Search

Twenty-five years after India passed legislation to legalize brain death, deceased donor transplantation remains underdeveloped while the country has established formidable capacity for living donor transplantation. Because of a large number of potential deceased donors, there is hope that deceased donation could help meet India's enormous need for organ transplantation. However, significant policy and practical barriers limit progress. The vast majority of potential deceased donors are poor motor vehicle accident victims who present for care in hospitals without the necessary infrastructure or expertise to support deceased donation. In contrast, transplant infrastructure and expertise are concentrated in private hospitals and are only accessible to those with the ability to pay. Given these realities, the potential of deceased donor transplantation can only be recognized if Indians who are likely to donate organs are also provided access to transplantation. In this viewpoint, we review the current status of organ transplantation in India and propose new policies to establish a national organization to oversee deceased donor services in all states, to fund resources needed to support deceased donation, to leverage the existing living donor infrastructure to advance deceased donor transplantation, and call for establishment of government policy on funding for posttransplant care and immunosuppression.

This Viewpoint discusses how the Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) in its current form is not fit to guide kidney allocation because it devalues organ donation by Black donors based on a weak association between donor race and kidney transplant failure.

A 45-year-old woman is seen in the hemodialysis unit having returned to dialysis 9 years after receiving a deceased-donor kidney transplant. The initial cause of her kidney failure was microscopic polyangiitis with granulomatosis. At the time of her first transplant, the panel reactive antibody (PRA

Longer pretransplant dialysis exposure is associated with a higher risk of transplant failure. Whether patients who receive dialysis in a region with a higher rate of dialysis mortality are a higher risk for transplant failure is unknown. Adjusted state-specific hemodialysis mortality rates were determined in 3-year intervals among prevalent dialysis patients in the United States between 1995 and 2012. The effect of state- and period-specific dialysis mortality on the association of pretransplant dialysis exposure with transplant survival through December 2017 was determined using multivariable models. Dialysis mortality within states ranged from 128 deaths/1000 patient-years to 330 deaths/1000 patient-years. Each additional year of dialysis was associated with a 4% higher risk of transplant failure in states within the lowest quartile of dialysis mortality, compared with an 8% higher risk in states within the highest quartile of dialysis mortality. Patients who received pretransplant dialysis treatment in a state with a high rate of dialysis mortality are at a higher risk for transplant failure compared with patients with the same duration of pretransplant dialysis treatment in a state with a lower mortality rate. The findings may have implications for dialysis care in transplant candidates and the design of future outcome metrics.

Background Living kidney donors incur donation-related expenses, but how these expenses impact postdonation mental health is unknown. Methods In this prospective cohort study, the association between mental health and donor-incurred expenses (both out-of-pocket costs and lost wages) was examined in 821 people who donated a kidney at one of the 12 transplant centers in Canada between 2009 and 2014. Mental health was measured by the RAND Short Form-36 Health Survey along with Beck Anxiety Inventory and Beck Depression Inventory. Results A total of 209 donors (25%) reported expenses of >5500 Canadian dollars. Compared with donors who incurred lower expenses, those who incurred higher expenses demonstrated significantly worse mental health-related quality of life 3 months after donation, with a trend towards worse anxiety and depression, after controlling for predonation mental health-related quality of life and other risk factors for psychological distress. Between-group differences for donors with lower and higher expenses on these measures were no longer significant 12 months after donation. Conclusions Living kidney donor transplant programs should ensure that adequate psychosocial support is available to all donors who need it, based on known and unknown risk factors. Efforts to minimize donor-incurred expenses and to better support the mental well-being of donors need to continue. Further research is needed to investigate the effect of donor reimbursement programs, which mitigate donor expenses, on postdonation mental health.

