Search

Informed consent for living donor liver transplantation ( LDLT) requires that patients are provided with accurate information on the relative benefits and risks of this procedure compared with deceased donor liver transplantation ( DDLT). There is strong evidence to suggest that LDLT facilitates timely transplantation to patients; however, information on the relative morbidity and death risks after LDLT as compared with DDLT is limited. A matched cohort comparison was performed matching recipients for age, MELD, date of transplant, gender, primary diagnosis, and recipient surgeon. A total of 145 LDLT were matched with 145 DDLT. LDLT had a higher overall rate of perioperative surgical complications ( P = 0.009). Most of this difference was caused by a higher rate of biliary complications. However, the complications that occurred in the DDLT group tended to be more serious ( P = 0.037), and these complications were strongly associated with graft loss in multivariate analysis. The 3- and 5-year graft and patient survivals were similar. In conclusion, DDLT and LDLT have different complication profiles, but comparable hospital stays and survival rates. In areas of deceased donor organ shortages, LDLT offers an excellent alternative to DDLT because it facilitates access to a liver transplant without compromising short- or medium-term recipient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is common for living donor candidates to use the Internet as a tool to enhance their decision-making process. Specifically, the websites of transplant hospitals can potentially be a vital source of information for those contemplating living donation. In an effort to explore the low incidence of Good Samaritan kidney donation (donations to strangers) in Australia, two raters conducted a nine-attribute website content analysis for all hospitals which participate in these transplants (n = 15). Overall, the concept of living donation is relatively silent on Australian hospital websites. Only four hospitals mention their living donor program, and only one mentions their Good Samaritan program. No site linked directly to Australia's AKX Paired Kidney Exchange Program - the only program which facilitates pair and chain transplants in Australia. Further, information about deceased donation is nearly absent as well. An individual with the altruistic desire to donate will generally find scant or absent information about donation at the website of their local transplant hospital, although this information could easily be present as an educational tool which supports the consent process. Using a hospital website to educate the public about a clinical service should not be viewed as ethically problematic (solicitation), but rather an ethical essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The practice recommendations discussed here are based on the findings of the national survey as well as the opinions of the authors. The recommendations that are proposed here are not exhaustive and are aspirational in intent and are likely to evolve with time. Practice guidelines are recommended for legal and regulatory issues (e.g., state or federal laws), consumer or public benefit (e.g., improving service delivery, avoiding harm to the patient, decreasing disparities in underserved or vulnerable populations), and for professional guidance (e.g., new role, professional risk management issues, advances in practice). Without such practice guidelines, donors, and indirectly the candidates, may be at increased risk for possible bias or undue harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: Due to increasing waiting times for deceased donor kidneys, living donor kidney transplantation is increasingly performed in the presence of donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Methods: Twenty-three patients with Luminex-detected DSA were successfully desensitized by anti-CD20 therapy and immunoadsorption (N = 19) or plasmapheresis (N = 4) and received a kidney transplant from a living donor. Twelve of the 23 patients (52%) had a positive CDC and/or ELISA crossmatch result before desensitization. Six patients were negative in CDC as well as ELISA screening but positive in Luminex for DSA. Results: The 23 patients received a median of 8 apheresis treatments before and 5 treatments after transplantation. Induction therapy was performed with either thymoglobulin (N = 11) or basiliximab (N = 12). The 2-year graft survival rate was 100%. At last follow up, a median of 12 months after transplantation, median serum creatinine was 1.42 mg/dL, median MDRD-GFR 59.5 mL/min/1.73 m2, and median urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio 0.12. Ten out of fourteen patients (71%) who had completed the first year after transplantation by the time of analysis had no DSA by day 360. Acute T-cell mediated rejection was diagnosed in one patient (4%), and antibody-mediated changes were found in 5 patients (22%). Four out of these 5 patients showed evidence of persistent (N = 2) or reemerging plus/minus de novo DSA (N = 2) on day 360, and the 2 patients with persistent DSA lost their allograft subsequently on days 750 and 810, respectively. Infectious complications were infrequent. Conclusions: Our previously described treatment algorithm for desensitization of living donor kidney transplant recipients with DSA results in good graft outcomes with a low rate of side effects. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Gender disparity among living kidney donors is common world wide, which demonstrates different social and economic problems in different countries. However, few data are available for China. Therefore, we retrospectively analyzed all 139 living donor renal transplants performed in our center between 2003 and 2010. The annual number of living donor renal transplants increased from six to 26 cases per year during the observation period. Among them, 69.2% of all kidney donors were females, whereas 79.5% of the recipients were male. The average age of recipients was 34.1 ± 7.6 yr and 94% (110/117) were younger than 44 yr. In contrast, 53% (62/117) of all donors were 'middle-aged' (45-59 yr) with an average donor age of 47.8 ± 9.2 yr. The first-degree relatives accounted for the majority of the donor pool, as the most common donor-recipient combination consisted of mother to son. In conclusion, there was a male and young preponderance among recipients, and a female and middle-aged one among donors of living kidney transplants in our transplant center, which might be related to socio-cultural as well as economic factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Greater tumor aggressiveness and different management modalities of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) before liver transplantation (LT) may explain the higher recurrence rates reported in Asia. This study investigates the prognostic factors for HCC recurrence in a Western and an Eastern HCC patient cohort in order to analyze the respective roles of tumor- and management-related factors on the incidence of post-LT HCC recurrence. Methods: Data of 273 HCC patients, transplanted during the period January 1999–March 2009, were obtained from the Rome Inter-University Liver Transplant Consortium (n=157) and Hong