Search

Background: It is not clear which serum creatinine-based glomerular filtration rate (GFR)-estimating model performs best in kidney donors.Study Design: Study of diagnostic accuracy.Setting& Participants: From a population of 3,698 kidney donors, 255 donors underwent iohexol GFR measurement (mGFR). INDEX TEST (INTERVENTION): mGFR by means of plasma disappearance of iohexol.Reference Test or Outcome: GFR was estimated (eGFR) by using the Cockcroft-Gault equation (eGFR(CG)), Mayo Clinic equation (eGFR(MC)), and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation (eGFR(MDRD)).Results: Mean mGFR was 71.8 +/- 11.8 mL/min/1.73 m(2), and 85.5% had mGFR greater than 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2). eGFR(CG) underestimated mGFR by 3.96 +/- 13.3 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and was within 30% of mGFR 89.4% of the time. eGFR(MC) overestimated mGFR by 8.44 +/- 11.9 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and was within 30% of mGFR in 83.1% of cases. eGFR(MDRD) underestimated mGFR by only 0.43 +/- 11.7 mL/min/1.73 m(2), and the proportion within 30% of mGFR was greatest in the tested model; 94.1% of the time. However, eGFR(MC) was most accurate in classifying donors according to having eGFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2).Limitations: Lack of ethnic diversity and response bias.Conclusions: The MDRD Study equation is least biased, and because it is routinely reported by most laboratories, it is the best readily available model for estimating GFR in kidney donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Studies addressing patterns and trends in red blood cell transfusion use in US hemodialysis patients surprisingly have received little attention in the last decade. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Point prevalent (as of January 1 of each calendar year 1992 to 2005) dialysis patients with Medicare Part A and Part B as primary insurance (n = 77,347 in 1992, n = 164,933 in 2005). The 6 months preceding January 1 of each year were used to assemble a comorbidity profile based on administrative claims data. PREDICTORS: Hemoglobin levels, patient characteristics, comorbid conditions. OUTCOMES: Blood transfusion events obtained from Part A and Part B files using code files for both whole and packed red blood cell transfusions and hemoglobin levels. MEASUREMENTS: Comorbid conditions were defined by the presence of 1 or more inpatient/outpatient institutional claims (inpatient hospitalization, skilled nursing facility, or home health agency), 2 or more outpatient or physician/supplier claims, or 1 or more outpatient and 1 or more physician/supplier claims for atherosclerotic heart disease, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular accidents/transient ischemic attacks, peripheral vascular disease, other cardiovascular diseases, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, gastrointestinal disorders, liver disease, arrhythmia, and diabetes mellitus. RESULTS: Raw transfusion rates decreased in both outpatient and inpatient settings from 535.33/1,000 patient-years for 1992 prevalent dialysis patients to 263.65/1,000 patient-years in 2005 (P for trend < 0.001, 1992 versus 1999 and 1999 versus 2005). Adjusted rates decreased similarly. This phenomenon could not be explained by changes in case mix. LIMITATIONS: Cause, effect, and confounding cannot be separated in this observational study. The accuracy of blood transfusion billing data is unknown. Temporal trends may be related to factors other than erythropoiesis-stimulating agent use. CONCLUSION: Transfusion events in hemodialysis patients decreased more than 2-fold from 1992 to 2005; most of the decrease occurred in the first 5 years after erythropoietin was introduced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Patients who have received solid organ transplants continue to experience a myriad of complex symptoms related to their underlying disease and to chronic immunosuppression that reduce the quality of life. Beneficial nonpharmacologic therapies to address these symptoms have not been established in the transplant population.Objective: Assess the efficacy of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) in reducing symptoms of anxiety, depression, and poor sleep in transplant patients.Design, Setting, and Patients: Controlled trial with a two-staged randomization. Recipients of kidney, kidney/pancreas, liver, heart, or lung transplants were randomized to MBSR (n=72) or health education (n=66) initially or after serving in a waitlist. Mean age was 54 years (range 21-75); 55% were men, and 91% were white.Interventions: MBSR, a mindfulness meditation training program consisting of eight weekly 2.5-hour classes; health education, a peer-led active control.Primary Outcome Measures: Anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), depression (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale), and sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index) scales assessed by self-report at baseline, 8 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year.Results: Benefits of MBSR were above and beyond those afforded by the active control. MBSR reduced anxiety and sleep symptoms (P < .02), with medium treatment effects (.51 and .56) at 1 year compared to health education in intention-to-treat analyses. Within the MBSR group, anxiety, depression, and sleep symptoms decreased and quality-of-life measures improved by 8 weeks (P < .01, all), and benefits were retained at 1 year (P < .05, all). Initial symptom reductions in the health education group were smaller and not sustained. Comparisons to the waitlist confirmed the impact of MBSR on both symptoms and quality of life, whereas health education improvements were limited to quality-of-life ratings.Conclusions: MBSR reduced distressing symptoms of anxiety, depression, and poor sleep and improved quality of life. Benefits were sustained over 1 year. A health education program provided fewer benefits, and effects were not as durable. MBSR is a relatively inexpensive, safe, and effective community-based intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses a serious risk to patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and renal transplant. While COVID-19 vaccination is recommended before transplant, there are limited data comparing vaccine timing. Our aim is to evaluate serological responses to COVID-19 vaccines pre- and post-renal transplant and the durability of antibody levels., Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the antibody response of adult renal transplant recipients who had received at least a primary series of the COVID-19 vaccine. The patients were divided into two groups based on the timing; pre- or post-transplant. Antibody titer levels were evaluated at least 4 weeks after vaccination for each group. Titer durability was assessed by calculating the median titer level of individuals., Results: A total of 139 patients were identified between January 2019 and April 2022. Twenty-nine patients were excluded because of previous COVID-19 infection, and 15 patients were excluded each for insufficient vaccine doses and lack of titer data. Forty patients were included for the pre-transplant group and 40 for post-transplant. The number of pre-transplant patients who developed antibodies (39 patients, 97.5%) was significantly greater than the number of post-transplant patients (21 patients, 52.5%) with p < .01. The median post-vaccination titer levels were significantly greater in the pre-transplant group up to 5 months after vaccination (p < .05). The pre-transplant group's titers seemed sustained even after renal transplantation., Conclusion: Vaccinating renal transplant patients before transplant results in increased achievement of seroresponse, higher levels of antibody titers, and sustained titers following transplant. Larger and prospective studies are warranted to confirm the findings., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Hypertension and chronic kidney disease are closely linked. Patients with chronic kidney disease have hypertension almost universally and uncontrolled hypertension accelerates the decline in kidney function. The pathophysiology of hypertension in chronic kidney disease is complex, but is largely related to reduced nephron mass, sympathetic nervous system overactivation, involvement of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, and generalized endothelial dysfunction. Consensus guidelines for blood pressure targets have adopted a blood pressure <120/80 mm Hg in native chronic kidney disease and <130/80 mm Hg in kidney transplant recipients. Guidelines also strongly advocate for renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade as the first-line therapy., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s).)

