Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Transplants”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

European best practice guidelines for renal transplantation. Section IV: Long-term management of the transplant recipient. IV.13 Analysis of patient and graft survival.

GUIDELINES: A. It is important for a transplant unit to follow-up on the results of their transplant activities. In order to achieve correct reports on graft and patient outcome in all patients, it is necessary to have sufficient resources, such as a computerized database, and continuous updates of patient information. All data collected should be subjected to validation procedures to ensure completeness and accuracy. B. Improved outcomes following implementation of new protocols, based on evaluation of clinical multi-centre trials, should be verified at local transplant centres since centres often include a range of patients different from those selected for the trial. C. The most widely accepted descriptor of outcome is the Kaplan-Meier probability estimate of patient and graft survival. Survival estimates should be calculated at intervals of time after transplantation and should always be expressed with their 95% confidence intervals. D. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates may be calculated in three ways. (i) 'Patient survival' should be calculated from the date of transplantation to the date of death or the date of the last follow-up. (ii) 'Graft survival' (non-censored for death) should be calculated from the date of transplantation to the date of irreversible graft failure signified by return to long-term dialysis (or retransplantation) or the date of the last follow-up during the period when the transplant was still functioning or to the date of death. Here, death with graft function is treated as graft failure. (iii) 'Graft survival censored for death with a functioning graft' (death-censored graft survival) should be calculated from the date of transplantation to the date of irreversible graft failure signified by return to long-term dialysis (or retransplantation) or the date of last follow-up during the period when the transplant was still functioning. In the event of death with a functioning graft, the follow-up period is censored at the date of death. E. The outcome of transplants carried out at a centre should be compared with those achieved across a range of data from centres collated by national and international multi-centre registries. Interpretation of a centre's performance should take into account the number of transplants performed and the prevalence of major risk factors. F. Major risk factors that influence transplant outcome are identifiable by applying multivariate analytical methods to large multi-centre follow-up databases. Although these major risk factors may not be identifiable in individual centre data, they should nonetheless be taken into account in patient management. G. When designing a clinical trial or evaluating data from a recent trial, the expected improvement in graft survival resulting from a reduction in acute rejection may be estimated from a knowledge of the rejection and graft survival rates that existed prior to the introduction of the new therapeutic regimen. H. When designing or evaluating a clinical trial, it is important to analyse the power of the study to verify statistically the difference (in graft survival) that might be expected and its statistical significance. A study resulting in absence of statistically significant differences between two treatment groups with insufficient statistical power to verify a difference at the expected level should not be taken as evidence of absence of a true difference.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

The cost effectiveness of lung transplantation compared with that of heart and liver transplantation in the Netherlands.

This study was performed to assess the main reasons for the unfavorable cost effectiveness of lung transplantation compared with that of heart and liver transplantation. Costs, effects, and cost-effectiveness ratios of Dutch lung, heart, and liver transplantation programs were compared. The data are based on three Dutch technology assessments of transplantation, with minor adjustments for time and methods. In result, mainly follow-up costs of lung transplantation are higher than costs of heart and liver transplantation-- 50,300 US dollars, 121,500 US dollars, and 95,300 US dollars, respectively--in the first 3 years after transplantation. The survival gain realized by lung transplantation is small (4.4 years) compared with heart (8.8 years) and liver (14.7 years) transplantation. Costs per life-year gained were 77,000 US dollars, 38,000 US dollars, and 26,000 US dollars for lung, heart, and liver transplantation, respectively. The unfavorable cost effectiveness of lung transplantation is largely related to a relatively small survival gain and high follow-up costs.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗

Transplantation of brain tissue in the brain of rat. II. Growth characteristics of neocortical transplants in hosts of different ages.

In this study the growth of neural transplants was analyzed in relation to the age of the host animals and the site of transplantation. The influence of these two host parameters on the growth of neural transplants with high growth potential (tissue from 15-day-old embryos) and low growth potential (tissue from 18-day-old embryos) was investigated. Neocortical neural tissues of constant volume, obtained from 15- and 18-day-old embryos, were transplanted into the forebrain or cerebellum of 5-, 10-, 20-, 25-, 30-, 35- and 180-day-old host animals and analyzed, quantitatively well as qualitatively, 90 days after transplantation. The transplants grew larger in volume in the cerebellum than in the forebrain region of the hosts of all ages. In both sites, tissue from 15-day-old embryos yielded larger transplants than tissue from 18-day-old embryos. Transplants from 15-day-old embryos grew most extensively in 5-day-old host animals (33-fold in the cerebellum, and 23-fold in the forebrain region.) In older host animals it grew less extensively, and without much variation in size that could be attributed to the age of host animals. Tissue from 18-day-old embryos grew little, regardless of site of transplantation or age of host. Apparently the age of the host animals and the site of transplantation had greater influence on the growth of the neural transplants with high growth potential than on those with low growth potential. Histologically, the neural transplants in all cases contained normal-looking and fully differentiated neurons and were anatomically integrated with the host brain.

Aging↗