Kong University (n=116) databases. Median follow-up was 4.3years (range: 0.2–12). Recurrence rate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on the entire population and on Milan criteria-in (MC-in) patients. Results: Multivariate analysis on the entire population identified four independent risk factors for post-LT HCC recurrence: microvascular invasion (odds ratio, OR=4.88; p =0.001), poor tumor grading (OR=6.86; p =0.002), diameter of the largest tumor (OR=4.72; p =0.05), and previous liver resection (LR) (OR=3.34; p =0.04). After removal of LR, only tumor-related variables were independent risk factors for recurrence. When only MC-in patients were analyzed, no difference was observed between the two cohorts in terms of recurrence rate after LR patient removal. Conclusions: LR followed by salvage “for HCC recurrence” LT represents the main reason for a higher HCC recurrence rate in the Hong Kong patients, but not LR followed by salvage “for liver failure” LT in the Roman group. This approach towards HCC before LT may not be universally applicable. The precise patient background must be taken into account in order to identify the best pre-LT strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The disparity between the number of available deceased liver donors and the number of patients awaiting transplantation continues to be an ongoing issue predisposing to death on the liver transplant waiting list. Deceased donor shortage strategies including the use of extended donor-criteria deceased donor grafts, split liver transplants, and organs harvested after cardiac death have fallen short of organ demand. Efforts to raise donor awareness are ongoing, but the course has been arduous to date. Living donor transplantation is a means to access an unlimited donor organ supply and offers potential advantages to deceased donation. Donor safety remains paramount demanding improvements and innovations in both the donor and recipient operations to ensure superior outcomes. The specialty operation is best preformed at centers with specific expertise and shuttling of select patients to these centers supported by third party payers is critical. Training future surgeons at centers with this specific experience can help disseminate this technology to improve local availability. Ongoing research in immunosuppression minimization, withdrawal and tolerance induction may make living donation a desired first-line operation rather than a necessary albeit less-desirable option. This chapter summarizes the progress of living liver donation and its potential applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Despite a substantially lower rate of live donor kidney transplantation among Black Americans compared to White Americans, there are few systematic efforts to reduce this racial disparity. This paper describes the rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the comparative effectiveness of three different educational interventions for increasing live donor kidney transplantation in Black Americans. This trial is a single-site, urn-randomized controlled trial with a planned enrollment of 180 Black Americans awaiting kidney transplantation. Patients are randomized to receive transplant education in one of three education conditions: through group education at their homes (e.g., House Calls), or through group (Group-Based) or individual education (Individual Counseling) in the transplant center. The primary outcome of the trial is the occurrence of a live donor kidney transplant, with secondary outcomes including living donor inquiries and evaluations as well as changes in patient live donor kidney transplantation readiness, willingness, knowledge, and concerns. Sex, age, dialysis status, and quality of life are evaluated as moderating factors. Findings from this clinical trial have the potential to inform strategies for reducing racial disparities in live donor kidney transplantation. Similar trials have been developed recently to broaden the evaluation of House Calls as an innovative disparity-reducing intervention in kidney transplantation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

For more than two decades, living donation has been an important part of kidney transplantation. This article discusses commonalities and differences of living donation across Europe, focussing on donor risks and ways to support the donor and enhance living donation practices. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Introduction: The current pattern of evaluation for living kidney donors was investigated. Methods: We designed a 37-question electronic survey to collect information about living kidney donor evaluation. Of the 181 United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)-approved centers, 72 responded. Survey responses were coded and downloaded into SPSS. Data was expressed as means and standard deviations or the percentage of centers with specific responses. Results: 66% of the centers used a cut-off of <80 ml/min for exclusion of living kidney donors. 24-hour urine measuring creatinine clearance (CrCl) was the most common screening method for glomerular filtration rate (GFR) assessment in potential living donors. 56% of the centers excluded donors with blood pressure (BP) >140/90, whereas 22.7 and 7.1% excluded patients with pre-hypertension with a cut-off BP of 130/85 and 120/80, respectively. 66% of the centers used 24-hour urine creatinine to assess for proteinuria. 20% of the centers accepted living kidney donors with microalbuminuria and 84% accepted patients with a history of nephrolithiasis. 24% of the centers reported use of formal cognitive testing of potential living donors. Discussion: There were significant variations in exclusion criteria based on GFR, history of kidney stones, body mass index, BP and donors with urinary abnormalities. The definitions for hematuria and proteinuria were variable. There is a need for uniformity in selection and for a living donor registry. We also recommend raising the cut-off for estimated GFR to 90 ml/min to account for 10-15% overestimation when CrCl is used. Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kidney paired donation ( KPD) is a safe and effective means of transplantation for transplant candidates with willing but incompatible donors. We report our single-center experience with KPD through participation in the National Kidney Registry. Patient demographics, transplant rates, and clinical outcomes including delayed graft function ( DGF), rejection, and survival were analyzed. We also review strategies employed by our center to maximize living donor transplantation through KPD. We entered 44 incompatible donor/recipient pairs into KPD from 9/2007 to 1/2011, enabling 50 transplants. Incompatibility was attributable to blood type (54.4%) and donor-specific sensitization (43.2%). Thirty-six candidates (81.8%) were transplanted after 157 d (median), enabling pre-emptive transplantation in eight patients. Fourteen candidates on the deceased donor waiting list also received transplants. More than 50% of kidneys were received from other transplant centers. DGF occurred in 6%; one-yr rejection rate was 9.1%. One-yr patient and graft survival was 98.0% and 94.8%. KPD involving participation of multiple