Search

Living donation (LD) transplantation is the preferred treatment for kidney failure as compared to donation after brain death (DBD), but age may play a role. We compared the 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) after kidney transplantation for recipients of LD and DBD stratified by recipient and donor age between 2015 and 2018 in a matched cohort. The strength of the association between donation type and 1-year eGFR differed by recipient age (Pinteraction < 0.0001). For LD recipients aged 40-54 years versus same-aged DBD recipients, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for eGFR =60 mL/min/1.73 m2 was 1.48 (95% CI: 1.16-1.90). For DBD recipients aged = 60 years, the aOR was 0.18 (95% CI: 0.12-0.29) versus DBD recipients aged 40-54 years but was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.67-1.24) versus LD recipients aged =60 years. In the matched cohort, 4-year graft and patient survival differed by donor age and type. As compared with DBD grafts, LD grafts increased the proportion of recipients with 1-year eGFR =60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Recipients aged =60 years benefited most from LD transplantation, even if the donor was aged =60 years. For younger recipients, large age differences between donor and recipient could also be addressed with a paired exchange program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently, graft options for pediatric liver transplantation (PLT) include whole (WL) and partial (P) grafts, in the form of either deceased donor transplantation (DD) or living donor liver transplantation (LD). WL transplants from LD are commonly referred to as domino LT. The objective of this manuscript is to compare the outcomes of PLT performed with each of the available graft options. Retrospective cohort study from Jan. 2010 to Dec. 2022. The variables included data on the recipients' preoperative clinical status, intraoperative technical aspects, post-operative complications, and survival studies. There were 4 groups: SPLIT (17), DD-WL (55), LD-WL (824), and LD-P (22). The median age and BW of the recipients was smaller in SPLIT, LD-P, and LD-WL compared to DDT-WL groups. HVOO (HR 15.87, 95% CI 1.89–133.06, P = 0.01), retransplantation (HR 7.94, 95% CI 2.63–24.02, P < 0.01), and malignancies (HR 3.08, 95% CI 1.29–7.37, P = 0.01) were independently associated with decreased patient survival. HAT (HR 27.54, 95% CI 10.44–72.68, P < 0.01) and malignancies (HR 2.42, 95% CI 1.10–5.34, P = 0.03) increased the risk of graft loss. The overall survival in this series was 91.4% (mean follow-up of 74.3 months). Patient and graft survival were not different among groups. HAT and malignancies were associated with reduced graft survival. Whole liver from living donors with MSUD presented 100% patient survival at 120 months. Even without statistical differences in survival among the studied groups, LD-P and LD-WL recipients presented a trend towards better outcomes. LEVEL III. • Liver transplantation (LT) in infants and small children presents significant challenges and necessitates specific technical refinements. • This paper delves into the outcomes of pediatric LT within a single center, covering more than 900 recipients over the past 12 years. • Notably, this report marks the first instance of comparing the outcomes of all available graft types used in pediatric LT. • The noteworthy addition in this study is the inclusion of whole livers from living donors (LD-WL), often referred to as domino LT. • Unexpectedly, the 10-year survival rate for LD-WL in this series reached 100%, whereas split LT showed lower survival rates during the same follow-up period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The rising frequency of live kidney donations is accompanied by growing ethical concerns as to donor autonomy, the comprehensiveness of disclosure, and donors' understanding of long-term consequences. Aim: To explore donors' satisfaction with the ethical competence of multi-professional nephrology teams regarding disclosure of donation consequences to live kidney donors. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed among Israeli live kidney donors who had donated a kidney in two hospitals that belonged to the Ministry of Health's Transplantation Center one year after the donation, from December 2018 to December 2020. Data collection was conducted online and through face-to-face interviews with the donors in their native language (Hebrew or Arabic). Results: Overall, 91 live kidney donors aged 18–49 years were enrolled. Of those, 65.9% were males, and 54.9% were academic donors. Among the live kidney donors, 59.3% reported that the motivation behind the donation was a first-degree family member vs. 35.2% altruistic and 5.5% commercial. Only 13.2% reported that the provided disclosure adequately explained the possible consequences of living with a single kidney. Approximately 20% of the participants reported that the disclosure