| Literature DB >> 27650978 |
Eduardo Peixoto1,2, Francesco Vendrame1,3, Alvaro Arnau1,4, Nathalia Padilla1, David Baidal1,3, Ana Alvarez1, Valentina Delmonte1,5, Alessia Fornoni6, Camillo Ricordi1, Rodolfo Alejandro7,3.
Abstract
Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27650978 PMCID: PMC5127237 DOI: 10.2337/dc16-1093
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diabetes Care ISSN: 0149-5992 Impact factor: 19.112
Figure 1A: Demographic and clinical features of study subjects and study time points. The half-life graft survival (1/2 GS) provided information about renal function between ITx and GF. Data are presented as n (%) and mean ± SD. GF, graft failure; ITx, islet transplant; LTSS, enrollment in the long-term surveillance study; LV, last visit on follow-up; YFUP1-4, yearly follow-ups 1–4; the half-life graft survival provided information about renal function between ITx and GF. B: Renal function at the time of ITx, GF, study enrollment, and follow-up. The eGFR was calculated based on the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and presented as mean ± SD, median and range. C: Rate of decline of the eGFR. Each circle represents an ITx recipient; solid circles symbolize the changes in eGFR at ITx vs. last visit follow-up, and open circles symbolize the changes in eGFR at GF vs. last visit follow-up. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. D: Albumin excretion. Albuminuria was determined by the urine albumin–creatinine ratio (UACR) from first morning spot urine samples. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Data are presented as mean ± SD. *Significant P values vs. GF after Dunn's test correction for multiple comparisons.