transplant centers can provide opportunities for transplantation, with potential to expand the donor pool, minimize waiting times, and enable pre-emptive transplantation. Our experience demonstrates promising short-term outcomes; however, longer follow-up is needed to assess the impact of KPD on the shortage of organs available for transplantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. To date, no study has described the pre-transplant and transplant risk factors for end-organ damage based on arterial hypertension in children after kidney transplantation (KTX).Methods. A retrospective chart review was performed of 206 children with KTX between 1991 and 2007. Patients <120 cm were excluded as no validated percentiles for 24-h ambulant blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) exist. Complete data sets were available for 116 patients. Data were recorded at 12, 24 and 36 months post- KTX. We analysed the influence of donor age, age at transplantation, pre-emptive transplantation, living or deceased transplantation and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) on the presence of end-organ damage, ABPM, ABPM standard deviation score and the numbers of anti-hypertensives used.Results. Lower donor age and the decade of transplantation were associated with less detection of end-organ damage (P = 0.001). A lower need for anti-hypertensive medication (P = 0.001) was detected in children who received organs from living donors and from deceased donors with a donor age <35 years and who were transplanted pre-emptively. Low recipient age was the only factor associated with lower ABPM (P = 0.001). In our study, the type of immunosuppressive regimen and the GFR had no influence on the blood pressure.Conclusions. It may be speculated that the risk of arterial hypertension and associated end-organ damage in children after KTX could be reduced by using organs from young donors with an advantage for living related and pre-emptive donation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Ramesh Prasad GV. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in solid organ transplantation. Clin Transplant 2011 DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2011.01569.x. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Solid organ transplant recipients are at an increased risk for hypertension and cardiovascular disease. To assist in their management, 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) has become increasingly used in both clinical research settings and practice. ABPM has been used to better define post-transplant hypertension incidence and prevalence in different solid organ transplantation populations. ABPM provides additional information on cardiovascular risk beyond that obtained by clinic-based readings, based on its ability to assess 24-h blood pressure (BP) load, detect nocturnal non-dipping, and predict target organ damage. It has provided some assurance about the safety of living kidney donation. Information from ABPM can be used to guide living kidney donor selection, and because ABPM-related data has been correlated with clinically important kidney and heart transplant recipient outcomes, it may be a valuable adjunct in their management. Despite these advantages, barriers to wider use of ABPM include expense, clinical inertia in hypertension management, lack of prospective clinical trial data, and clinical problems that compete with hypertension for attention such as acute or chronic allograft dysfunction. The increasing amount of research and clinical use for ABPM may allow for closer assessment and intervention to help address the increased cardiovascular risk faced by many solid organ transplant recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A perception that living donor liver transplantation can be accomplished with an acceptable donor complication rate and recipient survival rate has led to the acceptance of living donor liver transplantation as a viable alternative to decreased deceased donor transplantation. Careful candidate evaluation and selection has been crucial to the success of this procedure. Advancements in the understanding of the lobar nature of the liver and of liver regeneration have advanced the surgical technique. Initial attempts at adult-to-adult donation utilized the left hepatic lobe, but now have evolved into use of the right hepatic lobe. Size matching is very important to successful graft function in the recipient. There is great concern regarding morbidity and mortality in donors. Biliary complications and infections continue to be among the most highly reported complications, although rates vary among centers and countries. Reports of single center complications have ranged from 9% to 67%. A survey of centers in the United States in 2003 reported complications of 10%. A series from our institution reported complications arising in 13 (33%) of 39 patients. A review focused on documenting donor deaths found 33 living liver donor deaths worldwide. The much publicized immediate postoperative mishap of 2002 that resulted in a donor’s death resulted in a drop in the utilization of living donor liver transplantation in the United States, from which this procedure has never fully recovered. The future development and expansion of living donor liver transplantation depends on open communication regarding donor complications and deaths. Close immediate postoperative monitoring and meticulous management will remain an essential aspect in limiting donor complications and deaths. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background. There are concerns regarding potential long-term risks to the living kidney donor. Cardiovascular mortality has not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to assess overall and cardiovascular mortality in previous kidney donors compared with a general population sample. Methods. All live kidney donors in Norway in the period 1963–2007 were included. Controls matched 3:1 for age, gender and year of birth were provided by Statistics, Norway. Cause of death was retrieved from the death master file. Vital status as of 1 January 2010 was provided for all participants, and cause of death was available until 1 January 2008. Comparative survival analyses were performed by Kaplan–Meier curves and log-rank test. Age-stratified death rates were calculated and compared with a selected group with a health status hypothetically allowing donation. Results. There were 2269 living kidney donors in the study period. At donation, mean age was 47.6 + 12.6 years, 41.3% were male. Median observation time was 14.3 years. A total of 324 donors died during the study period. Causes of death were similar for donors and controls. By Kaplan–Meier analysis, overall and cardiovascular mortality was lower for previous kidney donors than for matched controls (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). Age-stratified death rates were elevated for the oldest group of donors. Conclusions. Overall and cardiovascular mortality results are partially reassuring. However, the seemingly elevated mortality rate among the oldest donors requires further study. