• 1. Department of Neurology; The Third People s Hospital of Chengdu; Chengdu 610031; China2. Department of Uro logy; West China Hospital; Sichuan University; Chengdu 6100413. Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center; 610072, China4. Key Lab. of Transplant Engineering and Immunloogy of MOH; West China Hospital of Sichuan University; 610072, China5. Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu 610072, China;
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective  To evaluate the efficacy of mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF) and azathioprine (AZA) after renal transplantation.
Method  Searching: Medline, Embase, Cochrane library and Chinese Biomedicine database (CBM); identified the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and applied Revman 4.11 for statistical analyses.
Results  Twenty-two RCTs were identified, involving MMF and AZA for anti-rejection after renal transplantation. The data shown that MMF (2 g/d) was more beneficial than AZA in improving the graft survival rate of short periods and the long-term patient survival rate, but there was no statistical differences between MMF (3 g/d) with AZA. Whether in 6 months or in 1 year after renal transplantation, the use of MMF (2 g/d) or MMF (3 g/d) could markedly reduce the incidence of biopsy-proven rejection.
Conclusions  Comparing with AZA, MMF is a more potent immunosuppressive drug, and more efficient in reducing the acute rejection after renal transplantation. MMF can improve the graft and patient survival rate. The 2 gram per day is more acceptable.

Citation: ZHANG Haitao,WANG Kunjie,LI Youping,GAO Li,LIU Jin,CAI Yujia. Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials about Comparison Mycophenolate Mofetil and Azathioprine after Renal Transplantation. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2004, 04(2): 79-91. doi: Copy