Across all solid organs, adolescent age recipients have worse transplant organ survival than younger age children: A US national registry analysis

Vikas R. Dharnidharka, Kenneth E. Lamb, Jie Zheng, Kenneth B. Schechtman, Herwig Ulf Meier-Kriesche

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

37 Scopus citations

Abstract

Univariate analyses suggest that adolescents have worse long-term allograft survival versus younger children across different SOT. This study's objective was to determine whether multivariate analyses of a large national database recording all deceased SOT (KI; LI; HR; LU) also show worse adolescent allograft survival in the different organs. Using data from the national Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients in the USA for pediatric primary SOT from 1989 to 2010, we calculated median half-lives and constructed K-M graft survival curves. Recipient age at transplant (<12 or adolescent 12-17 yr) was fitted with other identical covariates into multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. In all SOT recipients, unadjusted graft survival curves demonstrated better graft survival for adolescents initially, followed by crossing of the lines, such that adolescent SOT recipients had worse survival after one yr (KI), 4.6 yr (LI), 4.4 yr (HR), and 1.6 yr (LU). Multivariate models of the post-cross period showed a significantly higher AHR for worse graft survival in adolescent age across all four SOTs: AHR 1.400 (KI), 1.958 (LI), 1.414 (HR), and 1.576 (LU). Improving adolescent long-term outcomes across all four organs will be a defining issue in the future.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)471-476
Number of pages6
JournalPediatric transplantation
Volume19
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2015

Keywords

  • adolescents
  • heart
  • kidney
  • liver
  • lung
  • transplant

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Across all solid organs, adolescent age recipients have worse transplant organ survival than younger age children: A US national registry analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this