Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Transplant. Dec 24, 2015; 5(4): 154-164
Published online Dec 24, 2015. doi: 10.5500/wjt.v5.i4.154
Published online Dec 24, 2015. doi: 10.5500/wjt.v5.i4.154
Table 3 Selected clinical studies involving renal preservation solutions
| Ref. | Solution | Cases | Patient survival | Graft survival |
| UW solution vs HTK solution | ||||
| Lynch et al[60] | UW vs HTK | Living donor = 950 (UW 475, HTK 475) | No diff (1 yr) | No diff (1 yr) |
| Deceased donor = 634 | (living or deceased donors) | (Living or deceased donors) | ||
| (UW 317, HTK 317) | ||||
| de Boer et al[61] | UW vs HTK | 611 (UW 297, HTK 314) | ---- | No diff (1 yr) |
| (UW 81%, HTK 83%) | ||||
| Klaus et al[62] | UW vs HTK | 51 (UW 27, HTK 24) | No diff (1 yr) | No diff (1 yr) |
| (UW 84% vs HTK 86%) | (UW 78%, HTK 79%) | |||
| UW solution vs CEL solution | ||||
| Montalti et al[64] | UW vs CEL | 50 (UW 25, CEL 25) | No diff (1 yr) | No diff (1 yr) |
| (UW 100%, CEL 100%) | (UW 96%, CEL 91.8%) | |||
| P value not stated | ||||
| Faenza et al[23] | UW vs CEL | 187 (UW 88, CEL 99) | No diff (2 yr) | No diff (2 yr) |
| (UW 100%, CEL 100%) | (UW 75%, CEL 84%) | |||
| P value not stated | ||||
| Pedotti et al[54] | UW vs CEL | 441 (UW 269, CEL 172) | No diff (1 yr) | No diff (1 yr) |
| (UW 97.7%, CEL 99.4%) | (UW 91%, CEL 94.2%) | |||
| P value not stated | P value not stated | |||
| EC solution vs HTK solutions | ||||
| de Boer et al[61] | EC vs HTK | 569 (EC 277, HTK 292) | ---- | No diff (1 yr) |
| (EC 78%, HTK 80%) | ||||
| P value not stated |
- Citation: Latchana N, Peck JR, Whitson BA, Henry ML, Elkhammas EA, Black SM. Preservation solutions used during abdominal transplantation: Current status and outcomes. World J Transplant 2015; 5(4): 154-164
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3230/full/v5/i4/154.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5500/wjt.v5.i4.154