The worldwide burden of kidney disease is rising, but public awareness remains limited, underscoring the need for more effective communication by stakeholders in the kidney health community. Despite this need for clarity, the nomenclature for describing kidney function and disease lacks uniformity. In June 2019, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) convened a Consensus Conference with the goal of standardizing and refining the nomenclature used in the English language to describe kidney function and disease, and of developing a glossary that could be used in scientific publications. Guiding principles of the conference were that the revised nomenclature should be patient-centered, precise, and consistent with nomenclature used in the KDIGO guidelines. Conference attendees reached general consensus on the following recommendations: (i) to use "kidney" rather than "renal" or "nephro-" when referring to kidney disease and kidney function; (ii) to use "kidney failure" with appropriate descriptions of presence or absence of symptoms, signs, and treatment, rather than "end-stage kidney disease"; (iii) to use the KDIGO definition and classification of acute kidney diseases and disorders (AKD) and acute kidney injury (AKI), rather than alternative descriptions, to define and classify severity of AKD and AKI; (iv) to use the KDIGO definition and classification of chronic kidney disease (CKD) rather than alternative descriptions to define and classify severity of CKD; and (v) to use specific kidney measures, such as albuminuria or decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR), rather than "abnormal" or "reduced" kidney function to describe alterations in kidney structure and function. A proposed 5-part glossary contains specific items for which there was general agreement. Conference attendees acknowledged limitations of the recommendations and glossary, but they considered standardization of scientific nomenclature to be essential for improving communication.

Background Kidney transplantation (KT) is the optimal treatment for kidney failure and is associated with better quality of life and survival relative to dialysis. However, knowledge of the current capacity of countries to deliver KT is limited. This study reports on findings from the 2018 International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas (ISN-GKHA) survey, specifically addressing the availability, accessibility, and quality of KT across countries and regions. Methods Data were collected from published online sources and a survey was administered online to key stakeholders. All country-level data were analyzed by ISN region and World Bank income classification. Results Data were collected via a survey in 182 countries of which 155 answered questions pertaining to KT. Of these, 74% stated that KT was available, with a median incidence of 14 pmp (range: 0.04 to 70) and median prevalence of 255 pmp (range: 3 to 693). Accessibility of KT varied widely; even within high income countries, it was disproportionately lower for ethnic minorities. Universal health coverage of all KT treatment costs was available in 31% and 57% had a KT registry. Conclusions There are substantial variations in KT incidence, prevalence, availability, accessibility, and quality worldwide, with the lowest rates evident in low- and lower-middle income countries. Understanding these disparities will inform efforts to increase awareness and the adoption of practices that will ensure high quality KT care is provided around the world.Supplemental Visual Abstract; http://links.lww.com/TP/C288.

BACKGROUND: Patients with kidney transplant failure have a high risk of hospitalization and death due to infection. The optimal use of immunosuppressants after transplant failure remains uncertain and clinical practice varies widely. METHODS: This prospective cohort study enrolled patients within 21 days of starting dialysis after transplant failure in 16 Canadian centers. Immunosuppressant medication use, death, hospitalized infection, rejection of the failed allograft, and anti-HLA panel reactive antibodies were determined at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and and then twice yearly until death, repeat transplantation, or loss to follow-up. RESULTS: The 269 study patients were followed for a median of 558 days. There were 33 deaths, 143 patients hospitalized for infection, and 21 rejections. Most patients (65%) continued immunosuppressants, 20% continued prednisone only, and 15% discontinued all immunosuppressants. In multivariable models, patients who continued immunosuppressants had a lower risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17 to 0.93) and were not at increased risk of hospitalized infection (HR, 1.81; 95% CI, 0.82 to 4.0) compared with patients who discontinued all immunosuppressants or continued prednisone only. The mean class I and class II panel reactive antibodies increased from 11% to 27% and from 25% to 47%, respectively, but did not differ by immunosuppressant use. Continuation of immunosuppressants was not protective of rejection of the failed allograft (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.22 to 2.94). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged use of immunosuppressants >1 year after transplant failure was not associated with a higher risk of death or hospitalized infection but was insufficient to prevent higher anti-HLA antibodies or rejection of the failed allograft.

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.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 of30 kg/mObese 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 1.73mObesity 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.

