供体-受体大小不匹配对肾移植受者移植后预后的影响:一项系统综述

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
Sabaa Asif , Christie Rampersad , Ani Orchanian-Cheff , S. Joseph Kim
{"title":"供体-受体大小不匹配对肾移植受者移植后预后的影响:一项系统综述","authors":"Sabaa Asif ,&nbsp;Christie Rampersad ,&nbsp;Ani Orchanian-Cheff ,&nbsp;S. Joseph Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.trre.2025.100965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Donor-recipient size mismatch builds on the nephron dosing concept, but studies suggest unclear associations with kidney allograft outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We systematically searched, critically appraised, and summarized associations between donor-recipient size mismatch and primary outcome of death-censored graft failure, secondary outcomes of kidney function, all-cause graft failure, and mortality. The study protocol was registered a priori on PROSPERO (ID CRD42023455394). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Databases from 1946 to 2025 for studies evaluating adult kidney transplant recipients. We excluded non-English or unavailable full texts, and studies with donors &lt;16 years old. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies – of Exposure tool. Studies were narratively synthesized; marked heterogeneity precluded quantitative meta-analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 1521 citations, 56 studies were included. Sample sizes ranged from 23 to 238,895 donor-recipient pairs (median 214, IQR [95, 807]), with follow-up from 1 week to &gt;20 years. Studies varied in size mismatch definitions, exposure subgrouping, outcomes, patient populations, and follow-up period. Overall, 32 % demonstrated worse kidney allograft outcomes with unfavorable size mismatch, 9 % showed no association, and 59 % reported mixed findings. All studies had high or very high risk of bias.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Available studies do not provide strong evidence to support or reject the idea of nephron underdosing, however existing reports were generally of poor quality, with high or very high risk of bias. Due to data heterogeneity, quantitative meta-analysis was not performed. Well-designed studies with clear exposure definitions, standardized outcome assessments, appropriate confounder control, adequate follow-up, and robust statistical analyses remain a priority.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48973,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation Reviews","volume":"39 4","pages":"Article 100965"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of donor-recipient size mismatch on post-transplant outcomes in kidney transplant recipients: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Sabaa Asif ,&nbsp;Christie Rampersad ,&nbsp;Ani Orchanian-Cheff ,&nbsp;S. Joseph Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.trre.2025.100965\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Donor-recipient size mismatch builds on the nephron dosing concept, but studies suggest unclear associations with kidney allograft outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We systematically searched, critically appraised, and summarized associations between donor-recipient size mismatch and primary outcome of death-censored graft failure, secondary outcomes of kidney function, all-cause graft failure, and mortality. The study protocol was registered a priori on PROSPERO (ID CRD42023455394). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Databases from 1946 to 2025 for studies evaluating adult kidney transplant recipients. We excluded non-English or unavailable full texts, and studies with donors &lt;16 years old. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies – of Exposure tool. Studies were narratively synthesized; marked heterogeneity precluded quantitative meta-analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 1521 citations, 56 studies were included. Sample sizes ranged from 23 to 238,895 donor-recipient pairs (median 214, IQR [95, 807]), with follow-up from 1 week to &gt;20 years. Studies varied in size mismatch definitions, exposure subgrouping, outcomes, patient populations, and follow-up period. Overall, 32 % demonstrated worse kidney allograft outcomes with unfavorable size mismatch, 9 % showed no association, and 59 % reported mixed findings. All studies had high or very high risk of bias.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Available studies do not provide strong evidence to support or reject the idea of nephron underdosing, however existing reports were generally of poor quality, with high or very high risk of bias. Due to data heterogeneity, quantitative meta-analysis was not performed. Well-designed studies with clear exposure definitions, standardized outcome assessments, appropriate confounder control, adequate follow-up, and robust statistical analyses remain a priority.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48973,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transplantation Reviews\",\"volume\":\"39 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 100965\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transplantation Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955470X25000655\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955470X25000655","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

供体-受体大小不匹配建立在肾单位剂量概念上,但研究表明与同种异体肾移植结果的关系尚不清楚。方法我们系统地检索、批判性地评估并总结了供体-受体大小不匹配与死亡审查的移植物衰竭的主要结局、肾功能的次要结局、全因移植物衰竭和死亡率之间的关系。该研究方案在PROSPERO (ID CRD42023455394)上先验注册。我们检索了MEDLINE、Embase和Cochrane数据库,检索了1946年至2025年间评估成人肾移植受者的研究。我们排除了非英文或不可用的全文,以及16岁供体的研究。使用非随机研究的偏倚风险-暴露工具评估偏倚风险。研究是以叙述方式综合的;显著的异质性妨碍了定量荟萃分析。结果共收录1521篇文献,56篇文献。样本量为23 ~ 238,895对供体-受体(中位数为214对,IQR[95,807]),随访时间为1周至20年。研究在大小错配定义、暴露亚组、结果、患者群体和随访期等方面有所不同。总的来说,32%的人表现出更差的同种异体肾移植结果,不利的大小不匹配,9%的人没有表现出相关性,59%的人报告了混合结果。所有的研究都有很高或非常高的偏倚风险。现有的研究没有提供强有力的证据来支持或拒绝肾元剂量不足的观点,然而现有的报告通常质量较差,具有高或极高的偏倚风险。由于数据异质性,未进行定量荟萃分析。设计良好的研究、明确的暴露定义、标准化的结果评估、适当的混杂因素控制、充分的随访和可靠的统计分析仍然是一个优先事项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Impact of donor-recipient size mismatch on post-transplant outcomes in kidney transplant recipients: A systematic review

Impact of donor-recipient size mismatch on post-transplant outcomes in kidney transplant recipients: A systematic review

Background

Donor-recipient size mismatch builds on the nephron dosing concept, but studies suggest unclear associations with kidney allograft outcomes.

Methods

We systematically searched, critically appraised, and summarized associations between donor-recipient size mismatch and primary outcome of death-censored graft failure, secondary outcomes of kidney function, all-cause graft failure, and mortality. The study protocol was registered a priori on PROSPERO (ID CRD42023455394). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Databases from 1946 to 2025 for studies evaluating adult kidney transplant recipients. We excluded non-English or unavailable full texts, and studies with donors <16 years old. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies – of Exposure tool. Studies were narratively synthesized; marked heterogeneity precluded quantitative meta-analysis.

Results

From 1521 citations, 56 studies were included. Sample sizes ranged from 23 to 238,895 donor-recipient pairs (median 214, IQR [95, 807]), with follow-up from 1 week to >20 years. Studies varied in size mismatch definitions, exposure subgrouping, outcomes, patient populations, and follow-up period. Overall, 32 % demonstrated worse kidney allograft outcomes with unfavorable size mismatch, 9 % showed no association, and 59 % reported mixed findings. All studies had high or very high risk of bias.

Conclusions

Available studies do not provide strong evidence to support or reject the idea of nephron underdosing, however existing reports were generally of poor quality, with high or very high risk of bias. Due to data heterogeneity, quantitative meta-analysis was not performed. Well-designed studies with clear exposure definitions, standardized outcome assessments, appropriate confounder control, adequate follow-up, and robust statistical analyses remain a priority.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Transplantation Reviews
Transplantation Reviews IMMUNOLOGY-TRANSPLANTATION
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
40
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: Transplantation Reviews contains state-of-the-art review articles on both clinical and experimental transplantation. The journal features invited articles by authorities in immunology, transplantation medicine and surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信