Kidney Transplantation Outcomes From Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD) is a potential additional source of donor kidneys. This study reviewed uDCD kidney transplant outcomes to determine if these are comparable to controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD). METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched. Data on demographic information and transplant outcomes were extracted from included studies. Meta-analyses were performed, and risk ratios (RR) were estimated to compare transplant outcomes from uDCD to cDCD. RESULTS: Nine cohort studies were included, from 2178 uDCD kidney transplants. There was a moderate degree of bias, as 4 studies did not account for potential confounding factors. The median incidence of primary nonfunction in uDCD was 12.3% versus 5.7% for cDCD (RR, 1.85; 95% confidence intervals, 1.06-3.23; P = 0.03, I 2 = 75). The median rate of delayed graft function was 65.1% for uDCD and 52.0% for cDCD. The median 1-y graft survival for uDCD was 82.7% compared with 87.5% for cDCD (RR, 1.43; 95% confidence intervals, 1.02-2.01; P = 0.04; I 2 = 71%). The median 5-y graft survival for uDCD and cDCD was 70% each. Notably, the use of normothermic regional perfusion improved primary nonfunction rates in uDCD grafts. CONCLUSIONS: Although uDCD outcomes may be inferior in the short-term, the long-term outcomes are comparable to cDCD.

A meta-analysis of the risk of salivary gland tumors associated with mobile phone use: the importance of correct exposure assessment.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the risk of developing salivary gland tumors associated with the use of mobile phones. CONTENT: There have been a number of epidemiological studies conducted to assess for a possible association between mobile phone usage and the development of intracranial tumours, however results have been conflicting. We conducted an extensive literature search across four different databases was conducted. After selecting the articles relevant to the area of study, a total of seven studies were included in this meta-analysis, with no restrictions set on publication date or language. Studies were qualitatively assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. No significant association between the use of mobile phones and salivary gland tumors was observed (OR=1.06, 95% CI=0.86-1.32). No evidence for publication bias was detected. SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK: Our findings indicate no significant association between mobile phone usage and salivary gland tumours. However, there were many limitations encountered in these studies, suggesting that the observed result may not be an accurate estimate of the true carcinogenic risk of mobile phones, especially for heavy long-term users. In fact, the studies included in this meta-analysis highlight the need to correctly define exposure assessment in order to ascertain the risk of a certain variable.