Compatible pair participation in kidney paired donation (KPD) may increase the likelihood of finding suitable matches for all registered pairs. Retrospective studies have shown variable enthusiasm for participating in KPD in compatible pairs.The study objective was to gather potential living donor (PLD) and transplant candidate (TC) perspectives on compatible pair participation in KPD.Surveys and qualitative interviews.Three transplant programs in Canada: Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal in Montreal (Québec), Vancouver General Hospital, and St. Paul's Hospital in Vancouver (British Columbia).Both PLDs and TCs undergoing evaluation for donation/transplantation between 2016 and 2018 at 3 transplant programs in Canada.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed for the results of the survey and thematic and content analysis method was used for the content of the qualitative interviews.A total of 116 PLDs and 111 TCs completed surveys and an additional 18 PLDs and 17 TCs underwent semi-directed interviews. Of those surveyed, 61.2% of PLDs and 76.6% of TCs reported a willingness to participate in KPD as a compatible pair. The possibility of a more optimally matched kidney for the TC and policies ensuring prioritization of the TC for repeat transplantation in the event of early graft failure increased willingness to participate in KPD. Major concerns expressed during the interviews included the desire to retain the emotional bond of directed donation, the fear of chain breaks or donor reneging, delays in transplantation, and additional travel associated with participation in KPD.The limitations of this study are that it was conducted in only 3 Canadian transplant programs and that the interviews and surveys were in French and in English. As a consequence, the results may not be reflective of the views of individuals not living in these 2 provinces and from ethnic minority populations.Most of the compatible PLDs and TCs surveyed were willing to participate in KPD. Ensuring timely transplantation and a more optimal match for TCs and offering a policy of reciprocity to ensure timely repeat transplantation for compatible recipients if their allograft fails post KPD transplant may further increase compatible pair participation in KPD.La participation de paires d’individus compatibles au don croisé d’un rein (DCR) peut augmenter la probabilité de trouver des donneurs et receveurs compatibles pour tous les individus enregistrés. Des études rétrospectives ont montré un enthousiasme variable des paires d’individus compatibles à participer au DCR.Cette étude visait à recueillir les points de vue de donneurs vivants potentiels et de candidats à la greffe sur la participation de paires d’individus compatibles au DCR.Sondages et interviews qualitatives.Trois programmes de transplantation canadiens : le centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal à Montréal (Québec), de même que le Vancouver General Hospital et le St Paul’s Hospital de Vancouver (Colombie-Britannique).Les donneurs vivants potentiels (DVP) et les candidats à la greffe (CG) ayant fait l’objet d’une évaluation pour un don ou une transplantation dans trois programmes de transplantation canadiens entre 2016 et 2018.Une méthode d’analyse statistique descriptive a servi à analyser les résultats du sondage, tandis que le contenu des interviews qualitatives a été analysé à l’aide de méthodes d’analyse thématique et de contenu.En tout, 116 DVP et 111 CG ont répondu au sondage, alors que 18 DVP et 17 CG supplémentaires ont été rencontrés pour des entrevues semi-dirigées. Parmi les répondants au sondage, 61,2 % des DVP et 76,6 % des CG ont indiqué qu’ils seraient prêts à participer au DCR en tant que membre d’une paire d’individus compatibles. La possibilité pour le CG d’obtenir un rein avec un meilleur match et les politiques assurant la priorisation du CG pour une transplantation répétée en cas d’échec précoce de la greffe ont augmenté la volonté de participer au DCR. Parmi les principales préoccupations exprimées au cours des entrevues figuraient notamment le désir de préserver le lien émotionnel du don dirigé, la peur d’une rupture dans la chaîne, la peur du renoncement du donneur, les possibles retards pour la transplantation et les déplacements supplémentaires associés à une participation au DCR.L’étude est limitée par le fait qu’elle n’a été réalisée que dans trois programmes canadiens de transplantation et que les entrevues et les sondages n’étaient menés qu’en français et en anglais. Les résultats pourraient par conséquent ne pas refléter les opinions des personnes issues des minorités ethniques ou ne résidant pas dans ces deux provinces.La majorité des DVP et des CG compatibles qui ont été interrogés étaient ouverts à participer au don croisé d’un rein. Il est possible d’augmenter la participation de paires d’individus compatibles au don croisé d’un rein. Pour ce faire, on doit assurer une par un meilleur match optimale et une greffe en temps opportun pour les candidats à la transplantation; il faut également offrir une politique de réciprocité assurant une greffe répétée en temps opportun aux receveurs compatibles dont l’allogreffe échoue après un DCR.

