Nephrol Dial Transplant (2003) 18: 471-476
© 2003 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association
Invited Comment
Age and renal transplantation: an interim analysis
University Hospital, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Innsbruck, Austria
Keywords: age; donor; kidney; recipient; renal transplantation
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Introduction
The life expectancy of the population in general is increasing consistently, as is the age of the dialysis population. Consequently, donors and recipients are getting older, and renal transplantation has become a therapy that is not limited to the youngest segment of subjects with terminal renal failure. Reluctance to use organs from elderly subjects has decreased with increasing demand (and possibly with increasing age of transplant physicians), and age-matching programmes have been developed to better serve the dialysis population. The medical aspects of this changing attitude continue to be explored. However, the answers obtained may be the starting point for a discussion of oncoming ethical problems.
Effect of donor age on outcome (Figure 1
)
In the period from 1977 to 1982, a donor age >30 years was a major reason for declining a cadaver kidney allograft offer [11]. While 15% of kidneys retrieved from 1620-year-old donors were not transplanted, the discard rate was 30 and 56%
Effect of recipient age on outcome (Figure 2
)
Age matching in renal transplantation
Is there something special about immunology in elderly grafts/recipients?
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. R. Kaufman, J. K. Shim, and A. J. Russ Old age, life extension, and the character of medical choice. J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci., July 1, 2006; 61(4): S175 - S184. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. E. Morrissey, R. Gohh, A. Yango, A. Gautam, and A. P. Monaco Renal Transplant Survival From Older Donors: A Single Center Experience Arch Surg, April 1, 2004; 139(4): 384 - 389. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||