included information regarding their risk of developing ESRD, hypertension, and proteinuria. The donors reported a low mean of the index score that indicates a low follow-up by the physician after the donation (mean = 1.16, SD = 0.37). The mean GFR level was significantly lower in the post-donation period one year following a kidney donation (117.8 mL/min/1.73 m2) compared with the pre-donation period (84.0 mL/min/1.73 m2), p < 0.001. Conclusion: Our findings display that donors' satisfaction with the ethical competence of multi-professional nephrology teams regarding the disclosure of donation consequences to live kidney donors is low. This study indicates that donors are at an increased risk of worsening kidney functions (creatinine and GFR), and BMI. Our findings underscore the imperative to advise donors that their condition may worsen over time and can result in complications; thus, they should be monitored during short and long-term follow-up periods. This study was not registered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In June 2021, the first robot‐assisted donor nephrectomy (RADN) was performed at the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), the Netherlands. The goal of this study was to investigate whether this procedure has been implemented safely and efficiently. Methods: RADN was retrospectively compared to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) performed during the same time period (June 2021 until November 2022). Patients were assigned to RADN depending on the availability of the da Vinci robot and surgical team. The studied endpoints were postoperative complications, operative time, estimated blood loss, warm ischemic time (WIT), and postoperative pain experience. For analysis, the Student's t‐test and Chi‐squared test were used for, respectively, continuous and categorical data. Results: Forty RADN were compared to 63 LDN. Total insufflation time was significantly longer in RADN compared to LDN (188 min (169–214) versus 172 min (144–194); p = 0.02). Additionally, WIT was also found to be significantly higher in the robot‐assisted group (04:54 min vs. 04:07 min; p < 0.01). No statistical differences were found in postoperative outcomes (eGFR of the recipient at 3‐month follow‐up, RADN 54.08 mL/min ±18.79 vs. LDN 56.41 mL/min ±16.82; p = 0.52), pain experience, and complication rate. Conclusion: RADN was safely and efficiently implemented at the LUMC. It's results were not inferior to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Operative time and warm ischemic times were longer in RADN. This may relate to a learning curve effect. No clinically relevant effect on postoperative outcomes was observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The rising frequency of live kidney donations is accompanied by growing ethical concerns as to donor autonomy, the comprehensiveness of disclosure, and donors’ understanding of long-term consequences. Aim: To explore donors’ satisfaction with the ethical competence of multi-professional nephrology teams regarding disclosure of donation consequences to live kidney donors. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed among Israeli live kidney donors who had donated a kidney in two hospitals that belonged to the Ministry of Health’s Transplantation Center one year after the donation, from December 2018 to December 2020. Data collection was conducted online and through face-to-face interviews with the donors in their native language (Hebrew or Arabic). Results: Overall, 91 live kidney donors aged 18–49 years were enrolled. Of those, 65.9% were males, and 54.9% were academic donors. Among the live kidney donors, 59.3% reported that the motivation behind the donation was a first-degree family member vs. 35.2% altruistic and 5.5% commercial. Only 13.2% reported that the provided disclosure adequately explained the possible consequences of living with a single kidney. Approximately 20% of the participants reported that the disclosure included information regarding their risk of developing ESRD, hypertension, and proteinuria. The donors reported a low mean of the index score that indicates a low follow-up by the physician after the donation (mean = 1.16, SD = 0.37). The mean GFR level was significantly lower in the post-donation period one year following a kidney donation (117.8 mL/min/1.73 m2) compared with the pre-donation period (84.0 mL/min/1.73 m2), p < 0.001. Conclusion: Our findings display that donors’ satisfaction with the ethical competence of multi-professional nephrology teams regarding the disclosure of donation consequences to live kidney donors is low. This study indicates that donors are at an increased risk of worsening kidney functions (creatinine and GFR), and BMI. Our findings underscore the imperative to advise donors that their condition may worsen over time and can result in complications; thus, they should be monitored during short and long-term follow-up periods. This study was not registered.

