European Renal Best Practice Guideline on kidney donor and recipient evaluation and perioperative care

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00023001%3A_____%2F15%3A00059609" target="_blank" >RIV/00023001:_____/15:00059609 - isvavai.cz</a>

Result on the web

<a href="http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/11/1790.full.pdf+html" target="_blank" >http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/11/1790.full.pdf+html</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfu216" target="_blank" >10.1093/ndt/gfu216</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

European Renal Best Practice Guideline on kidney donor and recipient evaluation and perioperative care

Original language description

The European Best Practice Guideline group (EBPG) issued guidelines on the evaluation and selection of kidney donor and kidney transplant candidates, as well as post-transplant recipient care, in the year 2000 and 2002. The new European Renal Best Practice board decided in 2009 that these guidelines needed updating. In order to avoid duplication of efforts with kidney disease improving global outcomes, which published in 2009 clinical practice guidelines on the post-transplant care of kidney transplant recipients, we did not address these issues in the present guidelines.The guideline was developed following a rigorous methodological approach: (i) identification of clinical questions, (ii) prioritization of questions, (iii) systematic literature review and critical appraisal of available evidence and (iv) formulation of recommendations and grading according to Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The strength of each recommendation is rated 1 or 2, with 1 being a 'We recommend' statement, and 2 being a 'We suggest' statement. In addition, each statement is assigned an overall grade for the quality of evidence: A (high), B (moderate), C (low) or D (very low). The guideline makes recommendations for the evaluation of the kidney transplant candidate as well as the potential deceased and living donor, the immunological work-up of kidney donors and recipients and perioperative recipient care.All together, the work group issued 112 statements. There were 51 (45%) recommendations graded '1', 18 (16%) were graded '2' and 43 (38%) statements were not graded. There were 0 (0%) recommendations graded '1A', 15 (13%) were '1B', 19 (17%) '1C' and 17 (15%) '1D'. None (0%) were graded '2A', 1 (0.9%) was '2B', 8 (7%) were '2C' and 9 (8%) '2D'.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_x - Unclassified - Peer-reviewed scientific article (Jimp, Jsc and Jost)

CEP classification

FE - Other fields of internal medicine

OECD FORD branch

—

Project

—

Continuities

N - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z neverejnych zdroju

Publication year

2015

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation

ISSN

0931-0509

e-ISSN

—

Volume of the periodical

30

Issue of the periodical within the volume

11

Country of publishing house

GB - UNITED KINGDOM

Number of pages

8

Pages from-to

1790-1797

UT code for WoS article

000368452900004

EID of the result in the Scopus database

—