IMPORTANCE OF HLA-DR MATCHING IN POLYTRANSFUSED CADAVERIC KIDNEY TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS
- 1 October 1983
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Transplantation
- Vol. 36 (4) , 384-387
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00007890-198310000-00007
Abstract
Since Aug. 1978 prospective HLA-DR typing has been performed in 157 donor-recipient pairs. All recipients received pretransplant blood transfusions. HLA-DR matching can significantly improve the survival of cadaveric kidney allografts, even in polytransfused recipients. Patients receiving kidneys with no HLA-DR incompatibilities have a 1-yr graft survival of 97%, vs. 86% for recipients with 1 HLA-DR incompatibility and 73% for recipients with 2 HLA-DR incompatibilities. The cumulative dose of corticosteroids during the 1st yr after transplantation is significantly lower in patients with no DR-incompatibilities. HLA-A and B matching have no additional effect on graft survival.This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- HLA-DR MATCHING IN MULTICENTER, SINGLE-TYPING LABORATORY DATATransplantation, 1982
- INFLUENCE OF THE ORIGINAL DISEASE, RACE, AND CENTER ON THE OUTCOME OF KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATIONTransplantation, 1982
- Importance of HLA-DR Matching in Cadaveric Renal TransplantationNew England Journal of Medicine, 1980
- POWERFUL EFFECT OF HL-DR MATCHING ON SURVIVAL OF CADAVERIC RENAL ALLOGRAFTSThe Lancet, 1980
- DOMINANT EFFECT OF TRANSFUSIONS ON KIDNEY GRAFT SURVIVALTransplantation, 1980
- SIGNIFICANCE OF HLA MATCHING IN RENAL TRANSPLANTATION A PROSPECTIVE ONE-CENTER STUDY OF 485 TRANSPLANTS MATCHED OR MISMATCHED FOR HLA-A, B, C, D, DR ANTIGENSTransplantation, 1979
- SIGNIFICANCE OF HLA-D/DR MATCHING IN RENAL TRANSPLANTATIONThe Lancet, 1978
- MATCHING FOR HLA ANTIGENS OF A, B, AND DR LOCI IN RENAL TRANSPLANTATION BY EUROTRANSPLANTThe Lancet, 1978
- MATCHING FOR B-CELL ANTIGENS OF THE HLA-DR SERIES IN CADAVER RENAL TRANSPLANTATIONThe Lancet, 1978
- Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. Analysis and examplesBritish Journal of Cancer, 1977