Clinical outcome of living kidney donation

Perioperative morbidity and long-term outcome of unilateral nephrectomy in feline kidney donors: 141 cases (1998-2013)

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the outcome associated with unilateral nephrectomy in feline kidney donors. DESIGN Retrospective case series. ANIMALS 141 cats. PROCEDURES Medical records of cats that underwent nephrectomy for renal donation were reviewed for information on signalment, date of renal donation, results of blood and urine analyses, infectious disease history, anesthetic protocols, intra- and postoperative complications, and postoperative analgesic protocols. Long-term follow-up data were obtained via client telephone interview and review of referring veterinarian medical records. RESULTS All donors were healthy young adult cats with a median age of 1.5 years (range, 0.8 to 2 years). No cats died or were euthanized during the perioperative period. Intraoperative complications occurred in 2 cats, and postoperative complications occurred in 17. Median time from nephrectomy to hospital discharge was 3.6 days (range, 2 to 8 days). Long-term follow-up information was available for 99 cats, with a median interval between nephrectomy and follow-up of 10 years (range, 0.25 to 15 years). Six cats had a history of urinary tract disease including stable chronic kidney disease (n = 3), acute kidney injury (2), and cystitis (1). Nine cats were dead at follow-up; death was attributed to chronic renal failure in 2 and acute ureteral obstruction in 4. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Feline donor nephrectomy had an acceptably low perioperative morbidity in this series. Most cats (84%) for which follow-up information was available had no associated long-term effects. However, a small subset (7%) developed renal insufficiency or died of urinary tract disease.

Renal agenesis and unilateral nephrectomy: what are the risks of living with a single kidney?

The long-term outlook for patients with unilateral renal agenesis or following unilateral nephrectomy in childhood is controversial. Animal studies suggest that the resultant compensatory increase in glomerular filtration might lead to progressive damage to the remaining renal tissue and may generate hypertension. Human studies addressing these concerns are limited in number and are difficult to interpret because they are small, retrospective, or cross sectional with significant variations in duration and completeness of follow-up. The published studies suggest that renal function remains stable for several decades in the majority of subjects. The clinical significance of mild-grade proteinuria and hypertension seen in some patients is unknown. Longitudinal studies are needed to understand the long-term effect and significance of the several pathophysiological changes observed in the solitary kidney.

Religious aspects of organ transplantation

No religion formally forbid donation or receipt of organs or is against transplantation from living or deceased donors. Only some orthodox jews may have religious objections to "opting in." However, transplantation from deceased donors may be discouraged by Native Americans, Roma Gypsies, Confucians, Shintoists, and some Orthodox rabbis. Some South Asia Muslim ulemas (scholars) and muftis (jurists) oppose donation from human living and deceased donors because the human body is an "amanat" (trusteeship) from God and must not be desecrated following death, but they encourage xenotransplantation research. No religion formally obliges one to donate or refuse organs. No religion formally obliges one to consider cadaveric organs "a societal resource" or considers organ donation "a religious duty" (except some rabbis and isolated Muslim and Christian scholars) No religion has a formal position on "bonus points," which is priority on the waiting list. Living organ donation is strongly encouraged only between jesus christians (15 of 28 jesus christians worldwide have donated a kidney). No religion forbid this practice. Directed organ donation to people of the same religion has been proposed only by some Orthodox Jews and some Islamic Ulemas/Muftis. Only some Muslim Ulemas/Muftis and some Asian religions may prefer living donation over cadaveric donation. No religion prefers cadaveric over living donation. No religion formally forbid non-heart-beating donors (nhbd) cadaveric donation or cross-over donation. Due to the sacrad of human life, the Catholic Church is against donation from anencephalic donors or after active euthanasia. No religion formally forbid xenotransplantation. Addressing the participants of the First International Congress of the Society for Organ Sharing in 1991, Pope John Paul II said "There are many questions of an ethical, legal and social nature which need to be more deeply investigated. There are even shameful abuses which call for determined action on the part of medical association and donor societies, and especially of competent legislative bodies" and later on "In effect, the human body is always a personal body, the body of a person. The body cannot be treated as a merely physical or biological entity, nor can its organs and tissues ever be used as item for sale or exchange". Addressing the participants at the XVIII International Congress of the Transplantation Society in 2000, Pope John Paul II said "Accordingly, any procedure which tends to commercialize human organs or to consider them as items of exchange or trade must be considered morally unacceptable, because to use the body as an object is to violate the dignity of the human person" and later on added "The criteria for assigning donated organs should in no way be discriminatory (i.e. based on age, sex, race, religion, social standing, etc.) or utilitarian (i.e. based on work capacity, social usefulness, etc.)." To conclude, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church Compendium signed by Pope Benedict XVI on june 28, 2005, 476. Are allowed transplantation and organ donation, before and after death? Organ transplantation is morally acceptable with the consent of the donor and without excessive risks for him/her. For the noble act of organ donation after death, the real death of the donor must be fully ascertained.

Follow-up interviews of 12 living kidney donors one yr after open donor nephrectomy

Very few studies have prospectively followed living kidney donors the first year after donor surgery. In 2003, we in-depth interviewed living kidney donors one wk after donation to explore their immediate experiences of going through nephrectomy. The aim of the current investigation was to explore experiences regarding physical and psychosocial health during the first year after donor surgery. Twelve donors going through open donor nephrectomy were interviewed by telephone at one yr after donation. The analysis was carried out with an empirical phenomenological method. All participants expressed an overall positive experience about being a donor a year after transplantation. However, several participants experienced physical disincentives longer than expected post-donation. Emotional distress, such as mild depression and a feeling of loss, was also part of the donor experiences. Donors experiencing unsuccessful recipient outcome reported severe physical and mental reactions. This study provides insights on the physical and mental cost to living kidney donation. Awareness of how donors may experience their situations can help transplantation professionals in their efforts to understand and provide support.

