Shifting paradigms in eligibility criteria for live kidney donation: a systematic review

Prediction models for postoperative renal function after living donor nephrectomy: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Living-donor nephrectomy (LDN) is the most valuable source of organs for kidney transplantation worldwide. The current preoperative evaluation of a potential living donor candidate does not take into account formal estimation of postoperative renal function decline after surgery using validated prediction models. The aim of this study was to summarize the available models to predict the mid- to long-term renal function following LDN, aiming to support both clinicians and patients during the decision-making process.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review of the English-language literature was conducted following the principles highlighted by the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines and following the PRISMA 2020 recommendations. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO on December 10, 2022 (registration ID: CRD42022380198). In the qualitative analysis we selected the models including only preoperative variables.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

After screening and eligibility assessment, six models from six studies met the inclusion criteria. All of them relied on retrospective patient cohorts. According to PROBAST, all studies were evaluated as high risk of bias. The models included different combinations of variables (ranging between two to four), including donor-/kidney-related factors, and preoperative laboratory tests. Donor age was the variable more often included in the models (83%), followed by history of hypertension (17%), Body Mass Index (33%), renal volume adjusted by body weight (33%) and body surface area (33%). There was significant heterogeneity in the model building strategy, the main outcome measures and the model's performance metrics. Three models were externally validated.

CONCLUSIONS

Few models using preoperative variables have been developed and externally validated to predict renal function after LDN. As such, the evidence is premature to recommend their use in routine clinical practice. Future research should be focused on the development and validation of user-friendly, robust prediction models, relying on granular large multicenter datasets, to support clinicians and patients during the decision-making process.

Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Kidney Donors at First Check: A Single-Center Experience

OBJECTIVES

Kidney transplant is the best treatment for patients with end-stage kidney disease. In many regions of the world, including the Middle East, most kidney transplants are from living donors. In contrast to recipients, data for living donors remain scarce. Here, we describe living donor baseline characteristics at first hospital check at a single center in Baghdad, Iraq.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected and analyzed demographic, laboratory, imaging, and histocompatibility data from donor records at the Nephrology and Renal Transplantation Center, Medical City-Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq, from July 2022 to September 2022.

RESULTS

We included 124 kidney donors (56.4% male) who donated their kidneys 1 to 3 years previous to our study, with a mean age of 34.84 ± 10.04 years and mean body mass index (weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 27.11 ± 2.12. Most donors donated their kidneys to a firstdegree relative (69.2%); blood group O was the most prevalent (47.5%). More than half of the donors were unemployed. Histocompatibility testing showed that 40% of the donors had >3 human leukocyte antigen mismatches with their recipients, and 30% of the recipients were high-risk sensitized patients with a calculated panel reactive antibody >50%. Regarding the virus status, 68.5% of the donors tested positive for cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin G, 8% of the transplants were high-risk cytomegalovirus status, and 43.5% tested positive for Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin G. Renal imaging showed that 75.8% of donors had a single artery and 24.1% had a double artery (26.6% double left, 40% double right, and 33.3% both).

CONCLUSIONS

For living transplant procedures at a single center in Iraq, most were from related donors. Most donors are unemployed, which mandates future health and social support. High immunological and viral risks must not be ignored in a single center with living related donors.

Choosing the larger kidney on CT volumetry: a study on the early post-donation kidney function of living donors

BACKGROUND

Selecting the smaller kidney for donation has been advocated if there is a size difference of > 10% between the 2 kidneys but has never been prospectively evaluated. With increase in donor nephrectomies, it is important to evaluate this to minimize loss of renal function to donors.

METHODS

75 consecutive donor nephrectomy patients were included in our longitudinal study. The Split Renal Volume (SRV) of bilateral kidneys were measured using contrasted computer tomography scans and patients segregated into 2 groups depending on donated kidney having more (Group 1) or less than (Group 2) 52.5% of SRV.

RESULTS

Patients in Group 1 (n = 19) and 2 (n = 56) were of similar age (43.8 vs. 48.3), BMI (22.4 vs. 25.2), sex (57.9 vs. 55.4% women), respectively. Although total kidney volumes were similar in both groups, Group 1 had significantly smaller right kidney volumes (120.4 ± 24.9 vs. 142.7 ± 28.4 mls, p = 0.003). EGFR pre-operatively (116.3 ± 20.8 vs. 106.3 ± 23.8 mL/min/1.73 m2) and at 6-months (65.7 ± 13.3 vs. 66.9 ± 15.5 mL/min/1.73 m2) were not different between groups. However, patients in Group 1 had significantly greater absolute (50.6 ± 14.9 vs. 39.5 ± 14.7 mL/min/1.73 m2) and relative decline (43.0 ± 8.6 vs. 36.3 ± 10.6%) in eGFR at 6 months (p = 0.06, 0.009).

CONCLUSION

With a SRV difference of 5% between the 2 sides, removal of the larger kidney for living kidney donation resulted in greater early decline of renal function than kidney donors whose larger or equivalent kidney is preserved.

Respecting living kidney donor autonomy: an argument for liberalising living kidney donor acceptance criteria

Doctors routinely refuse donation offers from prospective living kidney donors with certain comorbidities such as diabetes or obesity out of concern for donor wellbeing. This refusal occurs despite the ongoing shortage of kidney transplants and the superior performance of living donor kidney transplants compared to those from deceased donors. In this paper, we argue that this paternalistic refusal by doctors is unjustified and that, within limits, there should be greater acceptance of such donations. We begin by describing possible weak and strong paternalistic justifications of current conservative donor acceptance guidelines and practices. We then justify our position by outlining the frequently under-recognised benefits and the routinely overestimated harms of such donation, before discussing the need to respect the autonomy of willing donors with certain comorbidities. Finally, we respond to a number of possible objections to our proposal for more liberal kidney donor acceptance criteria. We use the situation in Australia as our case study, but our argument is applicable to comparable situations around the world.

Pregnancy after living kidney donation, a systematic review of the available evidence, and a review of the current guidance

Understanding and communicating the risk of pregnancy complications post-living kidney donation is imperative as the majority of living kidney donors (LKD) are women of childbearing age. We aimed to identify all original research articles examining complications in post-donation pregnancies and compared the quality and consistency of related guidelines. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, society webpages, and guideline registries for English-language publications published up until December 18, 2020. Ninety-three articles were screened from which 16 studies were identified, with a total of 1399 post-donation pregnancies. The outcome of interest, post-donation pregnancy complications, was not calculable, and only a narrative synthesis of the evidence was possible. The absolute risk of pre-eclampsia increased from ~1%-3% pre-donation (lower than the general population) to ~4%-10% post-donation (comparable to the general population). The risks of adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes were no different between post-donation and pre-donation pregnancies. Guidelines and consensus statements were consistent in stating the need to inform LKDs of their post-donation pregnancy risk, however, the depth and scope of this guidance were variable. While the absolute risk of pregnancy complications remains low post-donation, a concerted effort is required to better identify and individualize risk in these women, such that consent to donation is truly informed.

