2017
DOI: 10.1111/ctr.12952
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationship between pre-transplant physical function and outcomes after kidney transplant

Abstract: Background Performance-based measures of physical function predict morbidity following non-transplant surgery. Study objectives were to determine whether physical function predicts outcomes after kidney transplant and assess how physical function changes post-transplant. Methods We conducted a prospective study involving living donor kidney transplants recipients at our center 5/2012 to 2/2014. Physical function was measured using the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) (balance, chair stands, gait spe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

2
25
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
2
25
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, even the younger‐impaired KT recipients experienced a 2.34‐fold increased risk of mortality compared to their unimpaired counterparts. Consistent with recent findings on SPPB performance and length of stay, performance on the balance portion had the single strongest association with mortality of all the individual SPPB components . Finally, SPPB impairment performed similarly to frailty with regard to strength of association with (aHR 2.30 vs. 2.17) and prediction of (C‐statistic 0.76 vs. 0.76) mortality.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…However, even the younger‐impaired KT recipients experienced a 2.34‐fold increased risk of mortality compared to their unimpaired counterparts. Consistent with recent findings on SPPB performance and length of stay, performance on the balance portion had the single strongest association with mortality of all the individual SPPB components . Finally, SPPB impairment performed similarly to frailty with regard to strength of association with (aHR 2.30 vs. 2.17) and prediction of (C‐statistic 0.76 vs. 0.76) mortality.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Appreciation of the impact of recipient demographics and characteristics including pre‐transplant hospitalization history and KT LOS upon readmission patterns are relevant to inform payer contracts, patient and family expectations, perioperative care coordination, and institutional resources dedicated to optimize recipient recovery after transplant. Pre‐transplant frailty and physical function have been correlated with increased transplant LOS and early readmission after KT; however, it remains to be seen if pre‐transplant interventions to impact these factors will enhance post‐transplant outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, our gene signature is relevant and may allow the identification of patients who could benefit the most from induction therapy or increased maintenance immunosuppression. This assay may also allow identification of patients at low risk for EAR, where surveillance biopsies may be avoided (43)(44)(45).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%