Mostrar el registro sencillo

dc.contributor.authorCampos, Sandra
dc.contributor.authorBallesteros Sanz, María Ángeles 
dc.contributor.authorRodrigo Calabia, Emilio 
dc.contributor.authorLópez del Moral, Covadonga
dc.contributor.authorCampos Juanatey, Felix 
dc.contributor.authorSuberviola, Borja
dc.contributor.authorGarcía-Alcalde, Lucía
dc.contributor.authorAmaya, Aurora
dc.contributor.authorDomínguez-Gil, Beatriz
dc.contributor.authorRuiz San Millán, Juan Carlos 
dc.contributor.authorMiñambres García, Eduardo 
dc.contributor.otherUniversidad de Cantabriaes_ES
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-14T07:32:17Z
dc.date.available2025-10-14T07:32:17Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.identifier.issn2373-8731
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10902/37808
dc.description.abstractBackground: The aim of our study is to share our experience with uncontrolled donation after the circulatory determination of death (uDCDD) kidney transplantation and to propose updated donor selection criteria for uDCDD programs. Methods: A prospective study comparing kidney recipients of grafts from local uDCDD donors with recipients of grafts from local standard criteria donors after the neurological determination of death (DNDD) between 2013 and 2024. Donor acceptance was determined using a combination of 3 factors: donor age, no-flow period, and warm ischemic time (WIT). Normothermic regional perfusion was the preservation method in uDCDD cases. Results: The study included 43 kidney recipients from uDCDD donors and 80 controls. The median no-flow period was 10 min (interquartile range, 5-13), and the median WIT was 101 min (interquartile range, 86-118). The incidence of delayed graft function was significantly higher in the uDCDD group (46.5% versus 21.3%; P = 0.004), although no significant difference was observed in primary nonfunction rates (2.3% versus 0%; P = 0.35). Long-term outcomes, including serum creatinine levels and estimated glomerular filtration rate at 5 y, were similar in both groups. Graft survival rates at 1 y (95.3% versus 100%) and 5 y (92.1% versus 95%) showed no significant differences between the uDCDD and the DNDD groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that uDCDD kidney recipients did not have a higher risk of graft loss. Conclusions: Kidney transplantation from uDCDD donors is a viable option, yielding outcomes comparable with those from standard DNDD donors. Strict donor selection criteria and efforts to minimize WIT are essential to achieving optimal long-term results.es_ES
dc.format.extent8 p.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherWolters Kluweres_ES
dc.rights© 2025 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND)es_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.sourceTransplantation Direct, 2025, 11(5), e1790es_ES
dc.titleNew donor selection criteria result in optimal outcomes of kidneys from uncontrolled donation after the circulatory determination of deathes_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.relation.publisherVersionhttps://doi.org/10.1097/txd.0000000000001790es_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccesses_ES
dc.identifier.DOI10.1097/TXD.0000000000001790
dc.type.versionpublishedVersiones_ES


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo

© 2025 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND)Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como © 2025 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND)