BACKGROUND: A national policy to allocate kidneys from expanded criteria donors (ECD) took effect October 31, 2002. METHODS: To assess its impact, we analyzed data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients for ECD kidney candidates and recipients between November 1999 and October 2005. RESULTS: The likelihood of being listed for ECD transplant, of receiving any transplant, and of receiving an ECD transplant were assessed using logistic regression models. As of October 31, 2005, 42.6% of candidates were listed with an ECD designation (range by donation service area [DSA], 1.9% to 94.9%). ECD-listed candidates were likely to be older, diabetic, and sensitized. By October 31, 2005, candidates listed for ECD as of November 1, 2002 were 41% more likely to receive any kidney transplant than those not ECD-listed. Among ECD-listed recipients, 30.1% received an ECD transplant and 69.9% a non-ECD transplant. Recipients more likely to receive an ECD transplant were significantly older and in DSAs where a high percentage of ECD transplants were performed and/or a low percentage of candidates were ECD-listed. CONCLUSIONS: A large, regionally variable fraction of candidates are opting to receive ECD offers. Listing with an ECD designation increases the likelihood of transplantation in selected populations. Selective listing of ECD candidates is associated with a higher likelihood of receiving an ECD transplant.
BACKGROUND: A national policy to allocate kidneys from expanded criteria donors (ECD) took effect October 31, 2002. METHODS: To assess its impact, we analyzed data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients for ECD kidney candidates and recipients between November 1999 and October 2005. RESULTS: The likelihood of being listed for ECD transplant, of receiving any transplant, and of receiving an ECD transplant were assessed using logistic regression models. As of October 31, 2005, 42.6% of candidates were listed with an ECD designation (range by donation service area [DSA], 1.9% to 94.9%). ECD-listed candidates were likely to be older, diabetic, and sensitized. By October 31, 2005, candidates listed for ECD as of November 1, 2002 were 41% more likely to receive any kidney transplant than those not ECD-listed. Among ECD-listed recipients, 30.1% received an ECD transplant and 69.9% a non-ECD transplant. Recipients more likely to receive an ECD transplant were significantly older and in DSAs where a high percentage of ECD transplants were performed and/or a low percentage of candidates were ECD-listed. CONCLUSIONS: A large, regionally variable fraction of candidates are opting to receive ECD offers. Listing with an ECD designation increases the likelihood of transplantation in selected populations. Selective listing of ECD candidates is associated with a higher likelihood of receiving an ECD transplant.
Authors: María José Pérez-Sáez; Núria Montero; Dolores Redondo-Pachón; Marta Crespo; Julio Pascual Journal: Transplantation Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Roland A Hernandez; Sayeed K Malek; Edgar L Milford; Samuel R G Finlayson; Stefan G Tullius Journal: Transplantation Date: 2014-11-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Mehdi Maanaoui; François Provôt; Sébastien Bouyé; Arnaud Lionet; Rémi Lenain; Victor Fages; Marie Frimat; Céline Lebas; François Glowacki; Marc Hazzan Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-06-09 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: M Heuer; A Zeiger; G M Kaiser; Z Mathé; A Goldenberg; S Sauerland; A Paul; Jürgen W Treckmann Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2010-01-29 Impact factor: 2.175
Authors: Miriam C Banas; Georg A Böhmig; Ondrej Viklicky; Lionel P Rostaing; Thomas Jouve; Lluis Guirado; Carme Facundo; Oriol Bestard; Hermann-Josef Gröne; Kazuhiro Kobayashi; Vladimir Hanzal; Franz Josef Putz; Daniel Zecher; Tobias Bergler; Sindy Neumann; Victoria Rothe; Amauri G Schwäble Santamaria; Eric Schiffer; Bernhard Banas Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-01-07