This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Richard J. Howard, MD, PhD; Carl M. Kjellstrand, MD; David E. R. Sutherland, MD, PhD; John S. Najarian, MD
University of Minnesota Health Sciences Center Minneapolis

JAMA. 1978;239(9):830.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The recent comparison of dialysis and transplantation by John P. Kemph, MD, (237:2532, 1977) in the WHEN FRIENDS OR PATIENTS ASK ABOUT section is not an even-handed discussion of these modes of treatment of end-stage renal disease. Kemph emphasizes only the negative aspects of transplantation and leads the reader to conclude that dialysis is currently the preferred treatment. In fact, the proper mode of therapy is by no means clearly established. We would like to make some additions and corrections to Kemph's presentation.

Concentrating only on the psychological aspects of transplantation, Dr Kemph totally neglects a discussion of the physiological advantages and disadvantages of dialysis and transplantation (of course, the two aspects are intimately associated). While dialysis and transplantation result in similar survival when all patients are considered, children and diabetics have better survival when treated by transplantation,¹ and older patients live longer with dialysis. Therefore, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by John D. Archer, MD, Senior Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?