Results of a Living Donor Kidney Promotion Program

Willingness for Solid-Organ Donation in Saudi Arabia: A Skyscape View

OBJECTIVES

The number of patients with organ failure in Saudi Arabia is increasing annually, and transplantation offers the best outcome for these patients. However, the number of donors does not meet these needs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire was distributed to assess the behavior of participants in Saudi Arabia toward different types of organ donation. The questionnaire examined general willingness to donate, deceased donation, living donation, and refusal to donate, as well as paired-exchange donation and next-of-kin consenting.

RESULTS

Of the 1099 participants, most were men (64%) and middle-aged (46%, 31-45 years old), with 36% of participants currently willing to donate or already registered as donors. Although 592 participants (54%) were not yet willing to donate, they believed they could consider making donations in specific circumstances (eg, when a relative is in need). In all circumstances, 10% (n = 108) of the participants refused to donate. With regard to deceased donation, 74% of participants accepted this, but only 29% (n = 322) agreed to consent for donation as next of kin. Of 1099 participants, 143 (13%) were willing to accept altruistic donation. Paired-exchange donation was widely accepted in a cohort study (n = 725, 65%), as opposed to list exchange (n = 540, 49%). Religious beliefs were the main reason behind the refusal of donation in the study cohort (n = 37, 37%). Female participants were less likely to refuse organ donation (odds ratio: 0.562; 95% CI, 0.407-0.775; P < .001), whereas older participants (> 60 years) were more likely to refuse organ donation (odds ratio: 5.457; 95% CI, 1.894-15.722; P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

This study described the willingness of the Saudi population to donate organs in general and under special conditions, such as deceased donation, living-unrelated donation, altruistic donation, paired-exchange donation, list exchange donation, and next-of-kin consent.

Efficacy of Educational Interventions in Improving Measures of Living-donor Kidney Transplantation Activity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To address patient-level barriers to living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), centers have implemented educational interventions. Recently, some have highlighted several gaps in knowledge and lack of evidence of efficacy of these interventions. No review has synthesized the available data.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted to increase measures of LDKT. Outcomes of interest were LDKT rates, donor evaluation, donor contact/inquiry, total transplantation rates, and change in knowledge scores and pursuit behaviors. A literature search was conducted across 7 databases from inception until 2017. Educational interventions were a decision/teaching aid alone or with personalized sessions. Comparator was another intervention or nonspecific education. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to pool risk ratios (RRs) across studies.

RESULTS

Of the 1813 references, 15 met the inclusion criteria; 9 were randomized control trials. When compared with nonspecific education, interventions increased LDKT rates (RR = 2.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-4.35), donor evaluation (RR = 3.82; 95% CI, 1.91-7.64), and donor inquiry/contact (RR = 2.41; 95% CI, 1.53-3.80), but not total transplants (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.96-1.61). Significant increased mean knowledge scores postintervention was noted, and most showed favorable trends in pursuit behaviors. Quality across the studies was mixed and sometimes difficult to assess. The biggest limitations were small sample size, selection bias, and short follow-ups.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational interventions improve measures of LDKT activity; however, current literature is heterogeneous and at risk of selection bias. Prospective studies with diverse patient populations, longer follow-ups, and robust outcomes are needed to inform clinical practice.

Supplementing living kidney transplantees' medical records with donor- and recipient-narratives

Norway provides total social welfare coverage for organ transplantations, including free immunosuppressive medication and prepaid life-long follow up for both recipients and donors. Despite these benefits the proportion of living kidney donors (LKD) has in recent years declined from around 40% (2011) of all kidney transplantations to 24% (2016). This study suggests harnessing patient- and donor-narratives as a tool for addressing the current fall in donation rates. The hospital records of 18 recipient/donor dyads were compared with patient and donor accounts elicited in semi-structured interviews. Narratives afford a pertinent supplement to the primarily biomedical and technical information stored in medical records. Even in condensed form, the messages embedded in narratives contribute to a 'thicker' understanding of the complexity of living kidney donation (LKD)-decisions. Narratives represent a source of education for referring-nephrologists wishing to deepen their evaluation skills and avoid making decisions based on insufficient insight into patients' and potential donors' values and life-situation. Recipients' and donors' unedited accounts of their motivations, worries, doubts and expectations afford a revealing and edifying supplement to the primarily biomedical and technical information stored in medical records. In narratives, the predicaments and dilemmas surrounding LKD become visible and debatable and can serve as support for future donors, recipients and the nephrologists responsible for evaluation-conclusions. Generating narratives raises a number of practical, epistemic and normative challenges.

Living Donor in Renal Transplantation: Minimizing Risks

In recent years, the broadening of indications for renal transplantation, together with the progressive reduction of donations following brain stem death, has led to living donation being considered in increasing numbers of cases for renal transplantation. To investigate this further, it is necessary to assess the impact it has on the postoperative outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU). Our group conducted a retrospective, observational, single-center study from 2013 to 2016 to evaluate differences in outcomes between living and cadaveric kidney donation both during ICU admission and total hospitalization. We compared differences in characteristics between living and deceased graft recipients including demographics, comorbidities, analytical data, radioisotope imaging test results, complications, ICU and hospital ward length of stay, and mortality. In all, 387 patients were eligible for analysis, and 13% received living donor grafts. Our results demonstrate that this group had significantly fewer complications, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced mortality in comparison with recipients of cadaveric donor grafts. The better postoperative outcomes from living donor grafts could result from careful selection of the donor and less inflammatory injury, minimizing risk in the postoperative period.