The Impact of Cold Ischaemia Time on Outcomes of Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Studies have been carried out to investigate the effect of a prolonged cold ischaemia time (CIT) on the outcomes of living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). There is no clear consensus in the literature about the effects of CIT on LDKT outcomes, and therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide evidence on this subject. Searches were performed in five databases up to 12 July 2021. Articles comparing different CIT in LDKT describing delayed graft function (DGF), graft and patient survival, and acute rejection were considered for inclusion. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019131438. In total, 1452 articles were found, of which eight were finally eligible, including a total of 164,179 patients. Meta-analyses showed significantly lower incidence of DGF (odds ratio (OR) = 0.61, p < 0.01), and significantly higher 1-year graft survival (OR = 0.72, p < 0.001) and 5-year graft survival (OR = 0.88, p = 0.04), for CIT of less than 4 h. Our results underline the need to keep CIT as short as possible in LDKT (ideally < 4 h), as a shorter CIT in LDKT is associated with a statistically significant lower incidence of DGF and higher graft survival compared to a prolonged CIT. However, clinical impact seems limited, and therefore, in LDKT programmes in which the CIT might be prolonged, such as kidney exchange programmes, the benefits outweigh the risks. To minimize these risks, it is worth considering including CIT in kidney allocation algorithms and in general take precautions to protect high risk donor/recipient combinations.

Barriers to the donation of living kidneys for kidney transplantation

Since the waiting time for deceased donor kidney transplantation continues to increase, living donor kidney transplantation is an important treatment for end stage kidney disease patients. Barriers to living kidney donation have been rarely investigated despite a growing interest in the utilization of living donor transplantation and the satisfaction of donor safety. Here, we retrospectively analyzed 1658 potential donors and 1273 potential recipients who visited the Seoul National University Hospital for living kidney transplantation between 2010 and 2017 to study the causes of donation discontinuation. Among 1658 potential donors, 902 (54.4%) failed to donate kidneys. The average number of potential donors that received work-up was 1.30 ± 0.66 per recipient. Among living donor kidney transplant patients, 75.1% received kidneys after work-up of the first donor and 24.9% needed work-up of two or more donors. Donor-related factors (49.2%) were the most common causes of donation discontinuation, followed by immunologic or size mismatches between donors and recipients (25.4%) and recipient-related factors (16.2%). Interestingly, withdrawal of donation consent along with refusal by recipients or family were the commonest causes, suggesting the importance of non-biomedical aspects. The elucidation of the barriers to living kidney donation could ensure more efficient and safer living kidney donation.

Long-term outcomes of left versus right laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy with multiple renal arteries

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to compare the long-term graft outcomes of left versus right donor nephrectomy with multiple renal arteries, and therefore creating a reference for the expansion of the potential living kidney donor pool.

METHODS

Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy cases between May 2010 and October 2020 were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study. The data relating to donor and recipient demographics, surgical and anatomical characteristics, recipient and graft status were retrieved and compared using nonparametric statistical methods and multivariate regression. Analyses were fit for survival factors.

RESULTS

A total of 1009 recipients were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study with their donors. 16.7% of the donors had been discovered to have more than one renal artery supplying the donated kidney. The acute rejection rate was 12.8%. Death-censored graft survival at post-operative year 5 for single renal artery transplants was 89.6%, 89.5% for left-sided multiple renal arteries, and 88.2% for right-sided ones.

CONCLUSIONS

Both right donor nephrectomy and left donor nephrectomy are safe procedures with no significant negatively impacted rates for neither survival nor complications of the recipients in the long-term, compared to single renal artery ones.

How good is a living donor? Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of donor demographics on post kidney transplant outcomes

Background and Aims

Living donor kidneys are considered the best quality organs. In the attempt to expand the donor pool, the donor’s age, sex and body mass index (BMI) might be considered as potential determinants of the kidney transplant outcomes, and thus guide recipient selection. We aimed to investigate the effects of donor demographics on kidney function, graft and recipient survival, delayed graft function (DGF) and acute rejection (AR).

Methods

Systematic review and meta-analysis. EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, BIOSIS, CABI, SciELO and Cochrane were searched using algorithms. NHBLI tools were used for risk of bias assessment. Mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD), and risk ratio (RR) were calculated in Revman 5.4

Results

Altogether, 5129 studies were identified by the search algorithm; 47 studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. No significant difference in recipient 1-year survival was found between recipients of donors aged < 50 vs donors aged > 50 (RR = 0.65 95% CI: 0.1–4.1), and recipients of donors aged < 60 vs donors aged > 60 (RR = 0.81 95% CI: 0.3–2.3). Graft survival was significantly higher in recipients of grafts from donors aged < 60. Risk of AR (RR = 0.62 95% CI: 0.5–0.8) and DGF (RR = 0.28 95% CI: 0.1–0.9) were significantly lower in recipients of grafts from donors aged < 60. One-year serum creatinine was significantly lower in recipients from donors aged < 60 years compared to donors aged > 60 years (MD = 0.3 mg/dl 95% CI: 0.1–0.9), although there was high heterogeneity. Recipients of grafts from male donors had lower 1-year serum creatinine (MD = 0.12 mg/dl 95% CI: 0.2–0.1) and higher eGFR compared to recipients of female donors (p < 0.00001). Donor obesity increased the incidence of delayed graft function but not acute rejection (RR = 0.66 95% CI: 0.32–1.34).

Conclusions

Older donor age was associated with worse post-transplant outcomes and recipients of male donors had better 1-year eGFR. Donor obesity affects the incidence of delayed graft function, but not the incidence of acute rejection in recipients.

Graphical Abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40620-021-01231-7.

Safety and Intraoperative Results in Live Kidney Donors with Vascular Multiplicity After Hand-Assisted Laparoscopy Living Donor Nephrectomy

Background and Purpose

Vascular multiplicity is the most frequent anatomic variation in kidney donors. Despite concerns about risks, these allografts are increasingly used to overcome the shortage of kidney donors. The safety and clinical outcomes in living kidney donors were evaluated with vascular multiplicity after hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HALDN).

Patients and Methods

Data from all living kidney donors who underwent HALDN from 2008 to 2021 was retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups as single (SRV) and multiple renal vessels (MRV), and a comparative analysis was done. The primary outcomes include operating room time (ORT), days of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, complications, conversion, and re-operations.

Results

MRV were present in 166 out of 612 donors (27.1%). Among those, 10 (1.6%) donors had simultaneous multiple arteries and veins. Additionally, the prevalence of artery and vein multiplicity was 21.8% (n = 134) and 3.5% (n = 22), respectively. Warm ischemia time was significantly different among the two groups but not clinically important. The number of conversions to open technique, the mean ORT, the median blood loss, and days of hospital stay were similar between the SRV and MRV groups, without significant differences. According to the modified Clavien-classification system, no differences were found in the complication rates between the two groups (p = 0.29). Complication rates were 3.3% and 3.6% for the SRV and MRV groups, respectively.

Conclusion

HALDN is a procedure with safe intraoperative results, even with vascular multiplicity. The presence of multiple renal arteries or veins has no negative impact on the outcome of the donor after living donor nephrectomy.

Outcomes of Living Kidney Donor Candidates and Living Kidney Recipient Candidates with JC Polyomavirus and BK Polyomavirus Viruria

Introduction

Recent data have emerged about a protective association between JCV viruria and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Material and Methods. Single-center retrospective cohort study; 230 living kidney donors (LKD) candidates and 59 potential living kidney receptors (LKR) were enrolled. Plasma and urinary JCV and BKV viral loads were measured in all LKD candidates and in nonanuric LKR candidates. Twenty-six living kidney transplant surgeries were performed. LKR were followed in order to evaluate BKV and JCV viremia and urinary viral shedding after KT.