Heart failure can lead to renal impairment, an interaction now termed "cardiorenal syndrome." The prevalent physiological explanation for the renal impairment that accompanies heart failure centers around the forward failure hypothesis, which emphasizes the role of left ventricular dysfunction in causing edema, and the backward failure hypothesis, which singles out venous congestion as the dominant mechanism of edema and reduced glomerular filtration rate. In this review, we provide an appraisal on venous congestion, an extremely important contributor that has received little attention. We also summarize the pharmacology of loop diuretics, explain current understanding of diuretic resistance, and address controversies regarding decongestive treatments., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s).)

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is not only common after lung and heart transplantation but also is associated with increased morbidity and mortality due to multiple pre-, peri- and post-transplant factors. While the exact incidence of CKD in this population is not well-defined, it seems to have gradually increased over the years as older recipients are more frequently considered. The increasing success of the procedure and expanding transplant candidate pool has allowed many with comorbid conditions to receive a transplant, which was considered prohibitive in the past. This review presents risk factors that have been linked to CKD as well as interventions that may help alleviate this serious problem. The impact of pretransplant renal function and the overexaggerated role of chronic nephrotoxicity of calcineurin inhibitors is discussed in detail. Until the exact pathophysiology of kidney disease is better understood, there is a dire need to expand the research agenda beyond observational studies., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s).)

Most transplant centers do not screen kidney donor candidates for sickle cell trait (SCT) and many decline candidates with SCT since it may associate with kidney disease. We compared 17 kidney donors with SCT to propensity score matched donor controls on mortality, reduced eGFR, proteinuria and kidney failure. The prevalence of SCT in African American (AA) donors was 11 per 1000 compared to 73 per 1000 in non-donor AA. Donors with SCT were younger; 33 versus 35 years in controls, nine were AA, six were White, and two were listed as other or unknown ethnicities. After a follow-up period of 18.2 ± 10.5 years, the proportions of donors with SCT and controls who were alive, developed hypertension or cardiovascular disease were similar. No donor with SCT developed an eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 or kidney failure. SCT was, however, associated with increased risk of proteinuria; RR 5.71 (95% CI 5.7 - 22.7), P = .01. This small and preliminary case series suggest that donors with SCT should perhaps be considered more often provided they were aware of the lack of evidence to support liberal acceptance and that these outcomes reported here likely represent a healthy cohort of donors with SCT., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Type 2 diabetes mellitus causes a sizable burden globally from both health and economic points of view. This study aimed to assess the budget impact of substituting sitagliptin with liraglutide versus other glucose-lowering drugs from the private health insurance perspective in Egypt over a 3-year time horizon., Methods: Two budget impact models were compared with the standard of care (metformin, pioglitazone, gliclazide, insulin glargine, repaglinide, and empagliflozin) administered in addition to liraglutide or sitagliptin versus the standard of care with placebo. A gradual market introduction of liraglutide or sitagliptin was assumed, and the existing market shares for the other glucose-lowering drugs were provided and validated by the Expert Panel. The event rates were extracted from the LEADER and TECOS trials. Direct and mortality costs were measured. Sensitivity analyses were performed., Results: The estimated target population of 120,574 type 2 diabetic adult patients was associated with cardio vascular risk. The budget impact per patient per month for liraglutide is EGP29 ($6.7), EGP39 ($9), and EGP49 ($11.3) in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd years, respectively. The budget impact per patient per month for sitagliptin is EGP11 ($2.5), EGP14 ($3.2), and EGP18 ($4.1) in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd years, respectively. Furthermore, adoption of liraglutide resulted in 203 fewer deaths and 550 avoided hospitalizations, while sitagliptin resulted in 43 increased deaths and 14 avoided hospitalizations. The treatment costs of liraglutide use are mostly offset by substantial savings due to fewer cardiovascular-related events, avoided mortality and avoided hospitalizations over 3 years., Conclusion: Adding liraglutide resulted in a modest budget impact, suggesting that the upfront drug costs were offset by budget savings due to fewer cardiovascular-related complications and deaths avoided compared to the standard of care. Sitagliptin resulted in a small budget impact but was associated with increased deaths and fewer hospitalizations avoided., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Many kidney donor candidates with impaired fasting glucose (IFG) and all candidates with diabetes are currently excluded from kidney donation, fearing the development of an accelerated course of diabetic kidney disease in the remaining kidney., Methods: We studied mortality, proteinuria, and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in 8280 donors who donated between 1963 and 2007 according to donation fasting plasma glucose (FPG): <100 mg/dL (n = 6204), 100-125 mg/dL (n = 1826), and ≥126 mg/dL (n = 250)., Results: Donors with IFG and those with FPG ≥126 mg/dL were older, less likely to be non-Hispanic White, had a higher body mass index, and were more likely to be related to their recipient. After 15.7 ± 10.5 y from donation to study close, 4.4% died, 29.4% developed hypertension, 13.8% developed proteinuria, and 41 (0.5%) developed ESKD. In both the logistic and Cox models, IFG was associated with a higher diabetes risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-2.30) and hypertension (aHR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.10-1.65; P = 0.003 for both), but not higher risk of proteinuria or ESKD. The multivariable risk of mortality in donors with ≥126 mg/dL was higher than the 2 other groups, but risks of proteinuria, cardiovascular disease, and reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate were similar to those with FPG <126 mg/dL. Three cases of ESKD developed in the 250 donors with FPG ≥126 mg/dL at 18.6 ± 10.3 y after donation (aHR, 5.36; 95% CI, 1.0-27.01; P = 0.04)., Conclusions: Donors with IFG and the majority of donors with ≥126 mg/dL do well and perhaps should not be routinely excluded from donation., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite the reduction in the incidence of acute rejection, a major risk factor for graft loss, there has been only modest improvement in long-term graft survival. Most cases of kidney graft loss have an identifiable cause that is not idiopathic fibrosis/atrophy or calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity. Distinct immunologic and nonimmunologic factors conspire to lead to a common pathway of allograft fibrosis. It remains plausible that mitigating nonimmunologic damage using strategies proven effective in native kidney disease may yield benefit in kidney transplantation. In this review, we will focus on nonimmunologic aspects of kidney transplant care that may prove to be valuable adjuncts to a well-managed immunosuppression regimen. Topics to be addressed include the roles of hypertension and agents used to treat it, lipid lowering, sodium and water intake, elevated uric acid, metabolic acidosis, and the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors on long-term kidney transplant health., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Rationale & Objective: The burden of financial hardship among individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD) has not been extensively studied. Therefore, we describe the scope and determinants of financial hardship among a nationally representative sample of adults with CKD., Study Design: Cross-sectional., Setting & Participants: Nonelderly adults with CKD from the 2014-2018 National Health Interview Survey., Exposure: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics., Outcome: Financial hardship based on medical bills and consequences of financial hardship (high financial distress, food insecurity, cost-related medication nonadherence, delayed/forgone care due to cost). Financial hardship was categorized into 3 levels: no financial hardship, financial hardship but able to pay bills, and unable to pay bills at all. Financial hardship was then modeled in 2 different ways: (1) any financial hardship (regardless of ability to pay) versus no financial hardship and (2) inability to pay bills versus no financial hardship and financial hardship but able to pay bills., Analytical Approach: Nationally representative estimates of financial hardship from medical bills were computed. