Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 477

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of renal cadaveric transplantation on survival in end-stage renal failure: evidence for reduced mortality risk compared with hemodialysis during long-term follow-up.

Schnuelle, P, Lorenz, D, Trede, M, Van Der Woude, F J·1998·Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Abstract

Despite a superior quality of life and a favorable cost effectiveness, it has not been well established thus far whether renal cadaveric transplantation contributes to superior survival probability of end-stage renal disease patients in Europe, because the mortality rate on dialysis is lower compared with the United States. This analysis was undertaken to compare the mortality of wait-listed patients and transplant recipients during long-term follow-up, including the possibility of a retransplant in a single-center study. The study cohort included 309 consecutive patients, ages 17 to 72 yr, being registered on the waiting list of the Renal Transplantation Center of Mannheim since the initiation of the transplantation program on June 3, 1989. Follow-up was terminated on September 30, 1997, with a mean of 4.15 yr. A total of 144 renal cadaveric transplants (four retransplants) was performed during the follow-up period. A Cox regression model considering the time-dependent exposure to the different therapy modalities was applied for statistical analysis. Patients being removed from the waiting list or coming back to dialysis after transplantation were censored at time of withdrawal or graft failure. Transplantation resulted in a lower hazard ratio, which was 0.36 (95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 0.87) when the hazard of the wait-listed group was taken as 1.00. The underlying incidence rate of death was 0.026 per patient-year (0.032 on dialysis versus 0.016 with functioning graft). Performing the evaluation on an intention-to-treat basis without censoring the lower risk of the transplanted group was still pronounced according to a hazard ratio of 0.44 (95% confidence interval, 0.22 to 0.89). Thus, patients receiving a renal cadaveric transplantation have a substantial survival advantage over corresponding end-stage renal disease patients on the waiting list even in the setting of a single transplantation center where mortality on regular dialysis therapy was comparatively low.

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.v9112135

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 18 references

Cited by

See all 477

Metadata

Authors
Schnuelle, P., Lorenz, D., Trede, M., & Van Der Woude, F. J.
Venue
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Published
1998-11
Volume
9
Issue
11
Pages
2135-2141
ISSN
1046-6673 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2165667470
Cited by
477
References
18
FWCI
7.71
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: Impact of renal cadaveric transplantation on survival in end-stage renal failure: evidence for reduced mortality risk compared with hemodialysis during long-term follow-up. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1681/asn.v9112135
The paper
Schnuelle, P., Lorenz, D., Trede, M., & Van Der Woude, F. J. (1998). Impact of renal cadaveric transplantation on survival in end-stage renal failure: evidence for reduced mortality risk compared with hemodialysis during long-term follow-up. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. https://doi.org/10.1681/asn.v9112135

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.