How young is too young to be a living donor?

Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Left Lobe or Right Lobe

Living Donor Liver Transplantation (LDLT) has seen great advancements since its inception in 1988. Herein, the nuances of LDLT are discussed spanning from donor evaluation to the recipient operation. Special attention is given to donor anatomy and graft optimization techniques in the recipient.

Exploring Staff Attitudes Towards Unspecified Kidney Donors in the United Kingdom: Results From the BOUnD Study

Unspecified kidney donation (UKD) has made substantial contributions to the UK living donor programme. Nevertheless, some transplant professionals are uncomfortable with these individuals undergoing surgery. This study aimed to qualitatively explore the attitudes of UK healthcare professionals towards UKD. An opportunistic sample was recruited through the Barriers and Outcomes in Unspecified Donation (BOUnD) study covering six UK transplant centres: three high volume and three low volume centres. Interview transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. The study provided comprehensive coverage of the UK transplant community, involving 59 transplant professionals. We identified five themes: staff's conception of the ethics of UKD; presence of the known recipient in the donor-recipient dyad; need for better management of patient expectations; managing visceral reactions about the "typical" unspecified kidney donor; complex attitudes toward a promising new practice. This is the first in-depth qualitative study of attitudes of transplant professionals towards UKD. The data uncovered findings with strong clinical implications for the UKD programme, including the need for a uniform approach towards younger candidates that is adhered to by all transplant centres, the need to equally extend the rigorous assessment to both specified and unspecified donors, and a new approach to managing donor expectations.

Changes in Awareness Toward Minor's Organ Donation Through Structured Information; Survey

This study analyzed survey results regarding awareness of living minors' organ donation. The questionnaires focused on changes in how respondents felt about donations by living minors after eliciting the uncertainty of long-term outcomes for living donors and recipients. The respondents were categorized as minors, adults affiliated with non-medical jobs (Non-Meds), and adults affiliated with medical jobs (Meds). The rates of awareness of living organ donation were significantly different; minors at 86.2%, non-Meds at 82.0%, and Meds at 98.7% (p < 0.001). Only 41.4% of Minors and 32.0% of Non-Meds were aware of organ donation by minors, while 70.3% of Meds were (p < 0.001). The response rate of opposition to organ donation by minors was highest for Meds and remained the same before and after (54.4%-57.7%, p = 0.311). However, the opposition rate in Non-Meds significantly increased (32.4%-46.7%) after learning about the uncertainty of long-term outcomes (p = 0.009). The study found that Non-Meds lacked adequate knowledge regarding organ donation by minors and their potential lethal outcomes. Their attitudes toward organ donation by minors could be changed by giving structured information. It is necessary to provide exact information and raise social awareness regarding organ donation by living minors.

Outcomes of living liver donors are worse than those of matched healthy controls

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Donor death is the most serious complication of living liver donation but is reported rarely. We investigated the actual mortality of living liver donors (LLDs) compared with matched control groups based on analysis of the Korean National Health Insurance Services (NHIS) database.

METHODS

This cohort study included 12,372 LLDs who donated a liver graft between 2002 and 2018, and were registered in the Korean Network for Organ Sharing. They were compared to 3 matched control groups selected from the Korean NHIS and comprising a total of 123,710 individuals: healthy population (Group I); general population without comorbidities (Group II); and general population with comorbidities (Group III).

RESULTS

In this population, 78.5% of living liver donors were 20-39 years old, and 64.7% of all donors were male. Eighty-nine donors (0.7%) in the LLD group died (68 males and 21 females), a mortality rate (/1,000 person-years) of 0.91 (0.74-1.12). Mortality rate ratio and the adjusted hazard ratio of the LLD group was 2.03 (1.61-2.55) and 1.71 (1.31-2.25) compared to Control Group I, 0.75 (0.60-0.93) and 0.63 (0.49-0.82) compared to Control Group II, and 0.58 (0.46-0.71) and 0.49 (0.39-0.60) compared to Control Group III. LLD group, depression, and lower income were risk factors for adjusted mortality. The incidence of liver failure, depression, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, brain infarction, brain hemorrhage, and end-stage renal disease in the LLD group was significantly higher than in Control Group I.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes of the LLD group were worse than those of the matched healthy control group despite the small number of deaths and medical morbidities in this group. LLDs should receive careful medical attention for an extended period after donation.