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the associations of sociodemographic and clinical factors with the outcomes of financial hardship based on medical bills., Results: A total 1,425 individuals, representing approximately 2.1 million Americans, reported a diagnosis of CKD within the past year, of whom 46.9% (95% CI, 43.7%-50.2%) reported experiencing financial hardship from medical bills; 20.9% (95% CI, 18.5%-23.6%) reported inability to pay medical bills at all. Lack of insurance was the strongest determinant of financial hardship in this population (odds ratio, 4.06 [95% CI, 2.18-7.56])., Limitations: Self-reported nature of CKD diagnosis., Conclusions: Approximately half the nonelderly US population with CKD experiences financial hardship from medical bills that is associated strongly with lack of insurance. Evidence-based clinical and policy interventions are needed to address these hardships., (Copyright © 2021 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Having multiple renal arteries (MRA) has been linked to hypertension development. Whether kidney donors who are left with MRA in the nondonated kidney incur a higher risk of hypertension has not been studied. We compared the development of hypertension, reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), cardiovascular disease, and mortality in 2624 normotensive kidney donors with MRA in the nondonated kidney and to 2624 propensity score matched normotensive donor controls with a single renal artery. In total, 35% of donors had MRA. Donors with MRA were less likely to have undergone a left nephrectomy (51% vs. 83%). Postdonation hypertension was associated with age, male gender, non-White ethnicity, obesity, and family history of hypertension. Having MRA was not associated with risk of hypertension; aHR 0.92 (95% CI 0.82-1.03), P = 0.16. After 17 ± 11 years from donation, a similar proportion of donors with and without MRA developed cardiovascular disease, proteinuria and eGFR <30, <45 and <60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 and the multivariable risks of developing these outcomes were similar in the two groups. Our study did not show increased risk for hypertension, reduced eGFR, proteinuria or cardiovascular disease in donors with MRA in the remaining kidney and without hypertension at donation., (© 2021 Steunstichting ESOT. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Obesity is associated with the two archetypal kidney disease risk factors: hypertension and diabetes. Concerns that the effects of diabetes and hypertension in obese kidney donors might be magnified in their remaining kidney have led to the exclusion of many obese candidates from kidney donation., Methods: We compared mortality, diabetes, hypertension, proteinuria, reduced eGFR and its trajectory, and the development of kidney failure in 8583 kidney donors, according to body mass index (BMI). The study included 6822 individuals with a BMI of <30 kg/m 2 , 1338 with a BMI of 30-34.9 kg/m 2 , and 423 with a BMI of ≥35 kg/m 2 . We used Cox regression models, adjusting for baseline covariates only, and models adjusting for postdonation diabetes, hypertension, and kidney failure as time-varying covariates., Results: Obese donors were more likely than nonobese donors to develop diabetes, hypertension, and proteinuria. The increase in eGFR in obese versus nonobese donors was significantly higher in the first 10 years (3.5 ml/min per 1.73m 2 per year versus 2.4 ml/min per 1.73m 2 per year; P <0.001), but comparable thereafter. At a mean±SD follow-up of 19.3±10.3 years after donation, 31 (0.5%) nonobese and 12 (0.7%) obese donors developed ESKD. Of the 12 patients with ESKD in obese donors, 10 occurred in 1445 White donors who were related to the recipient (0.9%). Risk of death in obese donors was not significantly increased compared with nonobese donors., Conclusions: Obesity in kidney donors, as in nondonors, is associated with increased risk of developing diabetes and hypertension. The absolute risk of ESKD is small and the risk of death is comparable to that of nonobese donors., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Background: Fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) is a non-atherosclerotic systemic arterial disease that is not infrequently discovered during kidney donor evaluation. Current guidelines do not provide recommendations regarding the use of kidneys from donors with FMD and there is a paucity of data on the outcomes of these donors., Methods: The Renal and Lung Living Donor Evaluation (RELIVE) study addressed long-term outcomes of 8922 kidney donors who donated between 1963 and 2007. We compared the development of hypertension, cardiovascular disease (CVD), proteinuria and reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in 113 kidney donors with FMD discovered during donor evaluation versus 452 propensity score matched donors without FMD. Outcomes modeling with logistic and Cox regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier statistics were performed., Results: Donors with FMD were older (51 versus 39 years), were more likely to be women (80% versus 56%) and had a higher systolic blood pressure at donation (124.7 versus 121.3 mmHg) (P < 0.05 for all). After a mean ± standard deviation follow-up of 15.5 ± 8.9 years, a similar proportion of donors with and without FMD were alive, and developed hypertension (22.2% versus 19.8%), proteinuria (20.6% versus 13.7%) and CVD (13.3% versus 13.5%). No donor with FMD developed an eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 or end-stage kidney disease. The multivariable risk of mortality, CVD and renal outcomes in donors with FMD was not elevated., Conclusions: Kidney donors with FMD appear to do well, do not appear to incur increased risks of hypertension, proteinuria, CVD or reduced eGFR, and perhaps carefully selected candidates with FMD can safely donate as long as involvement of other vascular beds is ruled out., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: As many as 50% of U.S. transplant centers do not accept kidney donor candidates with hypertension, citing the link between hypertension, kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease (CVD)., Methods: We ascertained mortality, CVD, proteinuria, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) trajectory, reduced eGFR, and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in 904 hypertensive donors (blood pressure [BP] ≥140/90 mm Hg or receiving treatment) versus 7817 donors with BP <140/90 mm Hg., Results: Hypertensive donors were older, 58.1% were <50 years of age, and they had a lower eGFR. The majority were white and related to their recipient. At the end of follow-up, 14.3 ± 10.1 years (range 4-48 years) from donation, hypertensive and nonhypertensive donors had a similar prevalence of cardiovascular disease and renal outcomes. The multivariable risk of mortality, CVD, and proteinuria were also comparable in normotensive and hypertensive donors. eGFR slope over time was similar in hypertensive and nonhypertensive donors, and in total 5 hypertensive and 39 normotensive donors developed ESKD 19.2 ± 10.3 years after donation (adjusted hazard ratio 1.14 [95% confidence interval 0.62-2.12], P  = 0.67). Sensitivity analysis using the new definition of hypertension (≥130/80 mm Hg or requiring treatment) yielded similar results for renal outcomes, but hypertensive donors were more likely to develop CVD and diabetes., Conclusions: Kidney donors with hypertension defined by past criteria do not appear to incur higher mortality, CVD, or ESKD. Donors with current definition of hypertension enjoyed similar renal outcomes but were more likely to develop CVD., (© 2021 International Society of Nephrology. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Roughly 25% of US transplant centers exclude donor candidates with kidney stones fearing future obstructive consequences and the possible association between stones and CKD. We compared the development of hypertension, proteinuria, and reduced eGFR in 227 kidney donors with kidney stones to 908 propensity score-matched donor controls without kidney stones using data from The Renal and Lung Donor Evaluation (RELIVE) Study which studied intermediate and long-term outcomes of 8922 donors who donated between 1963 and 2007. 200 donors had kidney stones prior to donation, 21 had post-donation stones, and 6 had pre- and post-donation stones. Donors with stones were older, more likely to be Caucasian, less likely to be related to the recipient and had a higher fasting glucose. After 16.5 ± 10.9 years (range 0-44 years) from donation to study close, no ESKD occurred in donors with stones. The multivariable risks of hypertension, proteinuria, and reduced GFR were similar in donors with and without kidney stones. We could not demonstrate an association between stones and adverse renal outcomes in kidney donors, and the occurrence of post-donation stones was distinctly rare. These data may provide a rationale for possibly a wider acceptance of donor candidates with low kidney stones burden., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Cytokine release storm (CRS) is a potentially fatal, hyperinflammatory condition common to both coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and reactive hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (rHLH). We present our experience with the use of a diagnostic score, developed for rHLH, in a kidney transplant recipient hospitalized with COVID-19., Methods: We applied the H-Score to risk-stratify our patient to help predict his hospital course. This study was exempt from requiring specific Institutional Review Board approval, but met all the criteria required by our institution for this type of study and report including consent from the patient., Results: The calculated H-Score for our patient fell below the diagnostic cut-off value for rHLH. Because rHLH is characterized by CRS, we expected him to have a milder hospital course with COVID-19. Correlating with his below cut-off H-score, the patient had a more benign than expected hospital course., Conclusions: Because this is only a single case, we plan to retrospectively review a series of patients to validate our initial experience-that a low H-Score may correlate with a milder hospital course in kidney transplant patients with COVID-19., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: Increased donor age is one of the most important risk factors for delayed graft function (DGF), and previous studies suggest that the harmful effect of cold ischemia time is increased in kidneys from older donors. Our aim was to study the association of increased donor age and cold ischemia time with the risk of delayed graft function in a large cohort kidney transplants from the current era., Design, Setting, Participants, & Measurements: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was used for this observational, retrospective registry analysis to identify all deceased donor kidney transplantations in the United States between 2010 and September 2018, who were on dialysis pretransplantation ( n =90,810). The association of donor age and cold ischemia time with the risk of DGF was analyzed in multivariable models adjusted for recipient characteristics (age, race, sex, diabetes, calculated panel-reactive antibodies, pretransplant dialysis duration) and donor characteristics (cause of death, sex, race, body mass index, creatinine, donation after circulatory death status, history of hypertension, and HLA mismatch)., Results: Cold ischemia time and donor age were independently associated with the risk of DGF, but the risk of DGF was not statistically significantly lower in donor age categories between 50 and 64 years, compared with donors ≥65 years. The harmful association of cold ischemia time was not higher in kidneys from older donors in any age category, not even among donation after circulatory death donors. When donor risk was assessed with kidney donor profile index, although a statistically significant interaction with cold ischemia time was found, no practically meaningful increase in cold-ischemia susceptibility of kidneys with a high kidney donor profile index was found., Conclusions: We were unable to demonstrate an association between donor age and DGF. The association of longer cold ischemia time with the risk of DGF was not magnified in older or more marginal donors., (Copyright © 2020 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Living kidney donation is widely practiced throughout the world. During the past 2 decades, various groups have provided guidance about the evaluation and care of living donors. However, during this time, our knowledge in the field has advanced substantially and many agreed on the need for a comprehensive, unifying document. KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) addressed this issue at an international level with the publication of its clinical practice guideline on the evaluation and care of living kidney donors. The KDIGO work group extensively reviewed the available literature and wrote a series of guideline recommendations using various degrees of evidence when available. As has become recent practice, NKF-KDOQI (National Kidney Foundation-Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative) convened a work group to provide a commentary on the KDIGO guideline, with a focus on how these recommendations apply in the context of the United States. In the United States, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) guides and regulates the practice of living kidney donation. While the KDIGO guideline for the care of living kidney donors and UNOS policy are similar in most aspects of the care of living kidney donors, several important areas are not consistent or do not align with common practice by US transplantation programs in areas in which UNOS has not set specific policy. For the time being, and recognizing the value of the KDIGO guidelines, US transplantation programs should continue to follow UNOS policy., (Copyright © 2019 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Short-term studies have demonstrated that nondirected donors (NDDs) have psychosocial outcomes that are similar to donors who donate directly, but long-term studies have not been done. NDDs at our center were surveyed regarding motivation; support during donation; stress related to donation; regret; financial resources used for donation; preferences about communication with the recipient; and cost reimbursement. Of 100 NDDs who donated at our center in the last 20 years, 95 remain in contact with us, and 77 responded to our survey (mean ± standard deviation [SD] 6.7 ± 4 years postdonation). The most common motivation for donation was the desire to help another (99%). Many NDDs received support from family, friends, and employers. NDDs voiced stress about the possibility of recipient kidney rejection, physical consequences to themselves, and financial burden. Only one donor expressed regret. Almost half wanted some recipient information at donation; 61% preferred routine recipient status updates; 56% believed meeting the recipient should occur at any mutually agreeable time; and 55% endorsed reimbursement for expenses. Stressors for NDDs are analogous to those of directed donors; NDDs prefer having some information about the recipient and prefer to be given a choice regarding the timing for communication with the recipient. NDDs supported donation being financially neutral., (© 2018 