In 2014 the wait-time calculation for deceased donor kidney transplantation in the United States was changed from the date of first waitlisting to the date of first maintenance dialysis treatment with the aim of minimizing disparities in access to transplantation. This study examined the impact of this policy on access to transplantation, patient survival, and transplant outcomes among patients treated with maintenance dialysis for a prolonged duration before waitlisting.Retrospective cohort study.Patients identified in the US Renal Data System between 2008 and 2018 aged 18-70 years and in the 95th percentile of dialysis treatment duration (≥6.5 years) before waitlisting.Waitlisting for transplantation before versus after implementation of the policy.Time from date of waitlisting to deceased donor transplantation and death, and from date of transplantation to all cause graft loss.Univariate and multivariable time to event analyses.Patients waitlisted after the policy change had a higher likelihood of deceased donor transplantation (HR, 3.12 [95% CI, 2.90-3.37]) and lower risk of death (HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.63-0.87]). The risk of graft loss was lower in the post-kidney allocation system (KAS) cohort (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.55-0.80]). The proportion of adult patients treated with dialysis ≥6.5 years who were never waitlisted for transplantation remained high (73%) and did not decrease after the policy implementation.Cannot determine causality in this observational study.The policy change was associated with an increase in deceased donor transplantation and marked improvement in patient survival for patients waitlisted after long periods of dialysis treatment without decreasing the utility of available deceased donor kidney supply. The policy was not associated with increased waitlisting of this disadvantaged population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The optimal induction treatment in low–immune risk kidney transplant recipients is uncertain. We therefore investigated the use and outcomes of induction immunosuppression in a low-risk cohort of patients who were well matched with their donor at HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQB1 on the basis of serologic typing. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Our study was an observational study of first adult kidney-only transplant recipients in the United States recorded by the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network. RESULTS: Among 2976 recipients, 57% were treated with T cell–depleting antibodies, 28% were treated with an IL-2 receptor antagonist, and 15% were treated without induction. There was no difference in allograft survival, death-censored graft survival, or death with function between patients treated with an IL-2 receptor antagonist and no induction therapy. In multivariable models, patients treated with T cell–depleting therapy had a similar risk of graft loss from any cause, including death (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.98 to 1.45), compared with patients treated with an IL-2 receptor antagonist or no induction. The findings were consistent in subgroup analyses of Black recipients, patients grouped by calculated panel reactive antibody, and donor source. The incidence of acute rejection at 1 year was low (≤5%) and did not vary between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Use of induction therapy with T cell–depleting therapy or IL-2 receptor antagonists in first kidney transplant recipients who are well matched with their donor at the HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQB1 gene loci is not associated with improved post-transplant outcomes.

Objective There is currently no existing data examining the opinions of patients and families after treatment with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We sought to interview family members and patients to learn from their experiences and satisfaction with treatment. Methods We contacted family members and survivors for all cases treated with ECPR for refractory OHCA at St. Paul’s Hospital between January 2014 and July 2018. We performed semi-structured interviews with participants, specifically within the topics of: information sharing (including impressions of an ECPR informational pamphlet), prognostication, organ donation, and perceived value of ECPR. Due to low participant enrolment, we described all interviews in a narrative approach. Results Within the study period, there were 23 OHCAs treated with ECPR; two survivors and three family members agreed to participate. Participants were satisfied with the treatment provided, including information sharing and prognostication. There were mixed opinions about the best method of information-sharing (verbal vs written), as well as the timing of organ donation conversations. All participants believed ECPR for OHCA to be of high value. Conclusion Patient’s conveyed satisfaction with ECPR treatment, with mixed views on the best information sharing strategy. Further study is needed to define the optimal methods and timing for discussions of organ donation, especially for treatments of with a relatively low likelihood success.

The review provides an overview of deceased donor kidney allocation in Canada. Organ donation and transplant services are organized provincially in Canada. In the absence of a national system, provincial organ allocation policies aspire to balance considerations of utility and justice consistent with national best practice recommendations established in inter-provincial initiatives. As deceased donor kidneys are not routinely shared between regions, variations in provincial allocation policy are justifiable based on regional differences in donor supply and waiting times. The lack of a national organ donation and transplant system contributes to significant regional variation in access to deceased donor kidney transplant between provinces and uneven public reporting of system performance.

