172 research outputs found

    Kidney transplant outcomes from older deceased donors : a paired kidney analysis by the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry

    Get PDF
    As the median age of deceased kidney donors rises, updated knowledge of transplant outcomes from older deceased donors in differing donor-recipient age groups is required. Using ERA-EDTA Registry data we determined survival outcomes of kidney allografts donated from the same older deceased donor (55-70 years), and transplanted into one recipient younger and one recipient of similar age to the donor. The recipient pairs were divided into two groups: group 1; younger (median age: 52 years) and older (60 years) and group 2; younger (41 years) and older (60 years). A total of 1410 adults were transplanted during 2000-2007. Compared to the older recipients, the mean number of functioning graft years at 10 years was 6 months longer in the group 1 and group 2 younger recipients (P <0.001). Ten-year graft survival was 54% and 40% for the group 1 younger and older recipients, and 60% and 49% for the group 2 younger and older recipients. Paired Cox regression analyses showed a lower risk of graft failure (group 1 younger; adjusted relative risk [RRa]:0.57, 95% CI:0.41-0.79, and group 2 younger; RRa:0.63, 95% CI:0.47-0.85) in younger recipients. Outcomes from older deceased donor allografts transplanted into differing donor-recipient age groups are better than previously reported. These allografts remain a valuable transplant resource, particularly for similar-aged recipients.Peer reviewe

    Keep an eye on your hands: on the role of visual mechanisms in processing of haptic space

    Get PDF
    The present paper reviews research on a haptic orientation processing. Central is a task in which a test bar has to be set parallel to a reference bar at another location. Introducing a delay between inspecting the reference bar and setting the test bar leads to a surprising improvement. Moreover, offering visual background information also elevates performance. Interestingly, (congenitally) blind individuals do not or to a weaker extent show the improvement with time, while in parallel to this, they appear to benefit less from spatial imagery processing. Together this strongly points to an important role for visual processing mechanisms in the perception of haptic inputs

    Correlation of three immunohistochemically detected markers of neuroendocrine differentiation with clinical predictors of disease progression in prostate cancer

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The importance of immuno-histological detection of neuroendocrine differentiation in prostatic adenocarcinoma with respect to disease at presentation and Gleason grade is gaining acceptance. There is limited literature on the relative significance of three commonly used markers of NE differentiation i.e. Chromogranin A (CgA), Neuron specific enolase (NSE) and Synaptophysin (Syn). In the current work we have assessed the correlation of immuno-histological detection of neuroendocrine differentiation in prostatic adenocarcinoma with respect to disease at presentation and Gleason grade and to determine the relative value of various markers.</p> <p>Materials and methods</p> <p>Consecutive samples of malignant prostatic specimens (Transurethral resection of prostate or radical retropubic prostatectomy) from 84 patients between January 1991 and December 1998 were evaluated by immunohistochemical staining (PAP technique) using selected neuroendocrine tumor markers i.e. Chromogranin A (CgA), Neuron specific enolase (NSE), and Synaptophysin (Syn). According to the stage at diagnosis, patients were divided into three groups. Group (i) included patients who had organ confined disease, group (ii) included patients with locally invasive disease, and group (iii) with distant metastasis. NE expression was correlated with Gleason sum and clinical stage at presentation and analyzed using Chi-Square test and one way ANNOVA.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The mean age of the patients was 70 ± 9.2 years. Group I had 14 patients, group II had 31 patients and group III had 39 patients. CgA was detected in 33 cases, Syn in 8 cases, and NSE in 44 cases. Expression of CgA was seen in 7% of group I, 37% in group II and 35% of group III patients (p 0.059). CgA (p 0.024) and NSE (p 0.006) had a significantly higher expression with worsening Gleason grade.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>CgA has a better correlation with disease at presentation than other markers used. Both NSE and CgA had increasing expression with worsening histological grade this correlation has a potential for use as a prognostic indicator. Limitations in the current work included small number and retrospective nature of work. The findings of this work needs validation in a larger cohort.</p

    Survival in dialysis patients is not different between patients with diabetes as primary renal disease and patients with diabetes as a co-morbid condition

    Get PDF
    On dialysis, survival among patients with diabetes mellitus is inferior to survival of non-diabetic patients. We hypothesized that patients with diabetes as primary renal disease have worse survival compared to patients with diabetes as a co-morbid condition and aimed to compare all-cause mortality between these patient groups. Data were collected from the Netherlands Cooperative Study on the Adequacy of Dialysis (NECOSAD), a multicenter, prospective cohort study in which new patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD) were monitored until transplantation or death. Patients with diabetes as primary cause of ESRD were compared with patients with diabetes as co-morbid condition and both of these patient groups were compared to patients without diabetes. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression. Fifteen % of the patients had diabetic nephropathy as primary renal disease (N = 281); 6% had diabetes as co-morbid condition (N = 107) and 79% had no diabetes (N = 1465). During follow-up 42% of patients (N = 787) died. Compared to non-diabetic patients, mortality risk was increased for both patients with diabetes as primary renal disease HR: 1.9 (95% CI 1.6, 2.3) and for patients with diabetes as co-morbid condition HR: 1.7 (95% CI 1.3, 2.2). Mortality was not significantly higher in patients with diabetes as primary renal disease compared to patients with diabetes as co-morbid condition (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.79, 1.43). This study in patients with ESRD showed no survival difference between patients with diabetes as primary renal disease and patients with diabetes as a co-morbid condition. Both conditions were associated with increased mortality risk compared to non-diabetic patient
    corecore