Results

In LKD candidates, JCV viruria was negatively associated with proteinuria of >200 mg/24 hours (JC viruric LKD: 12.5% vs JCV nonviruric LKD: 26.7%, p=0.021, OR:0.393; 95% CI: 0.181–0.854). In a multivariate analysis, LKD candidates with JCV viruria had a lower risk of proteinuria of >200 mg/24 hours (p=0.009, OR: 0.342, 95% CI: 0.153–0.764), in a model adjusted for age, gender, presence of hypertension, and eGFR <80 mL/min. Prevalence of JCV viruria was higher in LKD candidates when compared with LKR candidates (40.0% vs 1.7%, p < 0.001). Among the 26 LKR, 14 (53.8%) KT patients evolved with JCV viruria; 71.4% received a graft from a JCV viruric donor.

Conclusion

Our data corroborate the recent findings of an eventual protective association between JCV viruria and kidney disease, and we extrapolated this concept to a South European population.

Have we reached the limits in altruistic kidney donation?

Altruistic donation (unspecified donation) is an important aspect of living donor kidney transplantation. Although donation to a stranger is lawful and supported in many countries, it remains uncommon and not actively promoted. Herein, we ask the question if we have reached the limit in altruistic donation. In doing so, we examine important ethical questions that define the limits of unspecified donation, such as the appropriate balance between autonomous decision-making and paternalistic protection of the donor, the extent of outcome uncertainty and risk-benefit analyses that donors should be allowed to accept. We also consider the scrutiny and acceptance of donor motives, the potential for commercialization, donation to particular categories of recipients (including those encountered through social media) and the ethical boundaries of active promotion of unspecified kidney donation. We conclude that there is scope to increase the number of living donation kidney transplants further by optimizing existing practices to support and promote unspecified donation. A number of strategies including optimization of the assessment process, innovative approaches to reach potential donors together with reimbursement of expenses and a more specific recognition of unspecified donation are likely to lead to a meaningful increase in this type of donation.

Clinical Outcomes Following Single vs. Multiple Vessel Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Retrospective Comparison of 210 Patients

Background: The use of living-donor kidney allografts with multiple vessels continues to rise in order to increase the donor pool. This requires surgeons to pursue vascular reconstructions more often, which has previously been associated with a higher risk of developing early post-transplant complications. We therefore wanted to investigate the prognostic role of using living-donor renal allografts with a single artery (SA) vs. multiple arteries (MA) at the time of transplant.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 210 consecutive living-donor kidney transplants performed between January, 2008 and March, 2019, and compared the incidence of developing postoperative complications and other clinical outcomes between SA vs. MA recipients.

Results: No differences were observed between SA (N = 161) and MA (N = 49) kidneys in terms of the incidence of developing a postoperative (or surgical) complication, a urologic complication, hospital length of stay, delayed graft function, estimated glomerular filtration rate at 3 or 12 mo post-transplant, and graft survival.

Conclusions: The use of live-kidney allografts with MA requiring vascular reconstruction shows excellent clinical outcomes and does not increase the risk of developing postoperative complications or other adverse outcomes when compared with SA renal allografts.

The Evolution of Living Donor Nephrectomy Program at A Hellenic Transplant Center. Laparoscopic vs. Open Donor Nephrectomy: Single-Center Experience

Since its introduction in 1995, laparoscopic nephrectomy has emerged as the preferred surgical approach for living donor nephrectomy. Given the ubiquity of the surgical procedure and the need for favorable outcomes, as it is an elective operation on otherwise healthy individuals, it is imperative to ensure appropriate preoperative risk stratification and anticipate intraoperative challenges. The aim of the present study was to compare peri-and postoperative outcomes of living kidney donors (LD), who had undergone laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN), with a control group of those who had undergone open nephrectomy (ODN). Health-related quality of life (QoL) was also assessed using the validated SF-36 questionnaire. Data from 252 LD from a single transplant center from March 2015 to December 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. In total, 117 donors in the LDN and 135 in the ODN groups were assessed. Demographics, type of transplantation, BMI, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, peri- and postoperative complications, renal function at discharge and QoL were recorded and compared between the two groups using Stata 13.0 software. There was no difference in baseline characteristics, nor in the prevalence of peri-and postoperative complications, with a total complication rate of 16% (mostly minor, Clavien–Dindo grade II) in both groups, while a different pattern of surgical complications was noticed between them. Duration of surgery was significantly longer in the ODN group (median 240 min vs. 160 min in LDN, p < 0.01), warm ischemia time was longer in the LDN group (median 6 min vs.2 min in ODN, p < 0.01) and length of hospital stay shorter in the LDN group (median 3 days vs. 7 days in ODN). Conversion rate from laparoscopic to open surgery was 2.5%. There was a drop in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at discharge of 36 mL/min in the LDN and 32 mL/min in the ODN groups, respectively (p = 0.03). No death, readmission or reoperation were recorded. There was a significant difference in favor of LDN group for each one of the eight items of the questionnaire (SF1–SF8). As for the two summary scores, while the total physical component summary (PCS) score was comparable between the two groups (57.87 in the LDN group and 57.07 in the ODN group), the mental component summary (MCS) score was significantly higher (62.14 vs. 45.22, p < 0.001) in the LDN group. This study provides evidence that minimally invasive surgery can be performed safely, with very good short-term outcomes, providing several benefits for the living kidney donor, thereby contributing to expanding the living donor pool, which is essential, especially in countries with deceased-donor organ shortage.

Organ donation in the US and Europe: The supply vs demand imbalance

Organ donation and transplantation remain the best and most cost-effective clinical solution for end-stage organ failure. Several agencies across the US and Europe provide legislative, regulatory, and humanitarian services to generate smoother applications in all transplantation processes and donor-recipient relationships. US and European statistics present nine types of grafts, with kidneys being the most transplanted organ worldwide. However, organ shortage, religion, underrepresented minority groups, difficulties in obtaining consent, lack of understanding, and general ethical concerns present challenging barriers to organ donation, reflecting the complexity of graft procurement and allocation. Breaking down these barriers to reduce the organ-supply imbalance requires an appropriate multifaceted approach. Some of the key areas include increasing the potential donor pool and consent rates, apt organ allocation, and improving organ health. Additionally, suitable policies and standardized guidelines for both donors and recipients, alongside educational initiatives, are needed to ensure patient safety and global awareness. Looking forward, novel and effective research plans and initiatives are needed if we are to avoid a colossal supply-demand gap.

Is obesity a contraindication for kidney donation?