"Nonresponse" to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is recognized, but definition(s) applied in practice, treatment(s), and their consequences are little known.The authors sought to assess nonresponse in the prospective, international, ADVANCE CRT registry (Advance Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Registry).Each subject's response was assessed at 6 months post-implantation using site-specific definitions and compared with the independently derived clinical composite score (CCS). Treatment(s) and hospitalization(s) were tracked during the following 6 months.Of 1,524 subjects enrolled in 69 centers (68 ± 12 years of age, 32% female, ischemic disease 39%), 74.3% received CRT-defibrillator devices, using mainly quadripolar LV leads (75%) deployed laterally (78%). Indications for CRT were wider than past trials. Among 1,327 evaluable subjects, site-defined nonresponse was 20.0% (greater age, comorbidities, ischemic cardiomyopathy, non-left bundle branch block, and lower %CRT pacing vs. responders). Site definitions used mainly clinical criteria (echocardiography infrequently), and underestimated nonresponders by 35% compared with CCS (58% sensitivity vs. CCS). Overall, more site-defined nonresponders received treatment (55.9% vs. 38.3% of responders; p 0.001) using medication changes and heart failure education, but device programming less frequently. Intensification of in-clinic/remote evaluations and involvement of heart failure specialists remained minimal. Remarkably, 44% of site-defined nonresponders received no additional treatment. Frequency and duration of hospitalizations, and death, among site-defined nonresponders was significantly higher than responders.A high incidence of CRT nonresponders persists despite good patient selection and LV lead position, but site identification methods have modest sensitivity. Following diagnosis, nonresponders are often passively managed, without specialty care, with poor outcome. ADVANCE CRT exposes a vulnerable group of heart failure patients. (Advance Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Registry [ADVANCE CRT]; NCT01805154).

Highlights •CKD is associated with very high risk of CAD. CAD management is complicated in CKD patients, due to comorbid conditions and potential side effects during interventions. •There are few trials related to CAD with focus on CKD patients, particularly in those with advanced CKD. •Additional prospective studies focusing on diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of CAD are needed in CKD.

Recurrent glomerulonephritis (GN) is a common cause of graft loss after kidney transplantation. Steroids are critical to GN management before transplantation, but it is unclear if early steroid withdrawal after transplantation increases the risk of graft loss in patients with GN. Here USRDS data were used to examine the association of early steroid withdrawal with death censored graft loss and all cause graft loss in GN and non-GN adult, non-diabetic, non-sensitized first kidney-only transplant recipients from 1998-2012. A 2-stage propensity score-based matching algorithm was used to match early steroid withdrawal to steroid-maintained patients in the GN and non-GN groups. Multivariate Cox models using a robust variance estimator to account for matched pairs were used to examine the association of early steroid withdrawal with death censored or all cause graft loss in patients with (6388 patients each in early steroid withdrawal and steroid groups) or without GN (6590 each in early steroid withdrawal and steroid groups). Early steroid withdrawal was not associated with an increased risk of death censored or all cause graft loss in patients with or without GN. These findings were consistent across GN types and after accounting for transplant center. Thus, our findings support consideration of early steroid withdrawal in patients with GN at high risk of the adverse consequences of prolonged steroid exposure.

Background and objectives Patients who have failed a transplant are at increased risk of repeat transplant failure. We determined access to transplantation and transplant outcomes in patients with and without a history of transplant failure. Design, setting, participants, & measurements In this observational study of national data, the proportion of waitlisted patients and deceased donor transplant recipients with transplant failure was determined before and after the new kidney allocation system. Among patients initiating maintenance dialysis between May 1995 and December 2014, the likelihood of deceased donor transplantation was determined in patients with (n=27,459) and without (n=1,426,677) a history of transplant failure. Among transplant recipients, allograft survival, the duration of additional kidney replacement therapy required within 10 years of transplantation, and the association of transplantation versus dialysis with mortality was determined in patients with and without a history of transplant failure. Results The proportion of waitlist candidates (mean 14%) and transplant recipients (mean 12%) with transplant failure did not increase after the new kidney allocation system. Among patients initiating maintenance dialysis, transplant-failure patients had a higher likelihood of transplantation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.12 to 1.20; P Conclusions Transplant-failure patients initiating maintenance dialysis have a higher likelihood of transplantation than transplant-naive patients. Despite inferior death-censored transplant survival, transplantation was associated with a similar reduction in the risk of death compared with treatment with dialysis in patients with and without a prior history of transplant failure.

