Preemptive kidney transplantation: experience in two centers

What are the benefits of preemptive versus non-preemptive kidney transplantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Opting for a preemptive kidney transplant (PKT) can help avoid costs and morbidity associated with dialysis. However, while multiple studies have shown clinical benefits of PKT, other studies have not demonstrated this, leading to controversy in the literature regarding the exact benefits of PKT. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of PKT versus non-preemptive kidney transplantation (nPKT) in adult patients. Multiple databases were searched up to May 4, 2022. Independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion and extracted relevant data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist. Eighty-seven studies including 859,715 adult kidney transplant patients were included the review. The risk of patient death (relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.74 [0.60-0.91]) was significantly lower in PKT versus nPKT patients for living donor (LD) transplants, whereas the risk of overall graft loss was significantly lower in PKT compared to nPKT patients for both LD (0.72 [0.62-0.83]) as well as deceased donor (DD) transplants (0.80 [0.69-0.92]). The evidence suggests that LD PKT patients have a lower risk of patient death and graft loss compared to nPKT patients, and DD PKT patients have a lower risk of graft loss than nPKT patients.

A Propensity Score-weighted Comparison of Outcomes Between Living and Standard Criteria Deceased Donor Kidney Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Consider a theoretical situation in which 2 patients with similar baseline characteristics receive a kidney transplant on the same day: 1 from a standard criteria deceased donor, the other from a living donor. Which kidney transplant will last longer?

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked administrative healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada, from January 1, 2005, to March 31, 2014, to evaluate several posttransplant outcomes in individuals who received a kidney transplant from a standard criteria deceased donor (n = 1523) or from a living donor (n = 1373). We used PS weighting using overlap weights, a novel weighting method that emphasizes the population of recipients with the most overlap in baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Compared with recipients of a living donor, the rate of all-cause graft failure was not statistically higher for recipients of a standard criteria deceased donor (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-1.6). Recipients of a standard criteria deceased donor, compared with recipients of a living donor had a higher rate of delayed graft function (23.6% versus 18.7%; odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.6) and a longer length of stay for the kidney transplant surgery (mean difference, 1.7 d; 95% CI, 0.5-3.0).

CONCLUSIONS

After accounting for many important donor and recipient factors, we failed to observe a large difference in the risk of all-cause graft failure for recipients of a standard criteria deceased versus living donor. Some estimates were imprecise, which meant we could not rule out the presence of smaller clinically important effects.

Preemptive Kidney Transplantation: The Initial Experience of a Single Center

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the best treatment method for end-stage renal disease. Outcomes of the preemptive kidney transplantation are better than non-preemptive kidney transplantation. Preemptive kidney transplantation is performed as a small percentage of kidney transplantations worldwide. We performed 15 preemptive kidney transplantations from living donors between November 2010 and April 2014. We present our experiences and outcomes for these 15 preemptive kidney transplantations.

METHODS

We performed 110 kidney transplantations between November 2010 and April 2014. Fifteen of the kidney transplantations were performed from living related donors to preemptive recipients. These 15 preemptive recipients and their donors' data were collected and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age of recipients and donors was 37.2 years (range, 4-60) and 50.6 years (range, 28-64), respectively. The male-female ratios were 10:5 in the recipients and 8:7 in the donors. Nine left kidneys and 6 right kidneys were recovered. Nine kidneys had a single artery; the other 6 kidneys had 2 renal arteries. The mean warm ischemic time was 219.5 seconds (range, 90-480). The mean hospitalization times were 5.9 days (range, 4-10) and 4.9 days (range, 3-9) for the recipients and the donors, respectively. The mean follow-up time was 20.3 months (range, 0.5-37) for recipients. Graft survival was 100% in this period. BK virus nephropathy occurred in only 1 pediatric recipient. One patient had a recurrent disease that was the cause of the renal failure. They graft functions were stable. No kidney was lost from rejection, technical causes, infection, or recurrent disease. The donors live their lives with no problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive kidney transplantation is a better therapeutic option than is non-preemptive kidney transplantation for patients with chronic renal failure. Kidney transplantation should be performed if possible before beginning dialysis for these patients.

Hospital-based inpatient resource utilization associated with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease in the US

OBJECTIVE

Polycystic kidney disease (PKD) is a clinically and genetically heterogeneous class of genetic disorders characterized by development of renal cysts leading to renal failure and end stage renal disease (ESRD). Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) accounts for the majority of PKD cases and is the predominant monogenic cause of ESRD. Limited information on patient characteristics and healthcare resource utilization is available in this population. This study assessed hospital-based inpatient utilization of patients with ADPKD in the US to help further understand the disease, which may lead to treatments that delay progression and reduce healthcare resource utilization.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using MedAssets Health System Data to investigate inpatient resource utilization for a total of 1876 patients hospitalized with ADPKD or chronic kidney disease (CKD). Patient characteristics and inpatient resource utilization were compared between hospitalized patients with ADPKD and CKD, including demographic and clinical characteristics, overall health, rates of complications and surgical interventions, and average length of hospital and intensive care unit stay.

RESULTS

Compared with patients with CKD, patients with ADPKD were more likely to have commercial insurance as their primary payer (36.1 vs 17.8%) and were significantly younger (mean age 57.9 vs 69.5 years) and generally healthier (Charlson Comorbidity Score of 2.0 vs 3.3). Patients with ADPKD also had a substantially shorter average length of hospital stay (6.3 vs 10.3 days). However, patients with ADPKD experienced more kidney-related complications and a higher surgical procedure rate (mainly for transplant and complete nephrectomy).

CONCLUSIONS

Although patients with ADPKD were generally healthier than patients with CKD, specific kidney function complications were more frequent. Patients with ADPKD had a higher rate of major kidney procedures, which may contribute to the high burden of ADPKD-related hospital-based inpatient resource utilization.

Patient and graft survival after pre-emptive versus non-pre-emptive kidney transplantation: a single-center experience from Turkey

OBJECTIVE

We sought to report the graft and patients survival of pre-emptive and non-pre-emptive kidney transplantations performed in our center.

METHODS

The 859 subjects showed a mean age of 36.1 years and included 64.6%; males, who received grafts from living (n = 665) or deceased (n = 194) donors between January 2008 and June 2011. We reviewed their medical records retrospectively, to separately pre-emptive versus non-pre-emptive recipients for year transplant outcomes.

RESULTS

Among the 859 patients, 153 (17.8%) underwent pre-emptive and 706 (82.2%), non-pre-emptive kidney transplantations. The rate of living donors was higher in the pre-emptive group (97.4% vs 73%, respectively). The 1-year graft survivals were 99.3% and 95.8% in pre-emptive and non-pre-emptive transplantation groups, respectively (P > .05). There was no significant difference between groups with respect to patient survival at 1 year (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, graft and patient survival rates between pre-emptive and non-pre-emptive kidney transplantation cases were comparable at 1 year. Pre-emptive kidney transplantation, which eliminates hemodialysis costs and complications, should be preferred as the optimal renal replacement therapy for end-stage renal disease patients.