 |
|
The Importance of Innovative Efforts to Increase Organ Donation
Arthur J. Matas, MD;
David E. R. Sutherland, MD, PhD
JAMA. 2005;294:1691-1693.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
In the United States, patients with end-stage renal disease have 2 treatment options: dialysis or a kidney transplant. Those choosing a transplant have 2 donor choices: a living donor or a deceased donor.
Considerable information has been accumulated to help guide patient choices. Compared with dialysis, a transplant leads to a longer life,1 enhances quality of life,2 and is cost-effective for the health care system.3 Moreover, a living donor transplant (either related or unrelated) leads to better outcomes (patient and graft survival) than a deceased donor transplant.4 Thus, for patients with end-stage renal disease who are medically eligible for a transplant, the best treatment choice is a living donor transplant. In the last 2 decades, it has been recognized that unrelated living donor transplants have results equivalent to related living donor transplants. In 2004, unrelated living donor transplants accounted for . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Author Affiliation: Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
RELATED ARTICLE
Clinical Results From Transplanting Incompatible Live Kidney Donor/Recipient Pairs Using Kidney Paired Donation
Robert A. Montgomery, Andrea A. Zachary, Lloyd E. Ratner, Dorry L. Segev, Janet M. Hiller, Julie Houp, Mathew Cooper, Louis Kavoussi, Thomas Jarrett, James Burdick, Warren R. Maley, J. Keith Melancon, Tomasz Kozlowski, Christopher E. Simpkins, Melissa Phillips, Amol Desai, Vanessa Collins, Brigitte Reeb, Edward Kraus, Hamid Rabb, Mary S. Leffell, and Daniel S. Warren
JAMA. 2005;294(13):1655-1663.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