Aim Careful assessment of the potential donor-recipient relationship is recommended by guidelines to prevent undue coercion, and to ensure realistic expectations and genuine motivations. However, relationships are complex, nuanced and value-laden, and can be challenging to evaluate in living kidney donation. We aimed to describe the attitudes and approaches of transplant clinicians towards assessing the relationship between potential living kidney donors and their recipients. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 54 transplant clinicians (nephrologists, surgeons, coordinators, social workers, psychiatrists and psychologists) from 32 transplant centres across nine countries including Australia, United States, Canada and New Zealand. Transcripts were analyzed thematically. Results Four themes were identified: protecting against vulnerability and premature decisions (ensuring genuine motivation, uncovering precarious dynamics and pre-empting conflict, shared accountability, relying on specialty psychosocial expertise, trusting intimate bonds, tempering emotional impulsivity); safeguarding against coercion (discerning power imbalance, justified inquiry, awareness of impression management); minimizing potential threat to relationships (preserving the bond, giving equitable attention to donors and recipients, ensuring realistic expectations); and ambiguities in making judgments (adjudicating appropriateness and authenticity of relationships, questioning professional intervening, uncertainties in subjective and emotional assessments). Conclusions Clinicians felt ethically compelled to minimize the risk of undue coercion and to protect donors and recipients when evaluating the donor-recipient relationship. However, disentangling voluntariness and altruism from potential undisclosed pressures to enact societal and family duty, making decisions within this complex, multi-stakeholder context, and avoiding the imposition of undue paternalism and donor autonomy, were challenging. Multidisciplinary expertise and practical strategies for managing uncertainties are required.

Living kidney donors incur donation-related expenses, but how these expenses impact postdonation mental health is unknown.In this prospective cohort study, the association between mental health and donor-incurred expenses (both out-of-pocket costs and lost wages) was examined in 821 people who donated a kidney at one of the 12 transplant centers in Canada between 2009 and 2014. Mental health was measured by the RAND Short Form-36 Health Survey along with Beck Anxiety Inventory and Beck Depression Inventory.A total of 209 donors (25%) reported expenses of5500 Canadian dollars. Compared with donors who incurred lower expenses, those who incurred higher expenses demonstrated significantly worse mental health-related quality of life 3 months after donation, with a trend towards worse anxiety and depression, after controlling for predonation mental health-related quality of life and other risk factors for psychological distress. Between-group differences for donors with lower and higher expenses on these measures were no longer significant 12 months after donation.Living kidney donor transplant programs should ensure that adequate psychosocial support is available to all donors who need it, based on known and unknown risk factors. Efforts to minimize donor-incurred expenses and to better support the mental well-being of donors need to continue. Further research is needed to investigate the effect of donor reimbursement programs, which mitigate donor expenses, on postdonation mental health.

Background and objectives Panel reactive antibody informs the likelihood of finding an HLA-compatible donor for transplant candidates, but has historically been associated with acute rejection and allograft survival because testing methods could not exclude the presence of concomitant donor-specific antibodies. Despite new methods to exclude donor-specific antibodies, panel reactive antibody continues to be used to determine the choice of induction and maintenance immunosuppression. The study objective was to determine the clinical relevance of panel reactive antibody in the absence of donor-specific antibodies. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Retrospective observational study of kidney allograft survival among 4058 zero HLA-A–, B-, DR-, and DQB1-mismatched transplant recipients without antibodies to donor kidney antigens encoded by these HLA gene loci. Results Among 4058 first and repeat transplant recipients, patients with calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) 1%–97% were not at higher risk of transplant failure, compared with patients with cPRA of 0% (death censored graft loss: hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.41). Patients with cPRA ≥98% had a higher risk of graft loss from any cause including death (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 1.79) and death censored allograft failure (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.27 to 2.49). In stratified analyses, the higher risk of graft loss among patients with cPRA ≥98% was only observed among repeat, but not first, transplant recipients. In subgroup analysis, there was no association between cPRA and graft loss among living related transplant recipients. Conclusions Calculated panel reactive antibody is poorly associated with post-transplant immune reactivity to the allograft in the absence of donor-specific antibody. Podcast This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2021_01_25_CJN13640820_final.mp3

