard-therapy group of non-ECD recipients and those still receiving dialysis. Retrospective cohort study using data from a US national registry of mortality and graft outcomes among kidney transplant candidates and recipients. The cohort included 109,127 patients receiving dialysis and added to the kidney waiting list between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2002, and followed up through July 31, 2004. Long-term (3-year) relative risk of mortality for ECD kidney recipients vs those receiving standard therapy, estimated using time-dependent Cox regression models. By end of follow-up, 7790 ECD kidney transplants were performed. Because of excess ECD recipient mortality in the perioperative period, cumulative survival did not equal that of standard-therapy patients until 3.5 years posttransplantation. Long-term relative mortality risk was 17% lower for ECD recipients (relative risk, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.90; P 1350 days), ECD recipients had a 27% lower risk of death (relative risk, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.83; P<.001). In areas with shorter waiting times, only recipients with diabetes demonstrated an ECD survival benefit. ECD kidney transplants should be offered principally to candidates older than 40 years in OPOs with long waiting times. In OPOs with shorter waiting times, in which non-ECD kidney transplant availability is higher, candidates should be counseled that ECD survival benefit is observed only for patients with diabetes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Transplantation
                Transplantation
                Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
                0041-1337
                2016
                October 2016
                : 100
                : 10
                : e55-e65
                Article
                10.1097/TP.0000000000001367
                27472096
                d4c84c26-4cd1-40ed-87b0-038555bf6046
                © 2016
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article