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Living donation is the key to increasing access to successful solid organ transplantation worldwide. However, the means to expanding the number of living donors on a global scale are not known. Although there have been many suggestions for the best approach, cultural issues may limit the effectiveness of some strategies. Only a few ideas have been studied, and one in particular- outright payment to donors - may raise ethical issues that are difficult to surmount and might negatively alter altruistic behavior. With respect to the present environment, this article will describe some of the approaches that are being discussed to increase the number of living donors, with a particular focus on kidney transplantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Néphrologie & Thérapeutique is the property of John Libbey Eurotext Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In Germany more than 12,000 patients are presently waiting for an organ donation. Living donation makes sense for the long waiting time for a kidney, but it is not a permanent solution for the lack of organ donations. In the future topics which should be discussed are intensified public relations, a better family care and the allocation of rights and duties at the German coordinating agency. For all the prospects of success after a living donation the high standards of quality and security, which are targeted by the German donor organization in recipient protection, responsible evaluation of the expanded donor criteria and immunosuppressive therapy are all in favor of post-mortem organ donation. For all the phenomenal chance of success the priority of the post-mortem organ donation is regulated by law. The living donation remains an individual decision of the donor and the personal situation of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to the existing organ shortage the option of a kidney transplantation (KTx) in patients with end-stage renal disease is not always possible despite the offer of this therapy. So far the required number of KTx could not be adequately achieved by organ donations from deceased persons. To solve this problem living donation KTx programs have already become established in many transplantation centers. In published reports it has been shown that with the living donation program better results could be achieved in terms of graft function and patient survival compared to cadaver donation KTx. Therefore, living donation KTx allows an optimal alternative to expand the organ pool. The aim of our study is to present the long-term results of our living donation KTx program regarding graft function and patient survival. Finally, the risks of living donation KTx will be discussed based on the reported experiences of other centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Taheri S, Alavian SM, Einollahi B, Nafar M. Gender bias in Iranian living kidney transplantation program: a national report. Clin Transplant 2010: 24: 528–534. © 2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Introduction: Strong challenges exist about living kidney transplantation practices worldwide. One of these concerns is based on the observation that in many places women constitute the majority of living kidney donors but the minority of recipients. We studied this issue in Iran by using national data for kidney transplantation. Methods: Data of the Iranian national registry for kidney transplantation which comprises data of all renal transplantations performed in the country during a 22 yr period were included in the study. Data of 16 672 living donors (living related [LR] = 16%, living unrelated [LUR] = 86%) were analyzed. Results: Males received 62.2% of all kidney transplants. From 16 672 living donors, 20% and 80% were women and men, respectively. Recipients were more likely to receive kidney allograft from their own gender groups (p < 0.05). In living related donations, mothers, brothers and sons were significantly more often donors than their counterparts of opposite gender. Conclusion: In contrast with previous reports from other countries, this study of Iranian national data revealed that in Iran, most related and unrelated living kidney donors are male and the percentage of recipients who are female exceeds the percentage of donors who are female. Considering previous reports from other countries, our findings suggest that Iran is the only country in which females are more likely to be recipients of a kidney allograft than donors. The reason for the predominance of male kidney donors in Iran is probably multifactorial and associated with economical, social and cultural issues. The financial incentives paid to living unrelated donors may be an attraction for males to donate a kidney although, even in living related donations, males constitute the majority of donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Diabetologe is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In a Living Donor List Exchange program, the donor makes his kidney available for allocation to patients on the postmortal waiting-list and receives in exchange a postmortal kidney, usually an O-kidney, to be given to the recipient he favours. The program can be a solution for a candidate donor who is unable to donate directly or to participate in a paired kidney exchange because of blood group incompatibility or a positive cross-match. Each donation within an LDLE program makes an additional organ available for transplantation. But because most of the pairs making use of the program will be A/O incompatible, it will also tend to increase the waiting time for patients with blood group O, who already have the longest waiting time. It has therefore been objected that the program is materially unjust, because it further disadvantages the least advantaged. This objection appeals to John Rawls’ difference principle. However, the context for which Rawls proposed that difference principle, is significantly different from the present one. Applying the principle here amounts to a lop-sided trade-off between considerations of need and considerations of overall utility. Considerations of formal justice, however, may lead to a stronger objection to LDLE programs. Such a program means that one O-patient on the waiting list is exempted from the application of the general criteria used in constructing the list because he has a special bargaining advantage. This objection is spelled out and weighed against the obvious attraction of LDLE in a situation of (extreme) organ scarcity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims: Right lobar living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been controversial because of donor deaths and widely variable reports of recipient and donor morbidity. Our aims were to ensure full disclosure to donors and recipients of the risks and benefits of this procedure in a large University center and to help explain reporting inconsistencies. Methods: The Clavien 5-tier grading system was applied retrospectively in 121 consecutive adult right lobe recipients and their donors. The incidence was determined of potentially (Grade III), actually (Grade IV), or ultimately fatal (Grade V) complications during the first post-transplant year. When patients had more than one complication, only the seminal one was counted, or the most serious one if complications occurred contemporaneously. Results: One year recipient/graft survival was 91%/84%. Within the year, 80 (66%) of the 121 recipients had Grade III (n =54) Grade IV (n =16), or Grade V (n =10) complications. The complications involved the graft’s biliary tract (42% incidence), graft vasculature (15%), or non-graft locations (9%). Complications during the first year did not decline with increased team experience, and adversely affected survival out to 5 years. All 121 donors survive. However, 13 donors (10.7%) had Grade III (n =9) or IV (n =4) complications of which five were graft-related. Conclusions: Despite the satisfactory recipient and graft survival at our and selected other institutions, and although we have not had a donor mortality to date, the role of right lobar LDLT is not clear because of the recipient morbidity and risk to the donors. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

