The gap between supply and demand in kidney transplantation has led to increased use of marginal kidneys; however, kidneys with acute kidney injury are often declined/discarded. To determine whether this policy is justified, we analyzed outcomes of donor kidneys with acute kidney injury (AKI) in a large UK cohort. A retrospective analysis of the UK Transplant Registry evaluated deceased donors between 2003 and 2013. Donors were classified as no AKI, or AKI stage 1-3 according to Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) criteria. Relationship of AKI with delayed graft function/primary nonfunction (DGF/PNF), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and graft-survival at 90 days and 1 year was analyzed. There were 11 219 kidneys (1869 [17%] with AKI) included. Graft failure at 1 year is greater for donors with AKI than for those without (graft survival 89% vs. 91%, p = 0.02; odds ratio (OR) 1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03-1.41]). DGF rates increase with donor AKI stage (p < 0.005), and PNF rates are significantly higher for AKIN stage 3 kidneys (9% vs. 4%, p = 0.04) Analysis of association between AKI and recipient eGFR suggests a risk of inferior eGFR with AKI versus no AKI (p < 0.005; OR 1.25 [95% CI: 1.08-1.31]). We report a small reduction in 1-year graft-survival of kidneys from donors with AKI. We conclude that AKI stage 1 or 2 kidneys should be used; however, caution is advised for AKI stage 3 donors.
Diabetes is the pandemic disease of the modern era, with 10% of these patients having type 1 diabetes mellitus. Despite the prevalence, morbidities, and associated financial burden, treatment options have not changed since the introduction of injectable insulin. To date, over 40,000 pancreas transplants have been performed globally. It remains the only known method for restoring glycemic control and thus curing type 1 diabetes mellitus. The aim of this review is to bring pancreatic transplantation out of the specialist realm, informing practitioners about this important procedure, so that they feel better equipped to refer suitable patients for transplantation and manage, counsel, and support when encountering them within their own specialty. This study was a narrative review conducted in October 2015, with OVID interface searching EMBASE and MEDLINE databases, using Timeframe: Inception to October 2015. Articles were assessed for clinical relevance and most up-to-date content, with articles written in English as the only inclusion criterion. Other sources used included conference proceedings/presentations and unpublished data from our institution (Oxford Transplant Centre). Pancreatic transplantation is growing and has quickly become the gold standard of care for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and renal failure. Significant improvements in quality of life and life expectancy make pancreatic transplant a viable and economically feasible intervention. It remains the most effective method of establishing and maintaining euglycemia, halting and potentially reversing complications associated with diabetes.
Two main themes were identified including the legitimacy of seeking help and continuities of care. Most participants were reluctant to seek help, finding it difficult to decide whether their needs were sufficient to contact services. The degree to which services legitimised participants' requests mediated their experiences. Distress arose when services were dismissive of their needs, whereas respondents were appreciative of clinicians who provided them with reassurance. Participants reported a lack of relational and informational continuity of care. Consulting with an unfamiliar clinician out-of-hours raised doubts in some participants' minds about the quality of care. Some participants recounted episodes in which there were problems with pain management. While the themes suggest that the delivery of out-of-hours care as a whole was not always perfect, around-the-clock access to professional sources of support and reassurance was highly valued. However, the transfer of information to out-of-hours providers remains a key challenge; participants did not understand why out-of-hours providers could not access more information on their medical histories given the level of computerisation within the National Health Service. The findings highlight the need to improve continuity between in-hours and out-of-hours services for patients with complex needs.
Background: An intact sense of taste provides pleasure, supports sustenance and alerts the body to toxins. Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients who receive radiotherapy (RT) are high-risk for developing radiation-induced taste dysfunction. Advances in RT offer opportunities for taste-preserving strategies by reducing dose to the gustatory organs-at-risk. Methods: PubMed, Medline and EMBASE were searched for publications reporting on taste, RT and HNC. Randomised trials, cohort studies and cross-sectional studies were included. Results: 31 studies were included in this review. Meta-analysed prevalence of acute taste dysfunction following RT was approximately 96% (95% CI 64 to 100%) by objective measures and 79% (95% CI 65 to 88%) by subjective measures, with the majority of patients showing at least partial recovery. Long-term dysfunction was seen in~25% of patients. Taste dysfunction was associated with sequalae including weight loss and reduced quality-of-life (QoL). Taste dysfunction was more common when the oral cavity, and specifically the anterior two-thirds of the tongue, was irradiated, suggesting a dose constraint for taste preservation might be feasible. Proton beam therapy and customised bite blocks reduced dose to the gustatory field and subsequent loss of taste. Conclusions: Taste dysfunction following RT is common and negatively affects patients' nutritional status and QoL. Decisions about treatment strategies, including choice of RT modality, dose distribution across the gustatory field and the use of adjuncts like bite blocks may be beneficial. However, evidence is limited. There is a pressing need for randomised studies or large prospective cohort studies with sufficient adjustment for confounders.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.