期刊文献+

同种异体肾移植的HLA配型效果观察 被引量:1

Clinical significance of HLA-matching in renal transplantation recipients
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:探讨同种异体肾移植的HLA配型效果.方法:比较同种异体肾移植中采用传统HLA配型方法与CREG配型方法的移植状况;对比HLA配型组和未配型组1年移植效果的不同.结果:HLA抗原出现频率较高的有HLA-A2、A11、A24、B60(40)、B13、DR15、DR51、DR52、DR53、DR 4.根据HLA 6位点相配原则,0~6个位点错配(mismatch,MM)所占比例分别为0.78%、1.56%、5.06%、10.12%、27.63%、29.96%和24.9%;而采用交叉组间配型原则(CREGs),0~6位点错配率分别为3.89%、6.23%、17.51%、33.85%、19.84%、13.23%、5.45%.结论:具有某些HLA位点的受者相对来说有更多的获得良好HLA配型的机会;CREGs配型原则明显提高了供、受者间的相配率,但移植效果仍有争议. Objective: lo evaluate the clinical slgnificance of HLA matching in renal transplantation recipients. Methods: HLA antigen types of 573 patients were analyzed and used to select appropriate donors. The outcomes of HI,A matching and that of GREG were compared in renal transplant recipients. Results: The higher frequency of occurrence of HI,A antigen were A2. A11, A24, B60(40). B13. I)R15. DRS1. DR52. DR53 . DRI. and the re cipients with these antigens have more opportunity to gain well HLA matching. The proportion of 0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 MM were0,78%, 1.56%, 5.06%, 10.12%, 27.63%, 29.96% and 24.9% respectively. Bttt by ('REG. the proportion was 3.89%, 6,23%. 17,51%, 33.85%,19.84%.13.23%,5,45%, Conclusions:There was no difference between HLA typing and CREG in the incidence of acute rejection and graft survival.
出处 《临床泌尿外科杂志》 2005年第10期599-602,共4页 Journal of Clinical Urology
关键词 肾移植 组织配型 Transplantation of kidney HLA antigen
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

  • 1Rosenberg J C, Jukuruga D, Williams T. HLA and solid organ transplantation: a review of the literature of the 90s. In: terasaki PI, Gjertson DW. Eds. HLA 1997. Los Angeles: Press of the University of California, 1998. 7-38.
  • 2Cho Y W,Cecka J M. Terasaki HLA matching effect:better survival rates and graft quality. In: Terasaki PI, Cecka JM.. eds. Clinical transplant 1994. Los Angeles: UCLA Press, 1994. 435-439.
  • 3Opelz G. HLA Compatibility and kidney grafts from unrelated live donors. Transplant Proc,1998, 30: 704.
  • 4Petersen P, Scheeberger S, Schleibner S, et al. HLA matching and short/long-term outcome of cadaverice renal allografts: Large single centre asta confirm the multicentre analyses. Transplant Proc, 1995,27 (1): 658.
  • 5Wujciak T, Opelz G. Evaluation of HLA matching for CREG antigens in Europe. Transplantation, 1999 ,27;68(8): 1097- 1099.
  • 6Taylor C J, Dyer P A. Maximizing the benefits of HLA matching for renal transplantation: alleles, specificities,cregs, epitopes, or residues. Transplantation 1999,27;68(8): 1093- 1094.
  • 7Sijpkens Y W, Doxiadis I I, De Fijter J W, et al. Sharing cross-reactive groups of MHC class Ⅰ improves long-term graft survival. : Kidney Int, 1999 , 56 (5):920-1927.
  • 8Stobbe I, van der Meer Prins E M, de Lange P, et al.Cross-reactive group matching does not lead to a better allocation and survival of donor kidneys. Transplantation, 2000, 70(1): 157-161.

同被引文献1

引证文献1

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部