INTRODUCTION

To enlarge the donor pool, kidney donors with obesity have been considered. We hypothesized that it is safe for patients with obesity to serve as living kidney donors.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective analysis, we examined the effect of obesity (body mass index (BMI) of 30-35 kg/m²) on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and creatinine in patients undergoing laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Other outcomes included intraoperative, 30-, and 90-day complications. We examined the trajectory between patients with obesity versus patients without obesity over time using mixed effects models for the outcomes of creatinine in mg/dL and GFR in mL/min/1.73 m^2. RESULTS: Among donors with obesity versus donors without obesity, there were no significant differences in demographics or comorbidities. Baseline creatinine in donors with obesity was significantly greater than that of donors without obesity (p = 0.02). Operative time was significantly longer in donors with obesity versus without obesity (p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in 30-day morbidity between donors with obesity versus without obesity (6.52 vs. 3.57%, respectively; p = 0.38). The rate of graft complications was 8.7% in donors with obesity versus 7.1% in donors without obesity (p = 1.0). 90-day complications were infrequent, and not significant different between the groups. At 6, 12, and 24-month postoperative follow-up, the mean creatinine level in patients with obesity was not significantly different from that of patients without obesity (1.23 vs. 1.31, 1.23 vs. 1.26, and 1.17 vs. 1.19 at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively). Mean GFR was also not significantly different at 6, 12, and, 24 months.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative creatinine and GFR changes were not significantly different in patients with obesity versus without obesity after laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. These findings suggest that carefully screened living kidney donors with obesity do not experience decreased postoperative renal function.

Extended Criteria Donors in Living Kidney Transplantation Including Donor Age, Smoking, Hypertension and BMI

Purpose

An expansion of selection criteria for deceased organ transplantation already exists to manage the current donor shortage. Comparable evaluation of risk factors for living donors should be investigated to improve this issue.

Patients and Methods

Our retrospective single-centre study analysed 158 patients with living kidney transplants performed between February 2006 and June 2012. We investigated the influence of donor risk factors (RF) including body mass index over 30 kg/m², age >60 years, active nicotine abuse and arterial hypertension on postoperative kidney function with focus on the recipients. This was measured for long-term survival and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in a 5-year follow-up.

Results

Overall, out of 158 living donors, 84 donors were identified to have no risk factors, whereas 74 donors had at least one risk factor. We noted a significant higher delayed graft function (p=0.042) in the first 7 days after transplantation, as well as lower GFR of recipients of allografts with risk factors in the first-year after transplantation. In our long-term results, there was no significant difference in the functional outcome (graft function, recipient and graft survival) between recipients receiving kidneys from donors with no and at least one risk factors. In the adjusted analysis of subgroups of different risk factors, recipients of donors with “age over 60 years” at time of transplantation had a decreased transplant survival (p=0.014).

Conclusion

Thus, a careful expansion for selection criteria for living donors with critical evaluation could be possible, but especially the age of the donors could be a limited risk factor.

Unspecified live kidney donation by urological patients

BACKGROUND

Individuals with benign kidney disorders undergoing nephrectomy have three possibilities: Autotransplantation, with a certain risk of complications, but without a clear benefit; discarding the kidney; or living kidney donation.

AIM

To investigate whether patients with benign kidney disorders and a medical indication for nephrectomy are suitable as unspecified live kidney donors.

METHODS

We searched all clinical data from 1994-2019 for unspecified donors and their transplant recipients (n = 160). Nine of these 160 donors had pre-existing kidney disorders necessitating nephrectomy and had decided to donate their kidney anonymously after discussing the possibility of kidney donation. We studied the clinical course of these nine donating patients and their transplant recipients.

RESULTS

Seven of nine donating patients indicated unbearable loin pain as the main complaint, one donating patient refused ureterocutaneostomy and one had two aneurysms of the renal artery. Postoperatively, seven donating patients described absence of pain and one a significant reduction after the nephrectomy. The average 1-year creatinine level in the donating patients was 88 µmol/L and after a median of 6.9 years the average creatinine level was 86.6 µmol/L. In the transplant recipients, one major complication occurred which led to death and in one transplant recipient graft function failed to normalize at first but has been stable for nine years now. Currently, all transplant recipients are off dialysis.

CONCLUSION

Our data show that patients undergoing nephrectomy as part of treatment in selected kidney disorders can function as live kidney donors.

Long-term Surgical Outcome and Risk Factors in Living Kidney Donors

CONTEXT

Studies on the surgical outcome in living kidney donors mainly report perioperative complications with short follow-up.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study are to evaluate the long-term surgical outcome in living kidney donors and to identify donors with an increased risk for a complicated postoperative course.

BASIC PROCEDURES

A prospectively collected database of 496 living kidney donors at the Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery of the Ruprecht Karls University Heidelberg was retrospectively analyzed in a retrospective, observational single-center study.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 37 months. The perioperative severe complication (Clavien-Dindo IIIb) rate was 2.8%, the early postoperative (PO) severe complication rate (1-3 months post operation) was 0.7%, and the late PO severe complication rate (> 3 months post operation) was 8.4%. In multivariate analyses, male sex was associated with higher overall perioperative complication rate (odds ratio [OR], 1.930; P = .005) as well as higher rate of late PO complications (OR, 2.243; P = .014). An increased body mass index was associated with a higher late and severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIb) PO complication rate (OR, 1.107; P = .009 and OR, 1.105; P = .008, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Long-term surgery-associated severe complications occur in 8.4% of kidney donors. Older age is associated with an increased operative time, greater intraoperative blood loss, and longer PO hospital stay. Male donors and donors with an increased body mass index have a higher risk for a complicated PO course after kidney donation. Within a shared decision-making process before living kidney donation, special awareness should be brought to these facts.

Correlation of preoperative imaging characteristics with donor outcomes and operative difficulty in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

This study aimed to understand the relationship of preoperative measurements and risk factors on operative time and outcomes of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Two hundred forty-two kidney donors between 2010 and 2017 were identified. Patients' demographic, anthropomorphic, and operative characteristics were abstracted from the electronic medical record. Glomerular filtration rates (GFR) were documented before surgery, within 24 hours, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Standard radiological measures and kidney volumes, and subcutaneous and perinephric fat thicknesses were assessed by three radiologists. Data were analyzed using standard statistical measures. There was significant correlation between cranio-caudal and latero-lateral diameters (P < .0001) and kidney volume. The left kidney was transplanted in 92.6% of cases and the larger kidney in 69.2%. Kidney choice (smaller vs. larger) had no statistically significant impact on the rate of change of donor kidney function over time adjusting for age, sex and race (P = .61). Perinephric fat thickness (+4.08 minutes) and surgery after 2011 were significantly correlated with operative time (P ≤ .01). In conclusion, cranio-caudal diameters can be used as a surrogate measure for volume in the majority of donors. Size may not be a decisive factor for long-term donor kidney function. Perinephric fat around the donor kidney should be reported to facilitate operative planning.

Robotic assisted nephrectomy for living kidney donation (RANLD) with use of multiple locking clips or ligatures for renal vascular closure

Background

Robotic assisted nephrectomy for living donation (RANLD) is a rapid emerging surgical technique competing for supremacy with totally laparoscopic and laparoscopic hand assisted techniques. Opinions about the safety of specific techniques of vascular closure in minimally invasive living kidney donation are heterogeneous and may be different for laparoscopic and robotic assisted surgical techniques.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed perioperative and short-term outcomes of our first (n=40) RANLD performed with the da Vinci Si surgical platform. Vascular closure of renal vessels was performed by either double clipping or a combination of clips and non-transfixing suture ligatures.

