Skip Navigation



NDT Advance Access published online on October 5, 2004
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, doi:10.1093/ndt/gfh504
© 2004 by European Renal Association - European Dialysis and Transplant Association
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
19/11/2870    most recent
gfh504v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lee, S.
Right arrow Articles by Coco, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lee, S.
Right arrow Articles by Coco, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Received June 29, 2004
Accepted August 31, 2004

Original Articles

Pamidronate used to attenuate post-renal transplant bone loss is not associated with renal dysfunction

Sally Lee 1, Daniel Glicklich 1, and Maria Coco 1*

1 Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10467, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mcoco{at}montefiore.org.



  Abstract

Background. Pamidronate is a second-generation bisphosphonate that has been used to attenuate post-renal transplant bone loss, but its effect on the function of the renal allograft is unclear. Therefore, we evaluated the long-term renal function in 57 subjects who had participated in a prospective, randomized clinical trial using pamidronate to attenuate bone loss in the renal transplant recipient.

Methods. Thirty subjects (PAM) received intravenous pamidronate, 60 mg at baseline post-transplant and 30 mg in months 1, 2, 3 and 6 post-transplant, while 27 subjects (CON) did not receive pamidronate. We followed renal function, need for renal replacement therapy following transplant rejection, and mortality for 3 years following the start of the original study.

Results. PAM did not have increased incidence of renal dysfunction or mortality compared with CON at any time point during the 3 years of follow-up. The incidence of proteinuria was also not different between the two groups.

Conclusions. The prophylactic use of pamidronate in the above doses to attenuate bone loss in renal transplant recipients is not associated with higher incidence of renal dysfunction or mortality in a 3 year follow-up study. These findings may support the use of bisphosphonates in the treatment of early renal transplant-related bone loss.

Keywords: bisphosphonates; renal osteodystrophy; renal transplant.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CJASNHome page
J. R. Weisinger, R. G. Carlini, E. Rojas, and E. Bellorin-Font
Bone Disease after Renal Transplantation
Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., November 1, 2006; 1(6): 1300 - 1313.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.