Ethical aspects of renal transplantation from living donors

Kidney transplantation from living donors is widely performed all over the world. Living nephrectomy for transplantation has no direct advantages for the donor other than increased self-esteem, but it at least remains an extremely safe procedure, with a worldwide overall mortality of 0.03%. This theoretical risk for the donor seems to be justified by the socioeconomic advantages and increased quality of life of the recipient, especially in selected cases, such as pediatric patients, when living donor kidney transplantation can be performed in a preuremic phase, avoiding the psychological and physical stress of dialysis, which in children is not well tolerated and cannot prevent retarded growth. According to the Ethical Council of the Transplantation Society, commercialism must be effectively prevented, not only for ethical but also medical reasons. The risks are too high, not only for the donors, but also for the recipients, as a consequence of poor donor screening and evaluation with consequent transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or other infective agents, as well as of inappropriate medical and surgical management of donors and also recipients, who are often discharged too early. Most public or private insurance companies consider kidney donation a safe procedure without long-term impairment and therefore do not increase the premium, whereas recipient insurance of course should cover hospital fees for the donors. "Rewarded gifting" or other financial incentives to compensate for the inconvenience and loss of income related to the donation are not advisable, at least in our opinion. Our Center does not perform anonymous living organ donation or "cross-over" transplantation.

Corporeal Weight Gain and Metabolic Syndrome in Living Kidney Donors After Nephrectomy

The number of healthy individuals undergoing unilateral nephrectomy for kidney donation is increasing world-wide. Obesity and nephron reduction could promote a decline in the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and an increase in urinary protein excretion in these individuals. Metabolic Syndrome (MS) is also a risk factor for these patients. This study evaluated GFR, urinary protein excretion, and the possibility of one or more components of MS in this group.

METHODS

Twenty live kidney donors were evaluated at an average of 10 years after nephrectomy. We obtained measurements of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and waist circumference. We estimated renal function, urinary protein excretion, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and fasting plasma glucose levels. The GFR was calculated through the estimated creatinine clearance using the Cokcroft-Gault equation (eGFR).

RESULTS

Of the 20 participants, four developed MS. The patients with a greater number of MS components showed a greater eGFR. Only seven donors (35%) showed a normal blood pressure. Serum creatinine level changes were observed in three patients, and in five there was increased urinary protein excretion.

CONCLUSION

This study showed the possibility that corporeal weight gain and MS may be additional overburdens on the GFR of the remaining kidney.

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

BACKGROUND

Several large series of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) have been published, largely focusing on immediate results and short-term complications. The aim of this study was to examine the results of LDN and collect medium-term and long-term donor followup.

METHODS

We examined the results of two surgeons who performed 500 consecutive LDNs from 1996 to 2005. Prospective databases were reviewed for both donors and recipients to record demographics, medical history, intraoperative events, and complications. Patients were followed between 1 month and 9 years after surgery to assess for delayed complications, especially hypertension, renal insufficiency, incisional hernia, bowel obstruction, and chronic pain.

RESULTS

Left kidneys were procured in 86.2% of cases. Mean operative time was 3.5 h, and warm ischemia time averaged 3.4 min. Hand-assistance was used in 13.8%, and conversion rate was 1.8%. Intraoperative complication rate was 5.8% and was predominantly bleeding (93.1%). Most (86.2%) of the operative complications occurred during the initial 150 cases of a surgeon, compared with 10.3% in the subsequent 150 cases (p = 0.003). Operative time decreased by 87 min after the initial 150 cases (p < 0.001). Immediate graft survival was 97.5%. Delayed graft function occurred in 3.0% of recipients, and acute tubular necrosis occurred in 7.0%. Thirty-day donor complication rate was 9.8%. Mean donor creatinine was 1.24 on the first postoperative day, 1.27 at 2 weeks, and 1.24 at 1 year. At a mean followup of 32.8 months, long-term donor complications consisted of 11 cases of hypertension, 9 cases of prolonged pain or paresthesia, 2 incisional hernias, 1 small bowel obstruction requiring laparoscopic lysis of adhesions, and 1 hydrocele requiring repair.

CONCLUSIONS

LDN can be performed with acceptable immediate morbidity and excellent graft function. Operative time and complications decreased significantly after a surgeon performed 150 cases. Long-term complications were uncommon but included a likely underestimated incidence of hypertension.

Ethical Considerations on Kidney Transplantation From Living Donors

Kidney transplantation from living donors is widely performed all over the world. Living nephrectomy for transplantation has no direct advantage for the donor other than increased self-esteem, but at least remains an extremely safe procedure, with a worldwide overall mortality rate of 0.03%. This theoretical risk to the donor seems to be justified by the socioeconomic advantages and increased quality of life of the recipient, especially in selected cases, such as pediatric patients, when living donor kidney transplantation can be performed in a preuremic phase, avoiding the psychological and physical stress of dialysis, which in children is not well tolerated and cannot prevent retarded growth. According to the Ethical Council of the Transplantation Society, commercialism must be prevented, not only for ethical but also medical reasons. The risks are too high not only for the donors, but also for the recipients, as a consequence of poor donor screening and evaluation with consequent transmission of human immunodeficiency virus or other infectious agents, as well as inappropriate medical and surgical management of donors and also of recipients, who are often discharged too early. Most public or private insurance companies are considering kidney donation a safe procedure without long-term impairment and, therefore, do not increase the premium, whereas recipient insurance of course should cover hospital fees for the donors. "Rewarded gifting" or other financial incentives to compensate for the inconvenience and loss of income related to the donation are not advisable, at least in our opinion. Our center does not perform anonymous living organ donation or "cross-over" transplantation.