Results

RANLD almost quintupled in our center for the observed time period. A total of n=21 (52.5%) left and n=19 (47.5%) right kidneys were procured. Renal vessel sealing with two locking clips was performed in 18 cases (45%) Both, clips and non-transfixing ligatures were used in 22 cases (55%). Mean donor age was 53.075±11.68 years (range, 28–70). The average total operative time was 150.75±27.30 min. Right donor nephrectomy (139±22 min) was performed significantly faster than left (160.95±27.93 min, P=0.01). Warm ischemia time was similar for both vascular sealing techniques and did not differ between left and right nephrectomies. No conversion was necessary. Clavien-Dindo Grade ≤IIIb complications occurred in (n=5) 12.5%. Grade IV and V complications did not develop. In particular no hemorrhage occurred using multiple locking clips or suture ligatures for renal vascular closure. Mortality was 0%. Thirteen kidneys (32.5%) were transplanted across the AB0 barrier.

Conclusions

RANLD is an emerging minimally invasive surgical technique which facilitates excellent perioperative and short-term outcomes also when using multiple locking clips or suture ligatures for renal vascular closure.

Obese living kidney donors: a comparison of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy

Background

The aim of this study was to examine the difference in outcome between hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy in obese donors, and the impact of donor body mass index on outcome.

Methods

Out of 1108 living donors who underwent hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic or laparoscopic donor nephrectomy between 2010 and 2018, 205 were identified having body mass index ≥ 30. These donors were included in this retrospective study, analyzing postoperative outcomes and remnant renal function.

Results

Out of 205 donors, 137 (66.8%) underwent hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy and 68 donors (33.2%) underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Postoperative outcome did not show any significant differences between the hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy group and the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy group in terms of major complications (2.2% vs. 1.5%, P = 0.72), postoperative pain scale (4 vs. 4, P = 0.67), and the length of stay (3 days vs. 3 days, P = 0.075). The results of kidney function in donors after nephrectomy demonstrated no significant differences between the groups. Additional analysis of 29 donors with body mass index ≥ 35 (14.1%) as compared with 176 donors with body mass index 30–35 (85.9%) revealed no significant differences between groups in postoperative outcomes as well as kidney function after donation.

Conclusion

Our results show that laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy for obese donors is safe and feasible with good postoperative outcomes. There were no significant differences regarding postoperative outcome between hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Furthermore, the outcome in donors with body mass index ≥ 35 was comparable to donors with body mass index 30–35.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy in a high risk overweight donor with left-sided IVC, and previous abdominal surgery

•

Surgical planning based on preoperative CTA is necessary in patients with vascular anomalies in order to avoid complications.

•

Intrabdominal adhesions are common in patients with previous abdominal surgery and can affect the surgical approach for donor nephrectomy.

•

Considering the extension of the donor eligibility criteria, it is expected to see cases with congenital vascular anomalies.

Introduction

The extension of donor eligibility criteria represents one of the possible ways to increase the organ shortage, thus decreasing the waiting time for kidney transplantation. Expectedly, this strategy is associated with a growing number of more technically demanding living donor nephrectomy procedures requiring careful assessment, and sound surgical experience in order to avoid intraoperative complications.

Case presentation

After a thorough evaluation through preoperative imaging, we performed a hand-assisted left laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy in a 56 year-old overweight patient with history of prior abdominal surgery, harboring a left-sided inferior vena cava (IVC).

Discussion/conclusion

This case describes our comprehensive approach in this complex surgical scenario to preserve donor safety and provide an optimal kidney graft.

The Effect of Donors' Demographic Characteristics in Renal Function Post-Living Kidney Donation. Analysis of a UK Single Centre Cohort

Introduction: There is a great need to increase the organ donor pool, particularly for living donors. This study analyses the difference in post-living donation kidney function according to pre-donation characteristics of age, genetic relationship with the recipient, sex, ethnicity, and Body Mass Index (BMI). Methods: Retrospective single centre analysis of the trajectory of estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) post-living kidney donation, as a measure of kidney function. Mean eGFR of the different groups was compared at 6 months and during the 60 months follow up. Results: Mean age was 46 ± 13 years, 57% were female, and 60% Caucasian. Mean BMI was 27 ± 5 kg/m², with more than a quarter of the cohort having a BMI > 30 (26%), and the majority of the donors genetically related to their recipients (56%). The higher decline rate in eGFR was at 6 months after donation, with female sex, non-Caucasian ethnicity, and age lower than 60 years being independently associated with higher recovery in kidney function (p < 0.05). In the 60 months follow up, older age, genetic relationship with the recipient, and male sex led to higher percentual difference in eGFR post-donation. Conclusion: In this study, with a high proportion of high BMI living kidney donors, female sex, age lower than 60 years, and non-genetic relationship with recipient were persistently associated with higher increase in post-donation kidney function. Ethnicity and BMI, per se, should not be a barrier to increasing the living donor kidney pool.

The 6-year clinical outcomes for patients registered in a multiregional United States Kidney Paired Donation program - a retrospective study

We examined what happened during a 6-year period to 1121 end-stage renal disease patients who registered with their willing/incompatible living donors for kidney exchanges with the Alliance for Paired Donation (APD). Of all patients, 65% were transplanted: 37% in kidney paired donation (APD-KPD, APD-other-KPD); 10% with compatible live donors (APD-LD); and 18% with deceased donors (APD-DD). The remaining patients were withdrawn (sick/died/others; 15%), or were still waiting (20%). For those patients with a cPRA 0-94%, 72% received a transplant. In contrast, only 49% of very highly sensitized (VHS; cPRA 95-100%) were transplanted. Of the VHS patients, 50% were transplanted by KPD/APD-LD while 50% benefited through prioritization of deceased donors in the modified kidney allocation system (KAS introduced in 2014). All APD transplanted groups had similar death-censored 4-year graft survivals as their relevant Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) groups. It is noteworthy that VHS graft and patient survival results were comparable to less sensitized and nonsensitized patients. All patients should be encouraged to search for compatible donors through different options. Expanding the donor pool through KPD and the new KAS of the OPTN increases the likelihood of transplantation for VHS patients.

Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Live Donor Renal Allografts From Older and Younger Donors

BACKGROUND

The rising demand for living renal donors has led to the recruitment of older donors. Findings vary, but these grafts appear to survive as long as grafts from standard criteria deceased and expanded criteria deceased donors. We investigated the effects of donor age ≥65 years and the presence or absence of donor antihypertensive therapy on patient condition 1 year after transplantation, and retrospectively examined 1-year (273 patients), 3-year (217 patients), and 5-year (140 patients) patient and graft survival.

METHODS

We divided 273 donor-recipient pairs into Group Y (donor age <65 years, n = 224) and Group O (donor age ≥65 years, n = 49). Group O was subdivided into donors receiving treatment for hypertension (subgroup O-1, n = 16) and those not receiving treatment for hypertension (subgroup O-2, n = 33). We compared results of 1 hour post-transplant biopsies and looked at a small number of 1 year post-transplant biopsies.

RESULTS

Although a significantly larger percentage of recipients from younger donors were undergoing preemptive transplantation, and the incidence of arteriosclerosis was significantly higher in the Group O kidneys, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of patient or graft survival at 1, 3, or 5 years; serum creatinine levels; or number of episodes of acute rejection. The presence or absence of donor antihypertensive treatment had no effect.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that donor age ≥65, with or without antihypertensive treatment, had no effect on graft or patient survival.