An important aspect in the preoperative evaluation and a legal precondition for an living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a family or emotionally close relationship between donor and recipient. We investigated the development of the donor–recipient relationship after LDLT. We conducted semi-structured clinical interviews with 18 donors as part of a regular postoperative follow-up and analyzed them using the method of Grounded Theory. The donation does not lead to any major changes in the donor-recipient relationship, probably due to careful pre-selection. It does however enhance the existing positive or conflicting character of the relationship. Donors sometimes downplay negative aspects in the relationship and emphasize the improvement as a way of dealing with a major life event. A donation cannot fulfill expectations linked to it and it is unfavorable to be used to improve the relationship. Potential misuse or instrumentalization of the donation by the donor are possible. Postoperative feelings of gratitude are an issue after surgery. A good relationship enhances a better management of the postoperative course. The preoperative donor–recipient relationship should be as free of conflict as possible. A thorough preoperative evaluation of the donor–recipient relationship is particularly important to assess the donors’ suitability and clarify conflicts and unrealistic expectations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Donor advocacy is a critical feature of live donor transplantation. Donor Advocates and Donor Advocate Teams (DAT) are now routine to the practice of live donor evaluation in the USA. Multidisciplinary in nature, DATs gather both medical and psychosocial information about potential live organ donors and then render a decision as to whether or not these individuals are suitable to participate. Because of the critical ethical and psychosocial concerns about live donation, thorough donor evaluations are essential. Additionally, the information gathered must be accurate, and this requires honest disclosure by the donor candidate. In this paper, we describe how DATs can use various forms of free, public content available on the Internet to aid live donor assessments. In this way, the DAT assumes somewhat of an investigative role; however, this is ethically justified in light of the DAT duty to protect the donor. The protective effect can also spread to the transplant program, in general, when inappropriate donors are excluded from the donation process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The first successful renal transplant was carried out more than five decades ago between identical twins. At these early days, acute rejection was the limiting factor. Due to tremendous progress in immunosuppressive therapy and surgical technique, today, renal transplantation is the gold standard therapy for patients with end-stage renal disease. In fact, in comparison with chronic hemodialysis, renal transplantation offers an increase in quality of life while reducing comorbidities associated with dialysis treatment. Despite numerous beneficial achievements, no further improvement regarding patient outcome can be observed over the last two decades. Graft survival rates remain unchanged. The leading causes for graft loss are chronic allograft nephropathy and death with functioning graft. This might be related to a constant increase of the proportion of donors presenting extended donor criteria as well as a more liberal acceptance of candidates for a renal transplant. In the near future, one has to focus more closely on the posttransplant patient care to minimize factors associated with chronic allograft damage. These include post-transplant diabetes, hyperlipidemia, high blood pressure, cytomegalovirus infection, etc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Websites have emerged to highlight the plight of patients awaiting kidney transplantation and to match them to potential good Samaritan living donors. Little is known about the patients who choose to solicit living donors online, so we examined the 224 profiles of potential kidney transplant recipients who registered on one donor matching website. The number of patients soliciting a living kidney donor is less than 0.5% of those who are awaiting kidney transplantation in the United States. Other than blood type, region, and gender surprisingly few sociodemographic and medical details were posted with most solicitation profiles. The considerable variability in what information is provided in patient profiles suggests that we know very little about who the solicitors are and further highlights one of the inherent ethical problems with public solicitation of living donors. Specifically, in some instances, a Good Samaritan’s pursuit of living kidney donation may be based less on information potentially relevant to transplant outcome and more on the persuasiveness of the appeal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is an increasing population of German origin living in the South East of Spain. Objective: To analyze the attitude toward living kidney donation in this population subgroup. Methods: A sample of German residents in the South East of Spain was taken randomly (n = 250) (November 2005–April 2006). Attitude was evaluated using a validated questionnaire. The survey was self-administered and completed anonymously. The control group comprised native Spanish citizens (n = 500). Results: The questionnaire completion rate was 87% (n = 218). Most respondents (92%, n = 201) are in favor of living-related donation. The following variables are related to attitude to donation: (1) marital status of the respondent (p = 0.002); (2) level of education (p < 0.001); (3) attitude toward cadaveric donation (p = 0.005); (4) having had previous experience with the donation and transplantation process (p < 0.001); (5) the respondent’s religion (p = 0.002); (6) the risk that they believe is involved in living kidney donation (p = 0.001), and (7) concern about ‘mutilation’ that could be caused by living donation (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Attitude toward related living kidney donation of German residents in the South East of Spain is favorable and is closely related to attitude toward cadaveric donation, fear of the after-effects of this type of donation and religious