English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this study we systematically reviewed outcomes in recipients and donors of commercial kidney transplants. Inherent in a study of this nature is the possibility of center and country bias, in particular there are no publications from China and South America. Publications also tended to report poor outcomes which may reflect bias on the part of the authors or to highlight the ethical issues in this area. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis due to variability in studies making it impossible to synthesize the data other than descriptive. Furthermore, these studies were not large or well conducted. We found that patient and graft survival was generally inferior to the data obtained from the UNOS (United Network for Organ Sharing). Some studies did achieve good outcomes, however, due to lack of details, it was not possible to infer if the donor hospital, surgical technique or immunosuppressive regimen was a factor. There was a higher incidence of unconventional and life-threatening infections such as malaria, invasive fungal infections, pneumonia, HIV and hepatitis. There was also a markedly increased incidence of postoperative surgical interventions in recipients. We suggest the establishment of a database for both recipients and donors to identify unique surgical, medical, infectious and immunosuppressive protocols for the recipients and donors in these hospitals. This could lead to better liaison between the recipient and donor hospitals so that modern surgical and medical practices can be implemented. There should also be improved emotional and psychological support to both the recipient and the donor. However, these steps could be seen as condoning the reprehensible practice of commercialization of human body parts.

Commercialization of Kidney Transplants: A Systematic Review of Outcomes in Recipients and Donors