Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 879

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Survival in Recipients of Marginal Cadaveric Donor Kidneys Compared with Other Recipients and Wait-Listed Transplant Candidates

OJO, AKINLOLU O., HANSON, JULIE A., MEIER-KRIESCHE, HERWIG-ULF, OKECHUKWU, CHIKE N., WOLFE, ROBERT A., LEICHTMAN, ALAN B., AGODOA, LAWRENCE Y., KAPLAN, BRUCE, PORT, FRIEDRICH K.·2001·Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Abstract

Abstract.: An increasing number of cadaveric kidney transplants are now performed with organs from donors who would have been deemed unsuitable in earlier times. Although good allograft outcomes have been obtained with these marginal donor transplants, it is unclear whether recipients of marginal kidney transplants achieve a reduction in long-term mortality as do recipients of “ideal” kidneys. Patients with end-stage renal disease registered on the cadaveric renal transplant waiting list between January 1, 1992, and June 30, 1997, were studied for mortality risks according to three outcomes: wait-listed on dialysis treatment with no transplant (WLD); transplantation with marginal donor kidney (MDK); and “ideal” or optimal donor kidney transplantation (IDK). Thirty-four percent of wait-list registrants had received a cadaveric kidney transplant by June 30, 1998. Of these, 18% received a marginal kidney that had one or more of the following pretransplant factors: donor age >55 yr, non-heartbeating donor, cold ischemia time >36 h, and donor hypertension or diabetes mellitus of > 10 yr duration. Five-year graft and patient survival was 53% and 74% for MDK recipients compared with 67% (P < 0.001) and 80% (P < 0.001) for IDK recipients. Adjusted annual death rate and estimated remaining life time was 6.3%, 4.7%, and 3.3% and 15.3 yr, 20.4 yr, and 28.7 yr for WLD, MDK, and IDK groups, respectively. The average increase in life expectancy for MDK recipients compared with the WLD cohort was 5 yr, although this benefit varied from 3 to 10 yr depending on the recipient's characteristics. It is concluded that transplantation of a marginal kidney is associated with a significant survival benefit when compared with maintenance dialysis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1681/asn.v123589

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 879

Metadata

Authors
OJO, A. O., HANSON, J. A., MEIER-KRIESCHE, H.-U., OKECHUKWU, C. N., WOLFE, R. A., LEICHTMAN, A. B., AGODOA, L. Y., KAPLAN, B., & PORT, F. K.
Venue
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Published
2001-03
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
589-597
ISSN
1046-6673 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2123036912
Cited by
879
References
0
FWCI
16.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Survival in Recipients of Marginal Cadaveric Donor Kidneys Compared with Other Recipients and Wait-Listed Transplant Candidates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1681/asn.v123589
The paper
OJO, A. O., HANSON, J. A., MEIER-KRIESCHE, H.-U., OKECHUKWU, C. N., WOLFE, R. A., LEICHTMAN, A. B., AGODOA, L. Y., KAPLAN, B., & PORT, F. K. (2001). Survival in Recipients of Marginal Cadaveric Donor Kidneys Compared with Other Recipients and Wait-Listed Transplant Candidates. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. https://doi.org/10.1681/asn.v123589

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.