attitude. Copyright © 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Living donor kidney transplantation (LD-KTX) is increasing worldwide. With the prevalence of urolithiasis ranging between 4% and 15%, the number of donors with current nephrolithiasis or a history of the disease will increase as well. A questionnaire was sent to all German centers with LD-KTX programs (urologists and general surgeons). Answers were compared for differences between urological and surgical kidney transplant centers. Response rate was 74%. Nephrolithiasis at the time of KTX is an exclusion criterion at 36% of the German centers (58% urological/19% surgical, χ2 = 4.65, p = 0.03, Fishers exact p = 0.05), 96% of the centers accept kidney donors with a history of nephrolithiasis. The length of the stone-free episode is regarded as relevant by 42% of all centers (58% urological vs. 32% surgical centers, p = ns). Stone composition is a criterion for 54% of centers (66% vs. 44%, p = ns). More than half of the centers accept a history of cystine stones, almost all centers of struvite and urate stones. Donors with current nephrolithiasis were less commonly accepted by urologists than by general surgeons. For almost all centers history of nephrolithiasis does not preclude living kidney donation. Stone composition proved to be of little relevance for decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In April 2006, the Scottish Liver Transplant Unit in Edinburgh became the first NHS transplant unit in the UK to offer adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). This procedure allows a healthy individual to donate part of their liver to someone with end-stage liver disease. With donations from the deceased in short supply, this procedure has the capacity to save lives. The aim of this study was to explore the attitudes of the general public and general practitioners (GPs) towards LDLT, before its implementation. A total of 1041 members of the Scottish general public and 155 GPs working in Scotland completed a short questionnaire devised for this study. The majority of participants supported the option of LDLT, but frequency counts showed that only 34% of the general public wish to donate their organs following death compared to 85% of GPs. With regards to an acceptable risk of death before volunteering to donate, 25% of GPs would accept a 1 in 20 risk of death, whereas 50% of the general public either could not make a decision or selected 'No risk'. The question of how well people understand the concept of risk was again highlighted in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate a low-tech blunt liver dissecting technique for living-liver-donor procedures. Thirty three adult-to-adult living-donor operations were performed at Regensburg University and Jordan Hospital, Amman. For the technique of parenchymal dissection, dissecting scissors were used for blunt preparation; branches were closed, carefully pressing into the hepatic parenchyma. Donor, surgical procedure data, and data on liver function and recovery were analyzed and compared to literature. Median procedure time was 280 min (210 to 420 min). Median blood loss was 350 ml (0 to 650 ml). GOT levels decreased from 260 U/l (140 to 510 U/l) on day 1 to 65 U/l (31 to 220 U/l) on day 7. Bilirubin levels were at 2.0 mmol/l (1.29 to 5.99 mmol/l) on day 1 and 1.26 mmol/l (0.63 to 4.70 mmol/l) on day 7. After 12 days (6 to 23), all donors were discharged. There was no donor mortality. One major complication (biliary leakage) and seven minor complications occurred. This technique is a low-tech but efficient donor-dissection technique in living liver transplantation, which is comparable to other well established dissection techniques utilizing technical devices in regards to risk for the donor, performance, and recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of living donor kidneys has dramatically increased the number and success of kidney transplants across the world. But questions remain regarding the subjection of a healthy individual to surgery for the benefit of another. Donors do have medical and financial risks. The stigma of organ brokering remains today, with evidence of commercial transplantation in other countries. Here in the US, we are exposed to advertising for donors using the media. In the hope of increasing living donations, we run the risk of stretching altruism too far. In this manuscript, we highlight and discuss some of the current controversies surrounding living donor kidney transplantation across the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become a routine treatment option for patients waiting for liver transplantation. In European and North American countries, LDLT for adult recipients is mainly performed with right lobe grafts. Indications, when compared to deceased donor liver transplantation, are controversial. In our institution, patients suffering from hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis, non-resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma, viral hepatitis associated cirrhosis, as well as cholestatic liver and biliary disease are considered good candidates for LDLT. In this overview, donor evaluation, graft selection, and the donor operation with special regard to operative techniques and strategies are discussed. For visualization, a 5-min video sequence of the standard donor operation as performed in our institution is attached. Given the ongoing shortage of donor organs, adult LDLT has become a routine treatment option for patients waiting for liver transplantation. The associated inevitable risk for the healthy donor, however, remains ethically controversial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Living donor nephrectomy (LDN) has evolved a variety of different surgical techniques. Minimal invasive strategies were introduced to benefit the healthy donors. This paper attempts to identify the best possible practise in live kidney donation with special respect to donor safety. We present a single-centre experience of 173 live kidney donations and describe the surgical technique of open retroperitoneal donation in detail and by video sequences. Additionally, the evidence for donor safety (mortality and morbidity) and the integrity of the graft function are reviewed, comparing different surgical techniques for LDN. Focussing on maximal donor safety, a retroperitoneal access seems mandatory. Very detailed informed consent, including the offer for different retrieval techniques, has led to a total of 163 open and 10 hand-assisted retroperitoneal live kidney donations at our institution. Published and own data reveal longer operating and warm ischaemic times for minimal invasive kidney removal when compared with open technique. Adequate perioperative analgesia (peridural catheter) provides comparable patient comfort, duration of hospital stay, complications and graft function although there are some procedure-associated risks for minimal invasive techniques. The special ethical situation of live donation necessitates maximal donor safety. Although open antero-lateral incision and retroperitoneal access does provide some inconveniences for the surgeon, we are convinced that this and the hand-assisted retroperitoneal approach are the only two