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Many living kidney donors undertake a significant financial burden in order to donate. We studied the association between time to return to work and reported financial burden. Kidney donors who donated from 2/2005 through 12/2015 (n = 1012) were surveyed 6 months after donation and asked about occupation, time to return to work, and financial burden (on a 10-point Likert scale). Of 856 donors working for pay, 629 (73%) responded. After adjusting for donor characteristics, increased length of time to return to work was a significant predictor of financial burden (P < .001). It is notable that those in manual/skilled trade occupations, compared with all other occupations, experienced greater financial burden for each week away from work (P = .003). Older age at donation and nondirected (vs directed) donation were associated with significantly decreased financial burden. These observations provide additional information to better inform donor candidates, and further emphasize the need to develop policies so that living kidney donation can be financially neutral., (© 2018 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Background: The rate of measured glomerular filtration rate (GFR) change in kidney donor years after donation has not been adequately addressed. Whether this change is accelerated in the setting of 1 kidney is also understudied., Methods: Two hundred fourteen randomly selected donors underwent serial GFR measurements of nonradioactive iohexol. Estimated GFR at each visit was calculated using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease study equations., Results: Glomerular filtration rate visits were 4.8 ± 1.3 years apart and the second occurring 16.9 ± 9.1 years after donation. Most (97.7%) were white, 60.8% female, and 78.5% were related to their recipient. Most, 84.6%, had a GFR of 60 mL/min per 1.73 m or higher, 14.0% had a GFR between 45 and 60 mL/min per 1.73 m, and 1.4% had a GFR less than 45 mL/min per 1.73 m. Between visits 1 and 2, 56.5% had a GFR decline, 36.0% increase, and in 7.5%, there was no change. Overall, GFR declined at a rate of -0.42 mL/min per 1.73 m per year. Of GFR estimating models, only Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration-Creatinine equation produced a slope that was steeper than measured GFR., Conclusions: Nearly 2 decades postdonation GFR declined at a rate similar to that seen in the general population, and in one third, GFR continues to increase.

Incidence of postdonation hypertension, risk factors associated with its development, and impact of type of treatment received on renal outcomes were determined in 3700 kidney donors. Using Cox proportional hazard model, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for cardiovascular disease (CVD); estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60, <45, <30 mL/min/1.73m 2 ; end stage renal disease (ESRD); and death in hypertensive donors were determined. After a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of 16.6 (11.9) years of follow-up, 1126 (26.8%) donors developed hypertension and 894 with known antihypertensive medications. Hypertension developed in 4%, 10%, and 51% at 5, 10, and 40 years, respectively, and was associated with proteinuria, eGFR < 30, 45, and 60 mL/min/1.73m 2 , CVD, and death. Blood pressure was <140/90 mm Hg at last follow-up in 75% of hypertensive donors. Use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (compared to other antihypertensive agents) was associated with a lower risk for eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73m², HR 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.9), P = .01, and also less ESRD; HR 0.03 (95% CI 0.001-0.20), P = .004. In this predominantly Caucasian cohort, hypertension is common after donation, well controlled in most donors, and factors associated with its development are similar to those in the general population., (© 2018 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

In the general population, obesity is associated with an increased risk of developing hypertension (HTN), type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Therefore, most transplant centers have a body mass index (BMI) threshold for accepting living kidney donors. But there have been no studies of postdonation weight gain trends and any associated risks. We tracked serial BMIs in 940 donors for a median (IQ range) follow-up of 22.3 (15.4-35.8) years. We studied the impact of postdonation weight gain in a model adjusted for family history of HTN or DM. Donor characteristics included age, sex, smoking, fasting blood glucose, eGFR, systolic and diastolic BP, and BMI at time of donation and time postdonation. Postdonation weight gain was associated with a significant increase in the relative risk of developing HTN RR 1.93 (95% CI 1.51-2.46) (P < 0.001) and/or DM RR 4.18 (95% CI 2.05-8.5) (P < 0.0001), but not (to date) cardiovascular disease (CVD), reduced eGFR or death. Like the general population, donors gained weight as they aged; a higher BMI was associated with higher incidence of DM and HTN. Postdonation care should include ongoing counseling on the risks of substantial weight gain., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is a risk after kidney donation. We sought, in a large cohort of kidney donors, to determine the causes of donor ESRD, the interval from donation to ESRD, the role of the donor/recipient relationship, and the trajectory of the estimated GFR (eGFR) from donation to ESRD. From 1/1/1963 thru 12/31/2015, 4030 individuals underwent living donor nephrectomy at our center, as well as ascertainment of ESRD status. Of these, 39 developed ESRD (mean age ± standard deviation [SD] at ESRD, 62.4 ± 14.1 years; mean interval between donation and ESRD, 27.1 ± 9.8 years). Donors developing ESRD were more likely to be male, as well as smokers, and younger at donation, and to have donated to a first-degree relative. Of donors with a known cause of ESRD (n = 25), 48% was due to diabetes and/or hypertension; only 2 from a disease that would have affected 1 kidney (cancer). Of those 25 with an ascertainable ESRD cause, 4 shared a similar etiology of ESRD with their recipient. Almost universally, thechange of eGFR over time was stable, until new-onset disease (kidney or systemic). Knowledge of factors contributing to ESRD after living kidney donation can improve donor selection and counseling, as well as long-term postdonation care., (© 2018 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

An increased risk of ESRD has been reported for living kidney donors, and appears to be higher for those donating to a relative. The reasons for this are not clear. One possibility is that ESRD is due to the nephrectomy-related reduction in GFR, followed by an age-related decline that may be more rapid in related donors. Between 1/1/1990 and 12/31/2014, we did 2002 living donor nephrectomies. We compared long-term postdonation eGFR trajectory for donors with (n = 1245) vs. without (n = 757) a first-degree relative with ESRD. Linear mixed-effects models were used to model the longitudinal trajectory of eGFR. With all other variables held constant, we noted a steady average increase in eGFR until donors reached age 70: 1.12 (95% CI: 0.92-1.32) mL/min/1.73m ² /yr between 6 weeks and 5 years postdonation; 0.24 (0.00-0.49) mL/min/1.73m ² /yr between 5 and 10 years; and 0.07 (-0.10 to +0.25) mL/min/1.73m ² /yr between 10 and 20 years for donors with attained age less than 70. After age 70, eGFR declined. After we adjusted for predonation factors, the difference in eGFR slopes between related and unrelated donors was 0.20 mL/min/1.753 m 2 /year (0.07-0.33). Our data suggests that postdonation, kidney donor eGFR increases each year for a number of years and that eGFR trajectory does not explain any increase in ESRD after donation., (© 2017 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

The column in this issue is supplied by Hassan N. Ibrahim, M.D., director of the Division of Kidney Diseases and Hypertension in the Department of Medicine at Houston Methodist Hospital and a fellow of the American Society of Nephrology. Dr. Ibrahim joined Houston Methodist in May 2017 after serving as a professor of medicine and chief of nephrology at the University of Minnesota.