[Focusing on kidney transplantation in the elderly]

Due to the increase in life expectancy and the ageing of end-stage renal disease patients, the number of patients older than 65 years receiving a kidney transplant has been continuously growing over the last fifteen years. The benefits of renal transplantation compared to dialysis in terms of survival and quality of life have been shown in selected recipients over 65, or 70 years. However, the age remains the main limiting factor for the access to the waiting list, and the reluctance of the clinicians can be explained by the multiple comorbidities of these candidates, their limited life expectancy or the shortage of grafts. The challenge is to select the candidates who can benefit from renal transplantation, thanks to rigorous cardiovascular and neoplastic evaluation before enrolment and by taking into account the specific characteristics of elderly patients. The living donor appears to be the ideal option for elderly recipients, the alternative being the extended criteria donor, allowing waiting times to be limited. The choice of immunosuppressive therapy is also crucial in these patients at high risk of infectious and cardiovascular complications in whom the occurrence of acute rejection can have severe consequences. There are currently no specific recommendations for immunosuppression in elderly recipients, and we would need large-scale randomized studies to improve the prognosis of renal transplantation in this population.

KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors

The 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors is intended to assist medical professionals who evaluate living kidney donor candidates and provide care before, during and after donation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies that included critical appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations. However, many recommendations, for which there was no evidence or no systematic search for evidence was undertaken by the Evidence Review Team, were issued as ungraded expert opinion recommendations. The guideline work group concluded that a comprehensive approach to risk assessment should replace decisions based on assessments of single risk factors in isolation. Original data analyses were undertaken to produce a "proof-in-concept" risk-prediction model for kidney failure to support a framework for quantitative risk assessment in the donor candidate evaluation and defensible shared decision making. This framework is grounded in the simultaneous consideration of each candidate's profile of demographic and health characteristics. The processes and framework for the donor candidate evaluation are presented, along with recommendations for optimal care before, during, and after donation. Limitations of the evidence are discussed, especially regarding the lack of definitive prospective studies and clinical outcome trials. Suggestions for future research, including the need for continued refinement of long-term risk prediction and novel approaches to estimating donation-attributable risks, are also provided.In citing this document, the following format should be used: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Living Kidney Donor Work Group. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors. Transplantation. 2017;101(Suppl 8S):S1-S109.

Attitudes among transplant professionals regarding shifting paradigms in eligibility criteria for live kidney donation

BACKGROUND

The transplant community increasingly accepts extended criteria live kidney donors, however, great (geographical) differences are present in policies regarding the acceptance of these donors, and guidelines do not offer clarity. The aim of this survey was to reveal these differences and to get an insight in both centre policies as well as personal beliefs of transplant professionals.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to 1128 ESOT-members. Questions were included about several extended donor criteria; overweight/obesity, older age, vascular multiplicity, minors as donors and comorbidities; hypertension, impaired fasting glucose, kidney stones, malignancies and renal cysts. Comparisons were made between transplant centres of three regions in Europe and between Europe and other countries worldwide.

RESULTS

331 questionnaires were completed by professionals from 55 countries. Significant differences exist between regions in Europe in acceptance of donors with several extended criteria. Median refusal rate for potential live donors is 15%. Furthermore, differences are seen regarding pre-operative work-up, both in specialists who perform screening as in preoperative imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Remarkably, 23.4% of transplant professionals sometimes deviate from their centre policy, resulting in more or less comparable personal beliefs regarding extended criteria. Variety is seen, proving the need for a standardized approach in selection, preferably evidence based.

Zero-Time Renal Transplant Biopsies: A Comprehensive Review

Zero-time kidney biopsies, obtained at time of transplantation, are performed in many transplant centers worldwide. Decisions on kidney discard, kidney allocation, and choice of peritransplant and posttransplant treatment are sometimes based on the histological information obtained from these biopsies. This comprehensive review evaluates the practical considerations of performing zero-time biopsies, the predictive performance of zero-time histology and composite histological scores, and the clinical utility of these biopsies. The predictive performance of individual histological lesions and of composite scores for posttransplant outcome is at best moderate. No single histological lesion or composite score is sufficiently robust to be included in algorithms for kidney discard. Dual kidney transplantation has been based on histological assessment of zero-time biopsies and improves outcome in individual patients, but the waitlist effects of this strategy remain obscure. Zero-time biopsies are valuable for clinical and translational research purposes, providing insight in risk factors for posttransplant events, and as baseline for comparison with posttransplant histology. The molecular phenotype of zero-time biopsies yields novel therapeutic targets for improvement of donor selection, peritransplant management and kidney preservation. It remains however highly unclear whether the molecular expression variation in zero-time biopsies could become a better predictor for posttransplant outcome than donor/recipient baseline demographic factors.

Acceptability of older adults as living kidney donors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Kidney transplantation from a living kidney donor (LKD) is associated with better long-term survival and quality of life for a patient with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) than dialysis. We reviewed recent literature on the acceptability and outcomes of older adults as LKDs, which may be misunderstood in routine care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies report that receiving a kidney from an older LKD is associated with worse recipient and graft survival compared with receiving a kidney from a younger LKD, but similar recipient and graft survival to receiving a kidney from a standard criteria deceased donor. A kidney from a younger vs. older LKD results in better graft survival in younger recipients, whereas the graft survival is similar in older recipients. Compared with healthy matched nondonors, older LKDs have a similar risk of death and cardiovascular disease and the absolute risk of ESRD after 15 years remains less than 1%. The estimated predonation and postdonation lifetime risk of ESRD varies by age, sex and race with lower incidences in individuals who are older, female and white (vs. African-American).

SUMMARY

Donor and recipient outcomes from several studies support the acceptability of older adults as LKDs.

Nephron number, hypertension, and CKD: physiological and genetic insight from humans and animal models

The kidneys play a vital role in the excretion of waste products and the regulation of electrolytes, maintenance of acid-base balance, regulation of blood pressure, and production of several hormones. Any alteration in the structure of the nephron (basic functional unit of the kidney) can have a major impact on the kidney's ability to work efficiently. Progressive decline in kidney function can lead to serious illness and ultimately death if not treated by dialysis or transplantation. While there have been numerous studies that implicate lower nephron numbers as being an important factor in influencing susceptibility to developing hypertension and chronic kidney disease, a direct association has been difficult to establish because of three main limitations: 1) the large variation in nephron number observed in the human population; 2) no established reliable noninvasive methods to determine nephron complement; and 3) to date, nephron measurements have been done after death, which doesn't adequately account for potential loss of nephrons with age or disease. In this review, we will provide an overview of kidney structure/function, discuss the current literature for both humans and other species linking nephron deficiency and cardio-renal complications, as well as describe the major molecular signaling factors involved in nephrogenesis that modulate variation in nephron number. As more detailed knowledge about the molecular determinants of nephron development and the role of nephron endowment in the cardio-renal system is obtained, it will hopefully provide clinicians the ability to accurately identify people at risk to develop CKD/hypertension and lead to a shift in patient care from disease treatment to prevention.