options for LDN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Living donor kidney transplantation has increased in frequency in pediatric patients, accounting for 43% of cases performed between 1987 and 1991, and 52% of cases performed between 1987 and 2004 in North America. Patient survival has remained excellent over the years, and is currently over 96% at five years. Graft survival has improved over the years, and is currently over 95% at one year. Rejection rates have fallen over the years, and are currently <25% overall, with selected centers having very low rejection rates. The reasons for these improved outcomes are likely related to improvements in maintenance immunosuppression, which include a transition from cyclosporine to tacrolimus-based regimens, and from azathioprine to mycophenolate mofetil or sirolimus as adjunctive agents. Steroid withdrawal and steroid avoidance are beginning to be utilized by several centers, with excellent early outcomes. Finally, while there may be center effect/learning curve issues involved, the type of donor nephrectomy has recently been shown to influence early outcomes, particularly in very young recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Urologe A is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Living-related liver transplantation was developed in the context of deceased donor organ shortage, which is particularly acute for pediatric recipients. This retrospective study analyzes the surgical technique and complications in the first 100 pediatric liver transplantation using left segmental liver grafts from living donors, performed at Saint-Luc University Clinics between July 1993 and April 2002. Pre-operative evaluation in donors and recipients, analysis of the surgical technique, and postoperative complications were reviewed. After a median follow-up period of 2526 days, no donor mortality was encountered, with a minimal morbidity and no long-term sequelae. At one and five yr post-transplantation, the actuarial patient survival rates were 94% and 92%, the corresponding figures being 92% and 89% for graft survival. The incidences of portal vein and hepatic artery thromboses, and of biliary complications were 14%, 1%, and 27%, respectively. Living-related liver transplantation in children constitutes an efficient therapy for liver failure to face the increased demand for liver grafts. Donor morbidity was kept to acceptable incidence, and surgical technique in the recipient needs to be tailored to minimize postoperative complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Living renal donation is increasing and is an important source of kidneys for patients with end stage renal disease. Such donations have major quality of life implications for donors and recipients. The majority of studies in this field address physical health issues; live donation, however, also involves complex psychological, social, and cultural needs. It is important to have an understanding of this complexity to ensure that the quality of life of recipient and donor is not harmed. This paper reports the findings of an ethnographic study, which examined aspects of live donation from psychological, social, and cultural perspectives. Issues discussed include family relationships, complexities of seeking a donor from within the family, gift reciprocity, donor moral imperatives, and difficulties encountered within the donor decision-making process. The findings show: the degree and nature of the dependence and interdependence felt between donors and recipients; the difficulties encountered in both the decision to donate and the refusal to donate; the longer term obligations that may arise; and the impact on the family unit, demonstrating psychological, social, and cultural risks within the live donation process. These important findings should be recognised and addressed by relevant pre- and post-operative professional care, thus maintaining the integrity of the family unit and also, more importantly, the autonomy of both the donor and the recipient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transmission of cancer is a fatal risk in organ transplantation. We present a case of incidental renal carcinoma in a kidney obtained from a living donor. A 56-yr-old father was evaluated for donation for his 28-yr-old daughter. An MRT scan revealed two cysts in the right kidney. Right-sided donor nephrectomy and subsequent transplantation was performed. The wall of the prominent cyst was partially excised prior to transplantation. Histology revealed a high-grade renal clear cell carcinoma 10 d after transplantation. Following careful evaluation the recipient underwent partial nephrectomy. Immunosuppression was switched to rapamune. The graft function remained stable. Donor and recipient are without evidence of tumor recurrence 1 yr after transplantation. Our policy to obtain the kidney presenting anatomical variations proved to be beneficial for the donor. In case of transmission of cancer partial resection preserving graft function might be justified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Donors >60 years are now frequently accepted for living kidney transplantation (LKT). We asked whether a donor age >60 years may result in a higher risk for donor and recipient. All adult LKT from May 1996 to June 2005 were included. Long-term outcome was analysed, and results were compared for donors >60 and ≤60 years. Thirty-five grafts were obtained from donors >60 (group A) and 158 from donors ≤60 years (group B). In group A 40% and in group B 37% of grafts came from unrelated donors ( P = 0.769). The mean hospital stay of donors was 8 days in group A and 7 days in group B ( P = 0.171). The complication rate was 11% in group A and 17% in group B ( P = 0.409). Following LKT primary graft function was observed in 97% in group A and 96% in group B. One- and 5-year graft survival was 97% and 90% in group A and 99% and 91% in group B. For the first 2 years, mean serum creatinine was significantly higher in recipients of group A. Thereafter, values were comparable for both groups. As excellent results are achievable using living donors >60 years, we suggest that age should no longer be considered as a contra-indication for living donation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kidney transplantation (KTx) remains a challenging procedure in small children. This study presents our centre results. From 1983 to 2004, 40 of 442 paediatric KTx were performed in children with a body weight <11 kg. Median body weight was 9.2 kg (range: 7.2–10.9), median age was 2.7 years (range: 0.9–5.9). Preoperative dialysis was performed in 87.5%. In 24 cases (60%) grafts came from cadaveric (CAD) and in 16 cases (40%) from living related donors (LRD). Median donor age of CAD was 8 years (range: 1–40). The overall 1-, 5-, 10-, 15-year patient survival was 93%, 90%, 90% and 87% respectively. The overall 1-, 5-, 10-, 15-year graft survival was 90%, 80%, 66% and 56% respectively. There was no significant difference in survival of CAD or LRD grafts. Median follow-up was 13.7 years. Initial graft function rate was 100% for LRD and 79% for CAD. The relative glomerular filtration rate (GFR) showed no statistical difference between CAD and LRD. Main reasons for graft