LAY SUMMARY

The incidence of mortality, liver failure, depression, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, brain infarction, brain hemorrhage, and end-stage renal disease in the living liver donor group was significantly higher than in the matched healthy group. Careful donor evaluation and selection processes can improve donor safety and enable safe living donor liver transplantation.

Practice Patterns in the Acceptance of Medically Complex Living Kidney Donors with Obesity, Hypertension, Family History of Kidney Disease, or Donor-Recipient Age Discrepancy

Background  To assess the practice patterns of the acceptance of medically complex living kidney donors (MCLKDs). Methods  We distributed a survey to nephrologists and transplant surgeons (TS) across the world through major international transplant societies. The survey contained questions regarding obesity, abnormal blood glucose profile, mild hypertension, donor-recipient age discrepancy, or family history of kidney disease of unknown etiology. Results  In total, 239 respondents from 29 countries (42% were nephrologists and 58% were TS). Most respondents would allow donations from obese donors, especially if they intended to lose weight but would be cautious if these donors had abnormal blood glucose or family history of diabetes mellitus. In hypertensive donors, future pregnancy plans mattered in decisions regarding the acceptance of female donors. Most respondents would allow young donors but would be more cautious if they had a future risk of hypertension or a family history of kidney disease of unknown etiology. They would also allow donations from an older person if prolonged waiting time was anticipated. We found multiple areas of consensus of practice among the diverse members of international transplant societies, with some interesting variations among nephrologists and TS. Conclusions  This survey highlights the practice patterns of the acceptance of MCLKDs among the international community. In the absence of clear guidelines, this survey provides additional information to counsel kidney donors with these conditions.

Long-term Survival of 10,116 Korean Live Liver Donors

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term mortality of Korean live liver donors using data from a national donor registry by comparing it with the mortality of the general population.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although live liver donors generally have a healthy status, their long-term mortality has not been properly addressed in a large donor registry.

METHODS

Data of 10,116 live liver donors were drawn from a mandated national registry of Korean live liver donors between 2000 and 2015. Matched controls were selected from the Korean National Health Insurance System-National Sample Cohort (NHIS-NSC). Median (range) follow-up of liver donors was 5.7 (0-15.9) years. Donors were 1:3 individually matched to controls by sex and 5-year age group; potential controls were from the whole NHIS-NSC (Control 1) or from NHIS-NSC after excluding people with contraindications to be organ donors (Control 2) (donor, n = 7538; Control 1, n = 28,248; Control 2, n = 28,248).

RESULTS

Fifty-three deaths occurred after donation. Ten-year cumulative mortality of live liver donors was 0.9%. The most common cause of death was suicide (n = 19) followed by cancer (n = 9) and traffic accident (n = 7). In the matched control analysis, overall risk of death was significantly lower in donors than in Control 1 (P < 0.001), but higher than in Control 2 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver donors have increased long-term mortality risk compared to similar healthy controls without contraindications to be organ donors. Therefore, long-term follow-up, including psychosocial support, is needed for live liver donors.

Should minors and young adults qualify as potential live kidney donors? The views of international transplant professionals

Although live kidney donation (LD) has become an increasingly common procedure, European and US transplant centres disagree as to whether minors and young adults should qualify as donor candidates. Therefore, we aimed to better understand the attitudes and viewpoints of transplant professionals. We conducted fourteen in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of international transplant professionals from various professional backgrounds. Data analysis was guided by QUAGOL, a systematic approach based on the constant-comparative method. Professionals expressed a cautionary view, worrying about the uncertain long-term medical and psychosocial consequences of LD at a young age. They also worried that young individuals' decisions are more likely to be influenced by their psychosocial developmental stage or family pressure. As these concerns were more significant for minors as compared to young adults, minors were deemed ineligible for LD except for in highly exceptional circumstances. Professionals' attitudes were also influenced by the expected benefits for the recipient and the availability of therapeutic alternatives, as well as the strength of the donor-recipient relationship. More prospective research on the long-term medical and psychological outcomes in young adult donors is likely to shed more light on the acceptability of LD by adolescents and young adults.