Risk Factors Associated with Decreased Renal Function after Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Multivariate Analysis of a Single Surgeon Experience

Background: Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is a minimally invasive procedure for living kidney donation. The surgeon operative volume is associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the risk factors associated with decreased renal function after hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy performed by a single experienced surgeon. Methods: We included living renal donors who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy by a single experienced surgeon between 2006 and 2013. Decreased renal function was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² on postoperative day 4. The donors were categorized into groups with postoperative eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² or ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m². Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the risk factors associated with decreased renal function after hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The hospital stay duration, intensive care unit admission rate, and eGFR at postoperative year 1 were evaluated. Results: Of 643 patients, 166 (25.8%) exhibited a postoperative eGFR of < 60 mL/min/1.73 m². Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the risk factors for decreased renal function were age [odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 1.062 (1.035-1.089), P < 0.001], male sex [odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 3.436 (2.123-5.561), P < 0.001], body mass index (BMI) [odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 1.093 (1.016-1.177), P = 0.018], and preoperative eGFR [odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 0.902 (0.881-0.924), P < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in postoperative hospital stay duration and intensive care unit admission rate between the two groups. In addition, 383 of 643 donors were analyzed at postoperative year 1. Sixty donors consisting of 14 (5.0%) from the group of 279 donors in eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m², and 46 (44.2%) from the group of 104 donors in eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² had eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² at postoperative year 1 (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Increased age, male sex, higher BMI, and decreased preoperative eGFR were risk factors for decreased renal function after hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy by a single experienced surgeon. These results provide important evidence for the safe perioperative management of living renal donors.

Suggestions on how to make suboptimal kidney transplantation an ethically viable option

To overcome kidney donation, the pool of potentially eligible donors has been widened by using suboptimal organs harvested from living donors or cadavers. These organs may engender health complications as age, risk factors, and pathologies of donors fail to meet the standard donor criteria. After examining a wide array of literature on suboptimal kidney transplants, we evidenced two major issues: the lack of standardized terminology and the lack of longterm data on the health outcomes of both suboptimal living donors and recipients. Consequently, surgeons are still unable to provide patients with thorough information to obtain a well-informed consent. Suboptimal kidney transplantation still remains in its experimental stage, thereby raising many ethical and medico-legal concerns. We suggest that one possible solution to overcome some of the ethical shortcomings of suboptimal kidney donations is to provide living donors and recipients honest, accurate, and thorough information about its health risks. To this aim, we advocate adopting a widely standardized terminology that would embrace the whole concept of suboptimal kidney transplantation, increasing the number of future publications on the health outcomes of living donors and recipients, spurring ethical reflection to improve the experience of suboptimal kidney transplantation and reduce the waiting-list for kidney transplantation.

Living Organ Donation by Minors: An Analysis of the Regulations in European Union Member States

Living organ donation (LD) is an increasingly established practice. Whereas in the United States and Canada LD by minors has occasionally been reported, LD by minors seems to be largely absent in the European Union (EU). It is currently unclear whether this is the result of a different legal approach. This study is the first to systematically analyze the regulations of EU member states, Norway, and Iceland toward LD by minors. Relevant regulations were identified by searching government websites, translated, compared, and sent for verification to national legal experts. We identified five countries where LD by minors is allowed. In two of these (Belgium and the United Kingdom), some minors may be deemed sufficiently mature to make an autonomous decision regarding LD. In contrast, in the three other countries (Luxembourg, Norway, and Sweden), LD by minors is only allowed subject to parental permission and the assent (or absence of objection) of the donor. Where allowed, regulations differ significantly with regard to the substantive and procedural safeguards in place. In view of the controversial nature of the procedure, as illustrated by recent reports and surveys, we argue for a very cautious approach and greater harmonization in countries where LD by minors is allowed.

Five-year follow-up after live donor nephrectomy - cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of a prospective cohort within the era of extended donor eligibility criteria

To establish the outcome of live kidney donors 5 years after donation, we investigated the risk for progressive renal function decline and quality of life (QoL). Data on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), creatinine, hypertension, QoL and survival were assessed in a prospective cohort of 190 donors, who donated between 2008 and 2010. Data were available for >90%. The mean age predonation was 52.8 ± 11.5 years, 30 donors having pre-existent hypertension. The mean follow-up was 5.1 ± 0.9 years. Eight donors had died due to non-donation-related causes. After 5 years, the mean eGFR was 60.2 (95% CI 58.7-62.7) ml/min/1.73 m² , with a median serum creatinine of 105.1 (95% CI 102.5-107.8) μmol/l. eGFR decreased to 33.6% and was longitudinally lower among men than women and declining with age (P < 0.001), without any association on QoL. Donors with pre-existent and new-onset hypertension demonstrated no progressive decline of renal function overtime compared to nonhypertensives. No donors were found with proteinuria, microalbuminuria or at risk for end-stage renal disease. After an initial decline postdonation, renal function remained unchanged overtime. Men and ageing seem to affect renal function overtime, while decreased renal function did not affect QoL. These data support further stimulation of living kidney donation programmes as seen from the perspective of donor safety.

Live kidney donation: are concerns about long-term safety justified?-A methodological review

Live kidney donors are exhaustively screened pre-donation, creating a cohort inherently healthier at baseline than the general population. In recent years, three renowned research groups reported unfavourable outcomes for live kidney donors post-donation that contradicted their previous studies. Here, we compared the study design and analysis of the most recent and previous studies to determine whether the different outcomes were due to methodological design or reflect a real potential disadvantage for living kidney donors. All six studies on long-term risk after live kidney donation were thoroughly screened for the selection of study population, controls, data quality, and statistical analysis. Our detailed review of the methodology revealed key differences with respect to selection of donors and compared non-donors, data quality, follow-up duration, and statistical analysis. In all studies, the comparison group of non-donors was healthier than the donors due to more extensive exclusion criteria for non-donors. Five of the studies used both restriction and matching to address potential confounding. Different matching strategies and statistical analyses were used in the more recent studies compared to previous studies and follow-up was longer. Recently published papers still face bias. Strong points compared to initial analyses are the extended follow-up time, large sample sizes and better analysis, hence increasing the reliability to estimate potential risks for living kidney donors on the long-term. Future studies should focus on equal selection criteria for donors and non-donors, and in the analysis, follow-up duration, matched sets, and low absolute risks among donors should be accounted for when choosing the statistical technique.

Perioperative Complications After Living Kidney Donation: A National Study

We integrated the US transplant registry with administrative records from an academic hospital consortium (97 centers, 2008-2012) to identify predonation comorbidity and perioperative complications captured in diagnostic, procedure, and registry sources. Correlates (adjusted odds ratio, aOR) of perioperative complications were examined with multivariate logistic regression. Among 14 964 living kidney donors, 11.6% were African American. Nephrectomies were predominantly laparoscopic (93.8%); 2.4% were robotic and 3.7% were planned open procedures. Overall, 16.8% of donors experienced a perioperative complication, most commonly gastrointestinal (4.4%), bleeding (3.0%), respiratory (2.5%), surgical/anesthesia-related injuries (2.4%), and "other" complications (6.6%). Major Clavien Classification of Surgical Complications grade IV or higher affected 2.5% of donors. After adjustment for demographic, clinical (including comorbidities), procedure, and center factors, African Americans had increased risk of any complication (aOR 1.26, p = 0.001) and of Clavien grade II or higher (aOR 1.39, p = 0.0002), grade III or higher (aOR 1.56, p < 0.0001), and grade IV or higher (aOR 1.56, p = 0.004) events. Other significant correlates of Clavien grade IV or higher events included obesity (aOR 1.55, p = 0.0005), predonation hematologic (aOR 2.78, p = 0.0002) and psychiatric (aOR 1.45, p = 0.04) conditions, and robotic nephrectomy (aOR 2.07, p = 0.002), while annual center volume >50 (aOR 0.55, p < 0.0001) was associated with lower risk. Complications after live donor nephrectomy vary with baseline demographic, clinical, procedure, and center factors, but the most serious complications are infrequent. Future work should examine underlying mechanisms and approaches to minimizing the risk of perioperative complications in all donors.