loss were chronic transplant nephropathy. Paediatric KTx is the treatment of choice even in very small children. Living donor KTx is the preferable donor source in terms of primary graft function and timing to transplantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the introduction of new immunosuppressive agents, a steady decline of functioning renal allografts after living donation is observed. Thus nonpharmacological strategies to prevent graft loss have to be reconsidered, including donor-specific transfusions (DST). We introduced a cyclosporine-based DST protocol for renal allograft recipients from living-related/unrelated donation. From 1993 to 2003, 200 ml of whole blood, or the respective mononuclear cells from the potential living donor were administered twice to all of our 61 recipient candidates. The transplanted subjects were compared with three groups of patients without DST from the Collaborative Transplant Study (Heidelberg, Germany) during a 6-year period. Six patients were sensitized without delay for a subsequent cadaveric kidney. DST patients had less often treatment for rejection and graft survival was superior compared with subjects from the other Swiss transplant centers ( n = 513) or from Western Europe ( n = 7024). To diminish the probability that superior results reflect patient selection rather than effects of DST, a ‘matched-pair’ analysis controlling for relevant factors of transplant outcome was performed. Again, this analysis indicated that recipients with DST had better outcome. Thus, our observation suggests that DST improve the outcome of living kidney transplants even when modern immunosuppressive drugs are prescribed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This prospective, longitudinal cohort study investigated the effect of donating or receiving a kidney on quality of life and relationship dynamics. Forty donors and 35 recipients from two UK transplantation centres completed the World Health Organisation quality of life questionnaire (WHOQOL) with additional questionnaires before, 6 weeks and one year after operation. Before donation the donor mean quality of life score in the physical domain was 18.8. This was significantly higher than the UK value for a healthy person of 16.4 ( P < 0.001). Six weeks after operation, donor score reduced to UK normative levels however improved again at one year (17.7). Recipient mean physical domain score before was 11.4, significantly lower than the UK norm ( P < 0.01), increasing to 16.0 one year after. Both donor ( P < 0.009) and recipient ( P < 0.05) experienced a significant improvement in their mutual relationship. Recipients expressed anxiety about the donor before operation. Donors were not concerned about living with one kidney. We concluded that living kidney donation has no detrimental effect on the physical or psychological well being of donors one year after donation. Transplantation results in a major improvement in quality of life for the recipient. Most donors would donate again, if this were possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient and graft outcomes from older living kidney donors are similar to those from younger donors despite lower GFR.Background.Donor age adversely affects deceased-donor kidney transplant outcomes, but its influence on living-donor transplantation is less well characterized.Methods.Living-donor kidney transplants at a single center between 1998 and 2000 were reviewed. Data were abstracted for 52 transplants from donors aged≥50 years and for a matched group of 104 transplants from donors aged<50 years. Survival indices were compared during the first three years' post-transplantation. Functional indices, including serial iothalamate clearances, were compared at 1, 12, and 24 months.Results.Predonation glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was lower among older donors (94± 12 vs. 108± 17 mL/min/SA) but post-transplant compensatory hypertrophy was similar (11.7± 26.3% vs. 7.7± 31.4%). Recipients of older-donor grafts were older (52.8± 16.5 vs. 46.1± 15.1 years) and more frequently unrelated to the donor (54% vs. 39%). Trends toward higher frequency of slow graft function, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, and polyomavirus nephropathy were observed for older-donor grafts. Three-year recipient, graft, and death-censored graft survivals were≥90% for both groups. At 1, 12, and 24 months, serum creatinine was higher and GFR was lower among recipients of older- compared with younger-donor grafts. Other functional indices (urine total protein, serum potassium and uric acid, hemoglobin, and number of antihypertensives) were not different. Donor age correlated with graft GFR at 1, 12, and 24 months for the entire study cohort by linear regression.Conclusion.Older donor age does not preclude excellent results from living-donor kidney transplantation but should be appreciated as being associated with relatively lower GFR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since a dialysis patient in Austria still waits on average more than two years for a renal transplant, the question of a transplant from a living donor is very interesting. We differentiate between related and non-related living donors, who are chosen on the basis of medical criteria and emotional ties. Austria’s first three kidney transplants from related donors were performed in 1967. Since then a total of 317 kidneys from genetically related donors have been transplanted until December 31, 2000. Transplants from non-related living donors were performed once in 1982, once in 1990 and since 1995 in a steadily increasing number each year, until they reached 47 by December 31, 2000. The United Network for Organ Sharing calculated the ten-year survival rate for functional grafts for a four-year period (1995-1998) in more than 30,000 renal transplant recipients from HLA-identical twins, non-related living donors, parent and cadaver donors. As anticipated, this study demonstrates that HLA-identical twins (n = 1,581) have the most functional grafts (81 %), followed by non-related donor-recipients (n = 1,704) at 67 % despite their often poor HLA match, parent- child transplants (n = 2,428) at 62 % and cadaver renal grafts (n = 26,178) at 50%. Therefore, medical aspects as well as influences from the psychosocial environment would appear to be decisive for transplantation success. Thus, when choosing from several possible living donors it is absolutely justifiable to choose a donor with a poorer HLA match but good emotional ties. Such a choice requires strict selection criteria, and surgical preparation and follow-up demand the greatest care. While the criteria given in this paper are meant to be guidelines to help in deciding for a live donor, they certainly do not rule out a different approach following critical reflection and participation by the affected parties, namely donor and recipient, as well as their advisors, nephrologist, transplant surgeon and psychotherapist. At the same time we need to make every effort to further intensify the use of cadaver kidneys. Only in this way can we ensure optimal implementation of all the resources available to us for supplying renal grafts to dialysis patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]