Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Correlation Between the Transplant Evaluation Rating Scale (TERS) and Medical Outcomes in Living-Donor Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pretransplant psychosocial evaluation of living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) candidates identifies recipients with potentially inferior posttransplant outcomes. Rating instruments, based on semi-standardized interviews, help to improve and standardize psychosocial evaluation. The goal of this study was to retrospectively investigate the correlation between the Transplant Evaluation Rating Scale (TERS) and transplant outcome in LDKT recipients.

METHODS: TERS scores were retrospectively generated by 2 raters based on comprehensive interviews of 146 LDKT recipients conducted by mental health professionals (interrater reliability, 0.8-0.9). All patients were eligible for transplantation according to pretransplant psychosocial evaluation. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to their TERS scores, in either two thirds excellent risk (TERS <29) and one third at least moderate risk (TERS ≥29) candidates. Analyzed medical parameters were change in estimated glomerular filtration rate and acute rejection (AR) episodes within the first year posttransplant. In addition, a subgroup of 65 patients was tested for de novo donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSA) posttransplant.

RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the excellent (n = 97) and at least moderate (n = 49) risk candidates according to TERS in terms of organ function (estimated glomerular filtration rate decline >25%: 17 of 97 vs 11 of 49; P = .51) and episodes of AR (19 of 97 vs 15 of 49; P = .15). Patients developing de novo DSA (n = 18 [28%]) did not have higher pretransplant TERS scores (DSA positive, 11 of 42 vs 7 of 23; P = .78).

CONCLUSIONS: Classifying LDKT recipients according to TERS score did not predict medical outcome at 1 year posttransplant or the occurrence of de novo DSA.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app