Whether diabetes after kidney donation is associated with an accelerated GFR decay in the remaining kidney has not been studied. We determined the incidence of diabetes in kidney donors, and compared GFR change over time in diabetic to nondiabetic donors, in addition to the effect of diabetes mellitus (DM) on the development of proteinuria, hypertension, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Of the 4014 donors, 309 (7.7%) developed diabetes at a median age of 56.0 years and after a median of 18 years after donation. The difference in annual estimated GFR (eGFR) change between diabetic and nondiabetic donors in the 7 years before the development of DM was -0.08 mL/min/year; p = 0.51. After DM development, the difference was -1.10 mL/min/year for diabetic donors with hypertension and proteinuria, p < 0.001; -0.19 for diabetic donors with hypertension but no proteinuria, p = 0.29; -0.75 mL/min/year for diabetic donors with proteinuria but no hypertension, p = 0.19; and -0.09 mL/min/year for diabetic donors without proteinuria or hypertension, p = 0.63. When DM was considered as a time-dependent covariate, it was associated with the development of proteinuria (hazard ratio [HR] 2.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.89-3.70; p < 0.001) and hypertension (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.74-2.75; p < 0.001). It was not, however, associated with ESRD. eGFR decline after DM development exceeds that of nondiabetic donors only in diabetic donors with concomitant proteinuria and hypertension., (© 2017 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Background: Living kidney donors have donation-related out-of-pocket costs (direct costs) and/or ongoing daily expenses while losing income (indirect costs). Yet there is little information about how much of a subjective burden these constitute for the donors., Methods: From December 2003 through December 2014, we surveyed donors 6 months postdonation to determine their financial burden related to donation (on a scale of 1 to 10) and what resources were used to cover expenses., Results: Of 1136 surveyed, 796 (70%) responded. Among respondents, mean age at donation was 43.6 ± 10.6 years, 64% were women, 96% were white, and 53% were related by blood to their recipient. Overall, 26% scored their financial burden as 5 or higher; 8% scored it as 8 or higher. Increased expenses were associated with a higher reported burden; however, significant burden was reported by some with no out-of-pocket expenses (presumably due to lost wages and continuing expenses). The burden was scored as 5 or higher by 27% of those employed outside the home (n = 660), 15% homemakers, 13% retirees, 40% students; 28% unemployed; and 26% whose occupation was unknown. Over half (51%) of those receiving a local or (means-tested) national grant still reported moderate to severe burden. Besides grants, donors used a variety of sources to help offset expenses: dipped into savings, borrowed from friends or family, took out a loan, and/or had a fundraiser. Those with the highest burden reported using the most additional sources., Conclusions: Donors should not have to incur costs or a financial burden to donate; the transplant community should strive to make donation financially neutral.

Background: Patients with progressive kidney disease experience increasing physiologic and psychosocial stressors and declining health-related quality of life (HRQOL)., Methods: We conducted a randomized, active-controlled, open-label trial to test whether a Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction (MBSR) program delivered in a novel workshop-teleconference format would reduce symptoms and improve HRQOL in patients awaiting kidney transplantation. Sixty-three transplant candidates were randomized to one of two arms: i) telephone-adapted MBSR (tMBSR, an 8-week program of meditation and yoga); or ii) a telephone-based support group (tSupport). Participants completed self-report questionnaires at baseline, post-intervention, and after 6-months. Anxiety, measured by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) post-intervention served as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included: depression, sleep quality, pain, fatigue, and HRQOL assessed by SF-12 Physical and Mental Component Summaries (PCS, MCS)., Results: 55 patients (age 54±12yrs) attended their assigned program (tMBSR, n=27; tSupport, n=28). 49% of patients had elevated anxiety at baseline. Changes in anxiety were small and did not differ by treatment group post-intervention or at follow-up. However, tMBSR significantly improved mental HRQOL at follow-up: +6.2 points on the MCS - twice the minimum clinically important difference (95% CI: 1.66 to 10.8, P=0.01). A large percentage of tMBSR participants (≥90%) practiced mindfulness and reported it helpful for stress management., Conclusions: Neither mindfulness training nor a support group resulted in clinically meaningful reductions in anxiety. In contrast, finding that tMBSR was more effective than tSupport for bolstering mental HRQOL during the wait for a kidney transplant is encouraging and warrants further investigation. ClinicalTrials.govNCT01254214., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background and Objectives: Two recent studies reported increased risk of ESRD after kidney donation. In both, the majority of ESRD was seen in those donating to a relative. Confounding this observation is that, in the absence of donation, relatives of those with ESRD are at increased risk for ESRD. Understanding the pathogenesis and risk factors for postdonation ESRD is critical for both donor selection and counseling., Design, Setting, Participants, & Measurements: We hypothesized that if familial relationship was an important consideration in pathogenesis, the donor and linked recipient would share ESRD etiology. We obtained information from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) on all living kidney donors subsequently waitlisted for a kidney transplant in the United States between January 1, 1996 and November 30, 2015, to determine ( 1 ) the donor-recipient relationship and ( 2 ) whether related donor-recipient pairs had similar causes of ESRD., Results: We found that a significant amount of information, potentially available at the time of listing, was not reported to the OPTN. Of 441 kidney donors listed for transplant, only 169 had information allowing determination of interval from donation to listing, and only 99 (22% of the total) had information on the donor-recipient relationship and ESRD etiology. Of the 99 donors, 87 were related to their recipient. Strikingly, of the 87, only a minority (23%) of donor-recipient pairs shared ESRD etiology. Excluding hypertension, only 8% shared etiology., Conclusions: A better understanding of ESRD in donors requires complete and detailed data collection, as well as a method to capture all ESRD end points. This study highlights the absence of critical information that is urgently needed to provide a meaningful understanding of ESRD after kidney donation. We found that of living related donors listed for transplant, where both donor and recipient cause of ESRD is recorded, only a minority share ESRD etiology with their recipient., (Copyright © 2017 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Despite generally positive outcomes and high rates of satisfaction, living kidney donors are at risk for both medical and psychosocial problems. In this review, the authors summarize non-end-stage renal disease (ESRD) risks for donors and describe limitations to the data. We review the evidence of medical risks (e.g. increased cardiovascular disease and mortality, preeclampsia) and psychosocial risks (e.g. mood disturbance, financial burden). We then discuss the evidence of differential risks among subsets and the impact of postdonation events (e.g. development of diabetes). Collectively, available evidence indicates the