Background: Robotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) has emerged as a safe alternative to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). Having previously demonstrated comparable efficacy, this study aims to examine postoperative analgesia use (opioid and non-opioid) in the two groups. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 300 living donor nephrectomies performed at our center, comparing 150 RDN's with a contemporary cohort of 150 hand-assisted LDN's. In addition to clinical and demographic information, data on postoperative inpatient opioid and non-opioid analgesia (from patient's arrival to the surgical floor after surgery till the time of discharge) was collected. Opioid dosages were standardized by conversion to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). All patients were managed post-operatively under a standardized ERAS pathway for living donor nephrectomy patients. Results: There were no significant differences in donor age, gender, and BMI between RDN and LDN groups. Total post-operative opioid use (MME's) was significantly lower in RDN patients (RDN 27.1 vs. LDN 46.3; P < 0.0001). Breakdown of opioid use with post-operative (POD) day demonstrated significantly lower use in RDN group on POD1 (RDN 8.6 vs. LDN 17.0; P < 0.05), and POD2 (RDN 3.9 vs LDN 10; P < 0.05). RDN patients had a shorter post-operative length of stay (LOS) (RDN 1.69 days vs. LDN 1.98; P = 0.0003). There were no differences between groups in non-opioid medication use, complications, and readmission rates. Conclusion: RDN has comparable safety to hand-assist LDN and offers additional benefits of lower postoperative opioid requirement and a shorter hospital LOS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The decision to become a living donor requires consideration of a complex, interactive array of factors that could be targeted for clinical, policy, and educational interventions. Our objective was to assess how financial barriers interact with motivators, other barriers, and facilitators during this process. Methods: Data were obtained from a public survey assessing motivators, barriers, and facilitators of living donation. We used multivariable logistic regression and consensus k‐means clustering to assess interactions between financial concerns and other considerations in the decision‐making process. Results: Among 1592 respondents, the average age was 43; 74% were female and 14% and 6% identified as Hispanic and Black, respectively. Among employed respondents (72%), 40% indicated that they would not be able to donate without lost wage reimbursement. Stronger agreement with worries about expenses and dependent care challenges was associated with not being able to donate without lost wage reimbursement (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.0–1.3; OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.1–1.3, respectively). Four respondent clusters were identified. Cluster 1 had strong motivators and facilitators with minimal barriers. Cluster 2 had barriers related to health concerns, nervousness, and dependent care. Clusters 3 and 4 had financial barriers. Cluster 3 also had anxiety related to surgery and dependent care. Conclusions: Financial barriers interact primarily with health and dependent care concerns when considering living organ donation. Targeted interventions to reduce financial barriers and improve provider communication regarding donation‐related risks are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Longer end‐stage renal disease time has been associated with inferior kidney transplant outcomes. However, the contribution of transplant evaluation is uncertain. We explored the relationship between time from evaluation to listing (ELT) and transplant outcomes. Methods: This retrospective study included 2535 adult kidney transplants from 2000 to 2015. Kaplan–Meier survival curves, log‐rank tests, and Cox regression models were used to compare transplant outcomes. Results: Patient survival for both deceased donor (DD) recipients (p <.001) and living donor (LD) recipients (p <.0001) was significantly higher when ELT was less than 3 months. The risks of ELT appeared to be mediated by other risks in DD recipients, as adjusted models showed no associated risk of graft loss or death in DD recipients. For LD recipients, ELT remained a risk factor for patient death after covariate adjustment. Each month of ELT was associated with an increased risk of death (HR = 1.021, p =.04) but not graft loss in LD recipients in adjusted models. Conclusions: Kidney transplant recipients with longer ELT times had higher rates of death after transplant, and ELT was independently associated with an increased risk of death for LD recipients. Investigations on the impact of pretransplant evaluation on post‐transplant outcomes can inform transplant policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Oxidative stress has been implicated in complications after kidney transplantation (KT), including delayed graft function (DGF) and rejection. However, its role in long-term posttransplant outcomes remains unclear. Methods: We investigated oxidative damage and antioxidant defense dynamics, and their impact on the graft outcomes, in 41 KT recipients categorized by type of donation over 12 months. Oxidative status was determined using OxyScore and AntioxyScore indexes, which comprise several circulating biomarkers of oxidative damage and antioxidant defense. Donor types included donation after brain death (DBD [61.0%]), donation