A Scoping Review for Strategies to Increase Living Kidney Donation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The literature on strategies to increase the number of potential living kidney donors is extensive and has yet to be characterized. Scoping reviews are a novel methodology for systematically assessing a wide breadth of a given body of literature and may be done before conducting a more targeted systematic review.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We performed a scoping review and summarized the evidence for existing strategies to increase living kidney donation.

RESULTS

Our review identified seven studies that tested interventions using rigorous methods (i.e., randomized, controlled trials) and outcome measures, all of which focused on using education targeted at potential recipients to increase living donation. Of these, two studies that targeted the potential recipients' close social network reported statistically significant results. Other interventions were identified, but their effect was assessed through quasiexperimental or observational study designs.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified an important gap in the literature for evidence-based strategies to increase living kidney donation. From the limited data available, strategies directed at potential recipients and their social networks are the most promising. These results can inform transplant programs that are considering strategies to increase living kidney donation and highlight the need for conduct of high-quality study to increase living donation.

An international comparison of deceased and living organ donation/transplant rates in opt-in and opt-out systems: a panel study

BACKGROUND

Policy decisions about opt-in and opt-out consent for organ donation are based on limited evidence. To fill this gap we investigated the difference between deceased and living organ donation rates in opt-in and opt-out consent systems across a 13 year period. We controlled for extensive covariates and estimated the causal effect of consent with instrumental variables analysis.

METHOD

This panel study used secondary data analysis to compare organ donor and transplant rates in 48 countries that had either opt-in or opt-out consent. Organ donation data were obtained over a 13-year period between 2000 and 2012. The main outcome measures were the number of donors, number of transplants per organ and total number (deceased plus living) of kidneys and livers transplanted. The role of consent on donor and transplant rates was assessed using multilevel modeling and the causal effect estimated with instrumental variables analysis.

RESULTS

Deceased donor rates (per-million population) were higher in opt-out (M = 14.24) than opt-in consent countries (M = 9.98; Β = -4.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -8.08, -0.45, P = .029). However, the number of living donors was higher in opt-in (M = 9.36) than opt-out countries (M = 5.49; B = 3.86, 95% CI = 1.16, 6.56, P = .006). Importantly, the total number of kidneys transplanted (deceased plus living) was higher in opt-out (M = 28.32) than opt-in countries (M = 22.43; B = -5.89, 95% CI = -11.60, -0.17, P = .044). Similarly, the total number of livers transplanted was higher in opt-out (M = 11.26) than opt-in countries (M = 7.53; B = -3.73, 95% CI = -7.47, 0.01, P = .051). Instrumental variables analysis suggested that the effect of opt-in versus opt-out consent on the difference between deceased and living donor rates is causal.

CONCLUSIONS

While the number of deceased donors is higher than the number of living donors, opt-out consent leads to a relative increase in the total number of livers and kidneys transplanted.

Kidney transplantation from living donors genetically related or unrelated to the recipients: a single-center analysis

Living-donor programs have gradually become an attractive strategy to expand the donor pool for kidney transplantation (KT). Grafts from living-related donors (LRD) display superior function and longer survival than those obtained from cadaveric sources. Recent reports have shown that outcomes from living-unrelated donors (LUD) are not worse than those from LRD. In this study, we evaluated 135 procedures using living donors performed in our center between 1987 and 2010 (LRD: n = 111; LUD: n = 24). Among the LRD, most donors were mothers (n = 61; 54.95%), fathers (n = 25; 22.52%), and sisters (n = 16; 14.41%). The LUD included wives (n = 17; 70.83%) and husbands (n = 7; 29.17%). The mean recipient ages for LRD versus LUD were 26.94 ± 13.51 and 50.04 ± 8.86 years, respectively (P < .0001). The recipient female/male distribution was 33/78 (29.73%/70.27%) for the LRD versus 6/18 (25%/75%) for the LUD group (P = .643). The donor age was 48.79 ± 9 years in LRD and 49.25 ± 8.44 years in LUD (P = .696). The donor female/male distribution was 72/39 (64.86%/35.16%) in LRD and 17/7 (70.83%/29.17%) in LUD (P = .576). The follow up was 123.79 ± 87.87 months (range, 0.91-279.93). Overall patient and graft survivals were 94.1% and 67.6%, respectively. There was no significant difference in patient survival after stratifying for donor type (LRD: 93.9%; LUD: 95.8%; P = .961) or in graft survival after stratifying for donor type (LRD: 63.8%; LUD: 87.8%; P = .124). Entering donor type as an independent variable in a univariate Cox regression, we observed no significance for either recipient (P = .961) or graft survival (P = .142). The results of this study suggest that LUD utilization should be encouraged in KT programs.

Living organ donation, a therapeutic possibility, is still poorly used in Italy: a national analysis

Validity of living donor kidney transplantation is universally accepted. In contrast, after enthusiastic adoption in the 1990s, living donor liver transplantation has decreased in recent years. The aim of the present study was to evaluate retrospectively the current use of this form of donation in Italy by comparing liver and kidney cadaveric and living donations from 2002 to 2010. The number of liver transplantations from living donors has decreased from 34 in 2002 (3.9% of total) to 13 in 2010 (1.3% of total). In contrast, kidney transplantation from living donors increased from 126 (7.9% of total) to 186 (11% of total). We observed that living donations for kidney transplantation are still underused, especially with unrelated donors. Living donor liver transplantation has decreased in recent years; this procedure should be reserved to centers with particular expertise. It would be appropriate to implement programs to increase the attention of health professionals and the general population and to integrate living donations into programs of deceased organ donation.