Vascular Multiplicity Should Not Be a Contra-Indication for Live Kidney Donation and Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Whether vascular multiplicity should be considered as contraindication and therefore 'extended donor criterion' is still under debate.

METHODS

Data from all live kidney donors from 2006-2013 (n = 951) was retrospectively reviewed. Vascular anatomy as imaged by MRA, CTA or other modalities was compared with intraoperative findings. Furthermore, the influence of vascular multiplicity on outcome of donors and recipients was studied.

RESULTS

In 237 out of 951 donors (25%), vascular multiplicity was present. CTA had the highest accuracy levels regarding vascular anatomy assessment. Regarding outcome of donors with vascular multiplicity, warm ischemia time (WIT) and skin-to-skin time were significantly longer if arterial multiplicity (AM) was present (5.1 vs. 4.0 mins and 202 vs. 178 mins). Skin-to-skin time was significantly longer, and complication rates were higher in donors with venous multiplicity (203 vs. 180 mins and 17.2% vs. 8.4%). Outcome of renal transplant recipients showed a significantly increased WIT (30 vs. 26.7 minutes), higher rate of DGF (13.9% vs. 6.9%) and lower rate of BPAR (6.9% vs. 13.9%) in patients receiving a kidney with AM compared to kidneys with singular anatomy.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that vascular multiplicity should not be a contra-indication, since it has little impact on clinical outcome in the donor as well as in renal transplant recipients.

Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in Elderly Living Kidney Donors: Risk Comparison Before and After Donation Using QRISK Equation

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess whether donor age would increase the risk of cardiovascular comorbidities during the first few years after donation. Cardiovascular risk was calculated using the QRISK tool (University of Nottingham and EMIS, Nottingham, UK).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were collected from 221 living renal transplant donors at St. George's University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust between 2008 and 2012 before and after donation (at 6, 12, and 24 mo). QRISK scores were calculated for each patient at these time points before stratifying our patients into 2 cohorts: cohort A (age ≤ 59 y) and cohort B (age ≥ 60 y). QRISK scores were then compared using unpaired t tests.

RESULTS

Before donation, mean QRISK scores were 3.4% in cohort A and 12.4% in cohort B (P < .001). At 6, 12, and 24 months after kidney donation, the risks were 3.3% and 12.2% (P < .001), 3.8% and 13.6% (P < .001), and 5% and 15.4% (P < .001) in cohort A versus cohort B.

CONCLUSIONS

When we analyzed risk before donation, both age groups showed a significant increase in cardiovascular risk at 24 months. This subtle increase in cardiovascular risk in the 2 groups may be attributed to changing patient demographics, such as the increasing age of patients, rather than the donation itself. Elderly kidney donors, therefore, are a key source of donation after satisfactory cardiovascular work-up. However, elderly kidney donors will require long-term postoperative follow-up care and specific counseling aimed at reducing modifiable cardiovascular risk factors.

Towards a standardised informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy: the PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project-study protocol for a nationwide prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Informed consent is mandatory for all (surgical) procedures, but it is even more important when it comes to living kidney donors undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. Donor education, leading to informed consent, needs to be carried out according to certain standards. Informed consent procedures for live donor nephrectomy vary per centre, and even per individual healthcare professional. The basis for a standardised, uniform surgical informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy can be created by assessing what information donors need to hear to prepare them for the operation and convalescence.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project is a prospective, multicentre cohort study, to be carried out in all eight Dutch kidney transplant centres. Donor knowledge of the procedure and postoperative course will be evaluated by means of pop quizzes. A baseline cohort (prior to receiving any information from a member of the transplant team in one of the transplant centres) will be compared with a control group, the members of which receive the pop quiz on the day of admission for donor nephrectomy. Donor satisfaction will be evaluated for all donors who completed the admission pop-quiz. The primary end point is donor knowledge. In addition, those elements that have to be included in the standardised format informed consent procedure will be identified. Secondary end points are donor satisfaction, current informed consent practices in the different centres (eg, how many visits, which personnel, what kind of information is disclosed, in which format, etc) and correlation of donor knowledge with surgeons' estimation thereof.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval for this study was obtained from the medical ethical committee of the Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, on 18 February 2015. Secondary approval has been obtained from the local ethics committees in six participating centres. Approval in the last centre has been sought.

RESULTS

Outcome will be published in a scientific journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR5374; Pre-results.

Robotic surgery rapidly and successfully implemented in a high volume laparoscopic center on living kidney donation

BACKGROUND

It is important to minimize risks associated with live donor nephrectomy. In this study we evaluated the results of left-sided robot-assisted donor nephrectomies in comparison with standard techniques.

METHODS

Data on perioperative results, kidney function, and recipient and graft survival were collected. All left-sided laparoscopic and hand-assisted procedures were selected as control groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine robot-assisted procedures were performed by two surgeons. Operative time was significantly longer in the robot-assisted group compared with both control groups. However, it decreased significantly during procedures 40-59 compared with procedures 20-39 (P = 0.014) to median 172.5 (114.0-242.0) min. One conversion to the open approach occurred in the robot group due to a bleeding of the renal artery stump. No difference was found between all techniques at 3 months post-donation.

CONCLUSION

Left-sided robot-assisted donor nephrectomy is feasible with over time a significant decrease in operative time with good outcomes for donor and recipient. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Previously, we reported on the low recall of Google Scholar (GS) for systematic review (SR) searching. Here, we test our conclusions further in a prospective study by comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of SR search strategies previously performed in Embase, MEDLINE, and GS.

METHODS

The original search results from Embase and MEDLINE and the first 1000 results of GS for librarian-mediated SR searches were recorded. Once the inclusion-exclusion process for the resulting SR was complete, search results from all three databases were screened for the SR's included references. All three databases were then searched post hoc for included references not found in the original search results.

RESULTS

We checked 4795 included references from 120 SRs against the original search results. Coverage of GS was high (97.2 %) but marginally lower than Embase and MEDLINE combined (97.5 %). MEDLINE on its own achieved 92.3 % coverage. Total recall of Embase/MEDLINE combined was 81.6 % for all included references, compared to GS at 72.8 % and MEDLINE alone at 72.6 %. However, only 46.4 % of the included references were among the downloadable first 1000 references in GS. When examining data for each SR, the traditional databases' recall was better than GS, even when taking into account included references listed beyond the first 1000 search results. Finally, precision of the first 1000 references of GS is comparable to searches in Embase and MEDLINE combined.

CONCLUSIONS

Although overall coverage and recall of GS are high for many searches, the database does not achieve full coverage as some researchers found in previous research. Further, being able to view only the first 1000 records in GS severely reduces its recall percentages. If GS would enable the browsing of records beyond the first 1000, its recall would increase but not sufficiently to be used alone in SR searching. Time needed to screen results would also increase considerably. These results support our assertion that neither GS nor one of the other databases investigated, is on its own, an acceptable database to support systematic review searching.