Kidneys from deceased donors who are hepatitis C virus (HCV) nucleic acid test positive are infrequently used for transplantation in HCV-negative patients due to concerns about disease transmission. With the development of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for HCV, there is now potential to use these kidneys in HCV-negative candidates. However, the high cost of DAAs poses a challenge to adoption of this strategy. We created a Markov model to examine the cost-effectiveness of using deceased donors infected with HCV for kidney transplantation in uninfected waitlist candidates. In the primary analysis, this strategy was cost saving and improved health outcomes compared to remaining on the waitlist for an additional 2 or more years to receive a HCV-negative transplant. The strategy was also cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $56 018 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) from the payer perspective, and $4647 per QALY from the societal perspective, compared to remaining on the waitlist for 1 additional year. The results were consistent in 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. We conclude that the use of kidneys from deceased donors with HCV infection is likely to lead to improved clinical outcomes at reduced cost for HCV-negative transplant candidates.

For a French translation of the executive summary, please see the Supplementary Material at DOI: 10.1017/cem.2017.429

The factors underlying the decline in living kidney donation in the United States since 2005 must be understood to inform strategies to ensure access to this option for future patients. Population-based estimates provide a better assessment of donation activity than do trends in the number of living donor transplants. Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the United States Census, we determined longitudinal changes in living kidney donation between 2005 and 2015, focusing on the effect of sex and income. We used multilevel Poisson models to adjust for differences in age, race, the incidence of ESRD, and geographic factors (including population density, urbanization, and daily commuting). During the study period, the unadjusted rate of donation was 30.1 and 19.3 per million population in women and men, respectively, and the adjusted incidence of donation was 44% higher in women (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.44; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.39 to 1.49). The incidence of donation was stable in women (IRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.07) but declined in men (IRR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.83). Income was associated with longitudinal changes in donation in both sexes, yet donation was stable in the highest two population income quartiles in women but only in the highest income quartile in men. In both sexes, living related donations declined, irrespective of income. In conclusion, living donation declined in men but remained stable in women between 2005 and 2015, and income appeared to have a greater effect on living donation in men.

To avoid loss to patients and society ( i.e. , scarcely available deceased donor kidneys), the transplant community adopted a uniquely vigilant screening program for coronary artery disease (CAD) as the standard of care ([1][1]). The standard of care involves screening on the basis of the presence

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors are an important source of kidneys for transplantation, but DCD donor transplantation is less common in the United States than in other countries. In this study of national data obtained between 2008 and 2015, recovery of DCD kidneys varied substantially among the country’s 58 donor service areas, and 25% of DCD kidneys were recovered in only four donor service areas. Overall, 20% of recovered DCD kidneys were discarded, varying from 3% to 33% among donor service areas. Compared with kidneys from neurologically brain dead (NBD) donors, DCD kidneys had a higher adjusted odds ratio of discard that varied from 1.25 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.16 to 1.34) in kidneys with total donor warm ischemic time (WIT) of 10–26 minutes to 2.67 (95% CI, 2.34 to 3.04) in kidneys with total donor WIT >48 minutes. Among the 12,831 DCD kidneys transplanted, kidneys with WIT≤48 minutes had survival similar to that of NBD kidneys. DCD kidneys with WIT>48 minutes had a higher risk of allograft failure (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.41), but this risk was limited to kidneys with cold ischemia time (CIT) >12 hours. We conclude that donor service area–level variation in the recovery and discard of DCD kidneys is large. Additional national data collection is needed to understand the potential to increase DCD donor transplantation in the United States. Strategies to minimize cold ischemic injury may safely allow increased use of DCD kidneys with WIT>48 minutes.