after circulatory death (DCD [26.8%]), and living donation (LD [12.1%]). Results: There was an overall increase in oxidative damage early after transplantation, which was significantly higher in DCD as compared to DBD and LD recipients. The multivariate adjustment confirmed the independent association of OxyScore and type of deceased donation with DGF, donor kidney function, and induction therapy with antithymocyte globulin. There were no differences in terms of antioxidant defense. Lower oxidative damage at day 7 predicted better graft function at 1-year posttransplant only in DBD recipients. Conclusion: DCD induced greater short-term oxidative damage after KT, whereas the early levels of oxidative damage were predictive of the graft function 1 year after KT among DBD recipients. Plain Language Summary: With advancements in therapies reducing the risk of graft-associated complications after kidney transplantation (KT), our focus shifts toward ensuring optimal graft conditions to improve the quality of life for KT patients. This emphasizes the importance of identifying prognostic factors of kidney function, even in populations without graft-associated complications. Oxidative stress, which is characterized by an imbalance in the production and neutralization of free radicals in the body, has been linked to graft-associated complications. Moreover, a significant determinant of graft function is the source of the graft, whether obtained from living donation (LD) or donation after circulatory or brain death (DCD and DBD). Therefore, we aimed to study whether oxidative stress differed in the short-term after KT in patients receiving LD, DCD, and DBD, and whether these levels of oxidative stress were predictive of graft function in KT patients without long-term complications such as rejection. We examined oxidative stress in 41 KT recipients over 12 months, finding increased oxidative damage early post-KT, notably higher in DCD donors. Moreover, lower oxidative damage in the first week after KT predicted better 1-year graft function in DBD recipients. In conclusion, DCD induced more short-term oxidative damage, while early oxidative levels predicted 1-year graft function in DBD recipients. These findings underscore the importance of early oxidative stress assessment in guiding clinical decision-making and optimizing long-term outcomes in KT recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Living donation (LD) transplantation is the preferred treatment for kidney failure as compared to donation after brain death (DBD), but age may play a role. We compared the 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) after kidney transplantation for recipients of LD and DBD stratified by recipient and donor age between 2015 and 2018 in a matched cohort. The strength of the association between donation type and 1-year eGFR differed by recipient age (Pinteraction < 0.0001). For LD recipients aged 40–54 years versus same-aged DBD recipients, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 was 1.48 (95% CI: 1.16–1.90). For DBD recipients aged ≥ 60 years, the aOR was 0.18 (95% CI: 0.12–0.29) versus DBD recipients aged 40–54 years but was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.67–1.24) versus LD recipients aged ≥60 years. In the matched cohort, 4-year graft and patient survival differed by donor age and type. As compared with DBD grafts, LD grafts increased the proportion of recipients with 1-year eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Recipients aged ≥60 years benefited most from LD transplantation, even if the donor was aged ≥60 years. For younger recipients, large age differences between donor and recipient could also be addressed with a paired exchange program.

Background: Pediatric (age < 18 years) kidney transplant (KT) candidates face increasingly complex choices. The 2014 kidney allocation system nearly doubled wait times for pediatric recipients. Given longer wait times and new ways to optimize compatibility, more pediatric candidates may consider kidney‐paired donation (KPD). Motivated by this shift and the potential impact of innovations in KPD practice, we studied pediatric KPD procedures in the US from 2008 to 2021. Methods: We describe the characteristics and outcomes of pediatric KPD recipients with comparison to pediatric non‐KPD living donor kidney transplants (LDKT), pediatric LDKT recipients, and pediatric deceased donor (DDKT) recipients. Results: Our study cohort includes 4987 pediatric DDKTs, 3447 pediatric non‐KPD LDKTs, and 258 pediatric KPD transplants. Fewer centers conducted at least one pediatric KPD procedure compared to those that conducted at least one pediatric LDKT or DDKT procedure (67, 136, and 155 centers, respectively). Five centers performed 31% of the pediatric KPD transplants. After adjustment, there were no differences in graft failure or mortality comparing KPD recipients to non‐KPD LDKT, LDKT, or DDKT recipients. Discussion: We did not observe differences in transplant outcomes comparing pediatric KPD recipients to controls. Considering these results, KPD may be underutilized for pediatric recipients. Pediatric KT centers should consider including KPD in KT candidate education. Further research will be necessary to develop tools that could aid clinicians and families considering the time horizon for future KT procedures, candidate disease and histocompatibility characteristics, and other factors including logistics and donor protections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Incidental kidneys