000			02547na a2200265 4500
999			_c2436 _d2436
003			PC2436
005			20210625062757.0
008			130622s2013 xxx||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_cH12O
041			_aeng
100			_aAguado Borruey, José María _9919 _eMedicina Intensiva
100			_aAndrés Belmonte, Amado _91321 _eNefrología
100			_aFernández Ruiz, Mario _9263 _eMedicina Interna
100			_aGonzález, E. _91836 _eNefrología
100			_aLópez Medrano, Francisco _9162 _eEnfermedades Infecciosas
100			_aLumbreras Bermejo, Carlos _9873 _eMedicina Interna
100			_aMorales Cerdán, José María _9576 _eNefrología
100			_aSan Juan Garrido, Rafael _9869 _eMedicina Interna
245	0	0	_aInfection Risk in Kidney Transplantation From Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death Donors. _h[artículo]
260			_bTransplantation Proceedings, _c2013
300			_a45(4):1335-8.
500			_aFormato Vancouver: Fernández-Ruiz M, Andrés A, López-Medrano F, González E, Lumbreras C, San-Juan R et al. Infection risk in kidney transplantation from uncontrolled donation after circulatory death donors. Transplant Proc. 2013 May;45(4):1335-8.
501			_aPMID: 23726566
504			_aContiene 15 referencias
520			_aBackground. Uncontrolled donations after circulatory death (DCD) present 2 well-established risk factors for infection after kidney transplantation (KT): greater rates of delayed graft function (DGF) and antithymocyte globulin (ATG)-containing sequential therapies. Methods. We performed a prospective cohort study of our 291 KT patients between November 2008 and July 2011 to compare the incidences of infection between DCD (n = 87) and donation after brain death (DBD; n = 204) recipients. Most DCD donors were uncontrolled Maastricht categories 1 or 2. Backward stepwise Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the impact of DCD on the primary study outcome. Results. As compared to the DBD group, DCD recipients were younger, less likely to have undergone previous transplantations, exhibited lower dialysis vintage, and displayed a greater incidence of DGF and graft loss, but lower incidence of acute rejection episodes. There were no differences in the non-death-censored graft survival at 2 years (log-rank P=.835). The DCD group showed lower cumulative incidences of overall, bacterial, cytomegalovirus (CMV), and non-CMV viral infections (P<.05 for all). Multivariate analysis, associated DCD with a lower risk of overall infection (hazard ratio: 0.41; 95% confidence interval: 0.28-0.60; P=.012), an effect that remained when the analysis was restricted to patients receiving ATG induction therapy. Finally, there were no differences in the cumulative incidence of overall infection when DCD recipients were compared with age-matched DBD controls: 43.7% vs 47.1% respectively (P=.648). Conclusion. Despite the higher rate of DGF and the use of ATG-containing sequential therapy, uncontrolled DCD policies were safe in terms of the risk of post-transplant infection.
710			_96 _aServicio de Medicina Interna
710			_986 _aServicio de Nefrología
710			_9625 _aInstituto de Investigación imas12
856			_uhttp://pc-h12o-es.m-hdoct.a17.csinet.es/pdf/pc/2/pc2436.pdf _ySolicitar documento
942			_n0 _2ddc _cART