The economic impact of laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy on kidney transplantation

Transplantation

Volumn 75, Issue 9, 2003, Pages 1505-1512

  Mullins, C Daniel ^a   Thomas, Simu K ^a   Pradel, Françoise G ^a   Bartlett, Stephen T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CADAVER DONOR; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEMODIALYSIS; HUMAN; KIDNEY FAILURE; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LIVING DONOR; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICARE; NEPHRECTOMY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED STATES;

CADAVER; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LAPAROSCOPY; LIVING DONORS; MEDICARE; NEPHRECTOMY; RENAL DIALYSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 0038586445     PISSN: 00411337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000060280.28204.3C     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. United States Renal Data System 2001 Annual Data Report: Atlas of End-Stage Renal Disease in the United States, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD; 2001.
2. Transplant Patient Data Source. Richmond, VA: United Network for Organ Sharing. Accessed June 16, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.patients.unos.org/tpd/.
3. 2000 Annual Report of the United States Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network: Transplant Data 1989-1998. Rockville, MD; February 16, 2001.
4. Critical Data, United States Facts about Transplantation. Richmond, VA: United Network for Organ Sharing. Based on the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), data as of May 3, 2002. Accessed June 16, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.unos.org/.
5. Eggers PW, Kucken LE. Cost issues in transplantation. Surg Clin North Am 1994; 74(5): 1259-1267.
6. Friedman EA. End-stage renal disease therapy: an American success story. JAMA 1996; 275(14): 1118-1122.
7. Eggers PW. Comparison of treatment costs between dialysis and transplantation. Semin Nephrol 1992; 12: 284-289.
8. Tousignant P, Guttmann RD, Hollomby DJ. Transplantation and home hemodialysis: their cost-effectiveness. J Chronic Dis 1985; 38: 589-601.
9. Evans RW. Quality of life assessment and the treatment of end-stage renal disease. Transplant Rev 1990; 4: 1.
10. Meers C, Hopman W, Singer MA, et al. A comparison ofpatient, nurse and physician assessment of health related quality of life in end-stage renal disease. Dial Transplant 1995; 24(3): 120.
11. Evans RW, Manninen DL, Garrison LP Jr, et al. The quality of life of patients with end-stage renal disease. N Engl J Med 1985; 312: 553-559.
12. Port FK, Wolfe RA, Mauger EA, et al. Comparison of survival probabilities for dialysis patients vs. cadaveric renal transplant recipients. JAMA 1993; 270(11): 1339-1343.
13. Cecka MJ. Living donor transplants. In: Cecka MJ, Terasaki PI, eds. Clinical transplants 1995. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Tissue Typing Laboratory 1996, p 363-377.
14. Schweitzer EJ, Wilson J, Jacobs S, et al. Increased rates of donation with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Ann Surg 2000; 232(3): 392-400.
15. Philosophe B, Kuo PC, Schweitzer EJ, et al. Laparoscopic vs. open donor nephrectomy: comparing ureteral complications in the recipients and improving the laparoscopic technique. Transplantation 1999; 68(4): 497-502.
16. Flowers JL, Jacobs S, Cho E, et al. Comparison of open and laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Ann Surg 1997; 226(4): 483-90.
17. Schweitzer EJ, Wiland AW, Evans D, et al. The shrinking renal replacement therapy 'break-even' point. Transplantation 1998; 66(12): 1702-1708.