FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 308:1553-1558 June 30, 1983 Number 26 Next

	Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited PubMed Citation

Abstract

We examined the survival experience of 1038 white patients with end-stage renal disease to compare transplantation with maintenance dialysis. A mathematical model was used that permitted adjustment for the confounding effects of age and morbidity at the start of treatment as well as for the year in which treatment began. For patients with all kinds of renal disease, survival was related to age and morbidity but not to the year of starting treatment. Transplantation with a graft from a living related donor was associated with significantly better survival than either transplantation with a cadaveric graft (relative risk, 0.54) or dialysis (relative risk, 0.55). No significant difference in survival was found between treatment by dialysis and by cadaveric transplantation (relative risk, 1.01). In view of this experience, the decision about whether a patient on dialysis should receive a cadaveric transplant should be based on evaluation of the differences in complications associated with the two treatments and the potential effects of these on the patient's general life style, opportunity for rehabilitation, and family and social responsibilities. Whether the use of cyclosporine will change this assessment in the future remains to be seen.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Kobayashi, K., Censullo, M. L., Rossman, L. L., Kyriakides, P. N., Kahan, B. D., Cohen, A. M. (2007). Interventional Radiologic Management of Renal Transplant Dysfunction: Indications, Limitations, and Technical Considerations. RadioGraphics 27: 1109-1130 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Oniscu, G. C., Brown, H., Forsythe, J. L.R. (2005). Impact of Cadaveric Renal Transplantation on Survival in Patients Listed for Transplantation. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 16: 1859-1865 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Brenner, M. J., Tung, T. H., Jensen, J. N., Mackinnon, S. E. (2002). The Spectrum of Complications of Immunosuppression: Is the Time Right for Hand Transplantation?. JBJS 84: 1861-1870 [Full Text]  
• RABBAT, C. G., THORPE, K. E., RUSSELL, J. D., CHURCHILL, D. N. (2000). Comparison of Mortality Risk for Dialysis Patients and Cadaveric First Renal Transplant Recipients in Ontario, Canada. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 11: 917-922 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Mazzuchi, N., Gonzalez-Martinez, F., Carbonell, E., Curi, L., Fernandez-Cean, J., Orihuela, S. (1999). Comparison of survival for haemodialysis patients vs renal transplant recipients treated in Uruguay. Nephrol Dial Transplant 14: 2849-2854 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Covic, A., Goldsmith, D.J.A., Venning, M.C., Ackrill, P. (1999). Long-hours home haemodialysis—the best renal replacement therapy method?. QJM 92: 251-260 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Jones, K. R. (1992). Variations in the Hemodialysis Treatment Process. Clin Nurs Res 1: 50-66 [Abstract]  
• Simon, D. G. (1986). A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Cyclosporine in Cadaveric Kidney Transplantation. Med Decis Making 6: 199-207 [Abstract]  
• Cuchural, G. J., Levey, A. S., Pauker, S. G. (1984). Kidney Failure or Cancer: Should Immunosuppression Be Continued in a Transplant Patient with Malignant Melanoma?. Med Decis Making 4: 83-107