{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029217719132893498, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00471253534401508, 'mean_word_length': 5.359281437125748, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Consensus pending on renal transplantation in children.

Should young children with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) be treated with long-term hemodialysis, transplantation of a kidney from a cadaver donor, or a transplant from a living related donor (LRD)? Indeed, question some, given the uncertain outcome of all available treatments in terms of survival and quality of life, should these small patients be treated at all? The controversy continues, but mounting evidence seems to favor vigorous treatment. Which treatment promises a longer and better life for the afflicted child remains to be determined. In a poster session at the recent National Kidney Foundation meeting in Chicago, William E. Harmon, MD, assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, Boston, presented a comparative study of long-term dialysis, cadaveric transplantation, and LRD transplantation. The study encompassed 21 children treated at the Children's Hospital Medical Center, Boston, where Harmon is director of the dialysis unit. In a previous study of 120 children