cysts are typically considered benign, but the presence of cysts is more frequent in individuals with other early markers of kidney disease. We studied the association of donor kidney cysts with donor and recipient outcomes after living donor kidney transplantation. Methods: We retrospective identified 860 living donor transplants at our center (1/1/2011–7/31/2022) without missing data. Donor cysts were identified by review of pre‐donation CT scan reports. We used linear regression to study the association between donor cysts and 6‐month single‐kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) increase, and time‐to‐event analyses to study the association between donor cysts and recipient death‐censored graft failure. Results: Among donors, 77% donors had no kidney cysts, 13% had ≥1 cyst on the kidney not donated, and 11% only had cysts on the donated kidney. In adjusted linear regression, cysts on the donated kidney and kidney not donated were not significantly associated with 6‐month single‐kidney eGFR increase. Among transplants, 17% used a transplanted kidney with a cyst and 6% were from donors with cysts only on the kidney not transplanted. There was no association between donor cyst group and post‐transplant death‐censored graft survival. Results were similar in sensitivity analyses comparing transplants using kidneys with no cysts versus 1–2 cysts versus ≥3 cysts. Conclusions: Kidney cysts in living kidney donors were not associated with donor kidney recovery or recipient allograft longevity, suggesting incidental kidney cysts need not be taken into account when determining living donor candidate suitability or the laterality of planned donor nephrectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After 2 decades of limited growth, living donor liver transplant (LDLT) has been increasingly accepted as a promising solution to the growing organ shortage in the US. With experience, LDLT offers superior graft and patient survival with low rates of rejection. However, not all waitlisted patients have equal access to LDLT, with financial toxicity representing a substantial barrier. Potential living liver donors face indirect, direct, and opportunity costs associated with donation as well as insurance-based discrimination and variable employer leave policies. There are multiple potential national, local, and patient-centered solutions to address some of the cost-related issues associated with living LDLT. These include standardization of employer leave policies, creation of federal and state-led tax relief programs, optimization of National Living Donor Assistance Center use, engagement of independent living donor advocates, creation of financial toolkits, and encouragement of recipient or donor-led fundraising. In this piece, members of the North American Living Liver Donation Group, a consortium of 37 LDLT programs, explore these financial challenges and discuss solutions to achieve financial neutrality, where individuals can donate free from financial constraints or gains. As a community, it is imperative that we confront factors driving financial toxicity to improve equity and access to LDLT., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose as described by the American Journal of Transplantation., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Transplantation & American Society of Transplant Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Any individual who has not attained the chronological age of legal majority as per national law is termed a minor. The concept of living donation (LD) has always been a subject of ethical debate and further compounding the controversy is the question of LD by minors. The decision for a minor to donate poses a special challenge as it involves a close family unit of parent-child relationship. Such an emotionally loaded situation wherein questions of attachment, perceived duties, moral obligation are likely to cloud a truly informed consent on the part of the minor to donation, who may find themselves in a vulnerable position. Furthermore, a minor's cognitive ability to comprehend the gravity of LD and when required defy parental coercion need to be elucidates before a minor is accepted for LD. Experts have set out stringent conditions which need to be met prior to the exceptional circumstance that a minor is considered for organ donation. Such donations should require parental permission, child's assent and the involvement of a paediatric-trained donor advocacy team. This article debates the question of minors acting as live donors from ethical, medical, psychosocial and legal viewpoints with an aim to present internationally defined circumstances when a minor may morally participate as a LD, thereby laying the foundation for future deliberations in this regard using traditional metrics to juxtapose divergent courses of action. • Although rare, children do serve as living donors, which raise serious ethical considerations from the perspectives of both members of the 'transplant pair'. • This article debates the question of minors acting as live donors with an aim to present internationally defined circumstances when a minor may morally donate. • The most important tenet is that minors may morally serve as donors only in exceptional circumstances when specific stringent safeguarding criteria are fulfilled. • These criteria are unsurprisingly similar across forums, societal guidelines and consensus and have been amalgamated into 6 criteria presented in this article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]