following. (1) Recognizing the importance of non-ESRD risks has been overshadowed by analyses of the reported risk of ESRD. This imbalance should be remedied. (2) There is little quantification of the true contribution of donation to medical and psychosocial outcomes. (3) Most studies, to date, have been retrospective, with limited sample sizes and diversity and with less-than-ideal controls for comparison of outcomes. (4) Many postdonation events (diabetes and hypertension) can now be reasonably predicted, and their association with adverse outcomes can be quantified. (5) Mechanisms and systems need to be implemented to evaluate and care for donors who develop medical and/or psychosocial problems. (6) Costs to donors are a significant burden, and making donation financially neutral should be a priority., (© Copyright 2016 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Aims: To raise awareness of critical care nurses' cognitive bias in decision-making, its relationship with leadership styles and its impact on care delivery., Background: The relationship between critical care nurses' decision-making and leadership styles in hospitals has been widely studied, but the influence of cognitive bias on decision-making and leadership styles in critical care environments remains poorly understood, particularly in Jordan., Design: Two-phase mixed methods sequential explanatory design and grounded theory., Setting: critical care unit, Prince Hamza Hospital, Jordan. Participant sampling: convenience sampling Phase 1 (quantitative, n = 96), purposive sampling Phase 2 (qualitative, n = 20)., Methods: Pilot tested quantitative survey of 96 critical care nurses in 2012. Qualitative in-depth interviews, informed by quantitative results, with 20 critical care nurses in 2013. Descriptive and simple linear regression quantitative data analyses. Thematic (constant comparative) qualitative data analysis., Results: Quantitative - correlations found between rationality and cognitive bias, rationality and task-oriented leadership styles, cognitive bias and democratic communication styles and cognitive bias and task-oriented leadership styles. Qualitative - 'being competent', 'organizational structures', 'feeling self-confident' and 'being supported' in the work environment identified as key factors influencing critical care nurses' cognitive bias in decision-making and leadership styles. Two-way impact (strengthening and weakening) of cognitive bias in decision-making and leadership styles on critical care nurses' practice performance., Conclusion: There is a need to heighten critical care nurses' consciousness of cognitive bias in decision-making and leadership styles and its impact and to develop organization-level strategies to increase non-biased decision-making., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Transplant programs inform potential donors that they should be able to return to normal activities within ~2 weeks and to work by 6 weeks after laparoscopic nephrectomy. We studied actual time. Between 10/2004 and 9/2014, 911 donors having laparoscopic nephrectomy were surveyed 6 months post-donation. Surveys asked questions specific to their recovery experience, including time to return to normal activities and work and a description of their recovery time relative to pre-donation expectations. Of the 911, 646 (71%) responded: mean age at donation was 43.5±10.6 years; 65% were female, 95% were white, 51% were biologically related to their recipient, and 83% reported education beyond high school. Of the 646 respondents, a total of 35% returned to normal activities by 2 weeks post-donation; 79% by 4 weeks post-donation; 94% by 5-6 weeks; however, 6% took >6 weeks. Of the 646, 551 (85%) were working for pay; of these, mean time to return to work was 5.3±2.8 weeks; median, 5 weeks. Of the 551, a total of 14% returned to work in 1-2 weeks, 46% by 3-4 weeks, and 76% by 5-6 weeks. Importantly, 24% required >6 weeks before returning to work with the highest rates for donors in manual labor or a skilled trade. Significantly longer return to work was reported by females (vs males; P=.01), those without (vs those with) post-high school education (P=.010, those with longer hospital stay (P=.01), and those with a postoperative complication (P=.02). Of respondents, 37% described their recovery time as longer than expected. During the donor informed consent process, additional emphasis on realistic expectations around recovery to baseline activities and return to work is warranted., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Previous studies reported the risk of ESRD after kidney donation, but not the renal outcomes that precede ESRD. Here, we estimated the risk of proteinuria, reduced GFR, and ESRD in 3956 white kidney donors, assessed the contribution of postdonation hypertension and diabetes to these outcomes, and developed a risk calculator. After a mean±SD follow-up of 16.6±11.9 years, 215 (6.1%) donors developed proteinuria. Men had a higher risk of proteinuria (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.18 to 2.05; P<0.001) as did those with higher body mass index (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.13; P<0.001). In all, 1410 (36%) donors reached an eGFR<60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), and 112 (2.8%) donors had either an eGFR<30 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) or ESRD (28 donors developed ESRD). An eGFR<30 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) or ESRD associated with older age (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.09; P<0.001), higher body mass index (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.13; P<0.001), and higher systolic BP (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.04; P=0.01) at donation. Postdonation diabetes and hypertension associated with a fourfold higher risk of proteinuria and a >2-fold higher risk of ESRD. Models predicting proteinuria and reduced eGFR performed well (C-index 0.77-1.00). In conclusion, severe reduction in GFR and ESRD after kidney donation were uncommon and were highly associated with postdonation diabetes and hypertension. Furthermore, information available before donation may predict long-term renal outcomes in white living kidney donors., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) is an uncommon but serious complication of solid organ transplantation. Reduction in immunosuppression is the mainstay of PTLD treatment, but it may precipitate graft loss. Retransplantation remains controversial, as immunosuppression resumption may trigger PTLD relapse. Herein, we describe the experience of eight patients who underwent kidney retransplantation after successful PTLD treatment. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) serology was not known before the first transplantation. PTLD was diagnosed 62.5 months (range 5-323 months) after transplantation and was confined to the renal allograft (n = 1), lymph nodes (n = 2), gastrointestinal tract (n = 4), or central nervous system (n = 1). Immunosuppression tapering (8/8), chemotherapy (6/8), oral cavity lymphoma excision (1/8), and allograft nephrectomy (1/8) led to hematological remission in all patients. Retransplantation was performed at a median of 55.5 months (range 29-95 months) after PTLD diagnosis. After a median follow-up of 62.5 months (range 2-125 months) allograft survival was 87.5% (seven functioning grafts, one failed graft from chronic rejection), with no recurrence of PTLD. In all, five patients remain alive; the other three died from causes other than PTLD. In conclusion, kidney retransplantation appears to be safe in patients with prior PTLD and without major risk of hematological recurrence provided that PTLD has remitted., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background and Objectives: Most kidney donors view their experience positively, but some may experience psychosocial and financial burdens. We