Renal Transplantation with a Current T Negative but Historical T and/or B Positive Cross-Match

We report our experience of 36 renal transplanted patients against a current T negative allocross- match, but historical T and/or B positive allocross- matches, whatever the result of the current B cross-match. Additionally, we have determined the immunoglobulin class of the antibody directed agains...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation dialysis, transplantation, 1991, Vol.6 (4), p.280-285
Main Authors: Guerin, C., Pomier, G., Laverne, S., Fleuru, H., Le Petit, J. C., Berthoux, F.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Antibody Specificity
Antilymphocyte Serum
B-Lymphocytes - immunology
Cross-match
Female
Histocompatibility Testing
Humans
Immunoglobulin G
Immunoglobulin M
Isoantibodies
Kidney Transplantation - immunology
Male
Middle Aged
Renal transplantation
T-Lymphocytes - immunology
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We report our experience of 36 renal transplanted patients against a current T negative allocross- match, but historical T and/or B positive allocross- matches, whatever the result of the current B cross-match. Additionally, we have determined the immunoglobulin class of the antibody directed against B and T lymphocytes. The graft survival rate did not differ between the 36 patients forming the study group, and the 229 patients transplanted within the same period with negative T and B, on current and historical sera, cross-matches. Within this study group there was no change in graft survival rate for the following three subgroups, which were retrospectively defined: historical positive (14 patients) versus negative (22 patients) T cross-match, current positive (15 patients) versus negative (21 patients) B cross-match, and IgM (16 patients) versus IgG (20 patients) against B lymphocytes. In terms of transplant outcome, our policy was thus safe.
ISSN:0931-0509
1460-2385
DOI:10.1093/ndt/6.4.280