hypothesized that certain donor characteristics, poor outcome of the recipient, negative perceptions of care, and lack of support may be associated with poor psychosocial outcomes for donors., Design, Setting, Participants, & Measurements: The Renal and Lung Living Donors Evaluation Study (RELIVE) examined long-term medical and psychosocial outcomes for kidney donors (at three U.S. transplant centers) who donated between 1963 and 2005. Standardized questionnaires evaluated donor perspectives, recovery time, social support, motivation, financial impact, insurability after donation, and current psychological status. Questionnaires were mailed to 6909 donors., Results: Questionnaires were returned by 2455 donors, who had donated 17 ± 10 years earlier (range, 5-48 years), a response rate of 36%. Most (95%) rated their overall donation experience as good to excellent. Rating the overall donor experience more negatively was associated with donor complications, psychological difficulties, recipient graft failure, and longer time since donation. Nine percent (n=231) reported one or more of the following poor psychosocial outcomes: fair or poor overall donor experience, financial burden, regret or discomfort with decision to donate, or psychological difficulties since donation. Recipient graft failure was the only predictor for reporting one or more of these poor psychosocial outcomes (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.33 to 2.34). Donors with lower educational attainment experienced greater financial burden. One of five employed donors took unpaid leave; 2% reported health and life insurability concerns., Conclusions: Although the majority of donors viewed their overall donation experience positively, almost 1 in 10 donors reported at least one negative consequence related to donation. Recipient graft failure was associated with poor psychosocial outcome, defined as one or more of these negative consequences. Some donors were financially disadvantaged, and some experienced insurance difficulties. Interventions to avoid negative psychosocial and financial consequences are warranted., (Copyright © 2015 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Generous and even excessive fluid intake is routinely recommended to kidney transplant recipients despite minimal evidence to support this practice. We hypothesized that increased fluid intake, ascertained by 24-h urine volume output, may adversely affect graft outcomes as it would impose an extra workload on a limited number of nephrons. Kidney transplant recipients who were randomized to losartan vs. placebo in the Angiotensin II Blockade for Chronic Allograft Nephropathy (ABCAN) trial (n = 153) underwent baseline, five-yr biopsies, and annual iothalamate glomerular filtration rate assessment. Recipients with higher urine volume at randomization had higher urinary sodium and also higher urinary protein. The proportion using diuretics or CNI based regimens were similar across urinary volume tertiles. The highest urinary volume tertile (>2.56 L/d) did not predict the development of interstitial volume doubling or end-stage renal disease (ESRD) from interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy (OR = 3.52, 95% CI 0.4, 31.24, p = 0.26), interstitial volume doubling or all-cause ESRD (OR = 7.04, 95% CI 0.66, 74.87, p = 0.11), and was not associated with the conventional endpoint of doubling serum creatinine, all-cause ESRD, or death (OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.21, 3.71, p = 0.87). These results suggest that the current practice of liberal fluid intake may not be beneficial in low risk and mostly Caucasian transplant recipients., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The performance of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) equations incorporating both cystatin C (CysC) and serum creatinine (Creat) in living kidney donors has not been studied before., Methods: From a population of 3,698 living kidney donors, 257 donors were randomly selected to undergo GFR measurement (mGFR) by the plasma disappearance of iohexol. GFR was estimated with the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation and the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration study eGFR(CKD-EPI-Creat) in 257 donors and the two newly developed equations using CysC with and without Creat, eGFR(CKD-EPI-CysC) and eGFR(CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC), in 215 donors., Results: Mean mGFR was 71.8±11.8 mL/min/1.73 m. The eGFR(MDRD) exhibited least and only negative bias and the three other models were comparable in terms of bias. The eGFR(CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) equation was most precise; r=0.64. Both eGFR(MDRD) and eGFR(CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) had high percentage (94.4% and 92.6%, respectively) of estimates falling within 30% of mGFR versus estimates by eGFR(CKD-EPI-Creat) and eGFR(CKD-EPI-CysC) equations (87.2% and 85.1%, respectively). The eGFR(MDRD) was by far most accurate in identifying those with mGFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m whereas the CKD-EPI models were extremely accurate in classifying those with mGFR greater than or equal to 60 mL/min/1.73 m., Conclusions: eGFR(CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) equation provides comparable accuracy to the eGFR(MDRD) in overall estimation of mGFR, but with higher precision. However, eGFR(CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) clearly misses many of those with a post-donation GFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m and therefore eGFR(MDRD) is preferable in detecting donors with GFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m.

Objectives: To evaluate quality of life (QOL) in kidney transplant recipients aged 65 and older, identify predictors of impaired physical and mental QOL cross-sectionally and compare QOL over time with that of younger transplant recipients and general population controls., Design: Comparison of serial Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Survey (SF-36) QOL scores in transplant recipients aged 65 and older with those of transplant recipients younger than 65 and with those of general population controls from the National Health Measurement Study (NHMS)., Setting: University of Minnesota., Participants: Individuals aged 65 and older (n = 150) and younger than 65 (n = 1,544) who received a primary kidney transplant between 1963 and 2009., Measurements: Two-sample t-tests and logistic regression were used to assess the risk of significant impairment in physical and mental QOL, defined as 1 standard deviation below the general population norms (<40 points) for the SF-36 Physical (PCS) and Mental Component Subscale (MCS) scores., Results: PCS scores were 39.3 for transplant recipients aged 65 and older, 43.5 for recipients younger than 65, and 49.2 for NHMS controls (P < .005 for each pairwise comparison). MCS scores were 54.6 for transplant recipients aged 65 and older, 51.0 for recipients younger than 65, and 53.8 for NHMS controls (P < .005 for ≥ 65 vs <65 and NHMS vs <65). These scores did not change significantly from the first (3.6 years after transplant) to the last (6.2 years after transplant) survey. Longer time since transplantation in elderly participants was associated with having significantly impaired physical QOL, but no predictors were associated with significantly impaired mental QOL. In younger recipients, rejection, diabetes mellitus, delayed graft function, coronary artery disease, and longer time on dialysis were associated with impaired physical QOL. Rejection, smoking, diabetes mellitus, and longer time on dialysis were predictors of impaired mental QOL., Conclusion: Physical QOL is lower in elderly recipients but mental QOL is maintained and is higher than in younger recipients., (© 2014, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2014, The American Geriatrics Society.)