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.

Evaluation of donor workups and exclusions in a single-center experience of living donor liver transplantation

The process of evaluating potential donors in liver transplantation is important to ensure donor safety and provide optimal recipient outcomes. However, there has been no report about donor exclusion rates and reasons for such exclusion in Korea. In this study, we aimed to elucidate the outcomes of potential living liver donor evaluation in a major living donor liver transplantation center. From July 2011 to June 2015, prospectively collected data of 726 potential donors for 588 matched recipients were subsequently evaluated. Among 726 potential donors, 374 potential donors (51.5%) finally reached donation; 352 potential donors (48.5%) were excluded for various reasons. Donor reasons were 29.8%, including medical problems, withdrawal of consent, graft volume issues, and identification of a better suitable donor. Recipient reasons were 20.7%, including recipient death or recovery, allocation to deceased donor, and progressions of hepatocellular carcinoma. A total of 38 (5.2%) potential donors had a fatty liver. Among them, 15 (39.5%) potential donors tried short-term weight reduction and eventually were able to donate. In conclusion, the main reasons for donor exclusion were medical problems and withdrawal of consent. Therefore, thorough medical screening and careful examination for donor voluntarism are important in the donor evaluation process. Liver Transplantation 23 614-624 2017 AASLD.

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.

Strategies to optimize kidney recovery and preservation in transplantation: specific aspects in pediatric transplantation

In renal transplantation, live donor kidney grafts are associated with optimum success rates due to the shorter period of ischemia during the surgical procedure. The current shortage of donor organs for adult patients has caused a shift towards deceased donors, often with co-morbidity factors, whose organs are more sensitive to ischemia-reperfusion injury, which is unavoidable during transplantation. Donor management is pivotal to kidney graft survival through the control of the ischemia-reperfusion sequence, which is known to stimulate numerous deleterious or regenerative pathways. Although the key role of endothelial cells has been established, the complexity of the injury, associated with stimulation of different cell signaling pathways, such as unfolded protein response and cell death, prevents the definition of a unique therapeutic target. Preclinical transplant models in large animals are necessary to establish relationships and kinetics and have already contributed to the improvement of organ preservation. Therapeutic strategies using mesenchymal stem cells to induce allograft tolerance are promising advances in the treatment of the pediatric recipient in terms of reducing/withdrawing immunosuppressive therapy. In this review we focus on the different donor management strategies in kidney graft conditioning and on graft preservation consequences by highlighting the role of endothelial cells. We also propose strategies for preventing ischemia-reperfusion, such as cell therapy.

Medical outcomes of adolescent live kidney donors

Living kidney donation from donors <18 yr of age is uncommon. The majority of donations from adolescents took place several decades ago providing a unique opportunity to study true long-term consequences of donation. We compared survival, renal outcomes, and rates of hypertension and diabetes among 42 adolescent donors and matched older controls. Adolescent donors were matched with donors 18-30 yr on the following: gender, relation to the recipient, BMI at donation, eGFR at donation, and year of donation. After a mean follow-up of 31.8 ± 8.0 yr, 94.9% of adolescent donors were alive vs. 93.8% of controls. There was no significant difference in having eGFR (MDRD) <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (26.1% vs. 40.9%), hypertension (35.9% vs. 39.4%), diabetes (5.1% vs. 12.5%), or proteinuria (15.4% vs. 14.1%): adolescent donors vs. controls for all comparisons. These data suggest that adolescent donors are not at a higher risk of shortened survival, hypertension, diabetes, or proteinuria. Nevertheless, they probably should donate only when other options are exhausted as they have to live with a single kidney for decades and longer follow-up is needed.

The start of the transplant journey: referral for pediatric solid organ transplantation

The focus of the majority of the psychosocial transplant literature is on post-transplant outcomes, but the transplant journey starts much earlier than this, at the point when transplantation is first considered and a referral for transplant evaluation is made. In this review, we cover information regarding the meaning of the referral process for solid organ transplantation. We discuss various factors of the referral for transplantation including the impact of referral on the pediatric patient and the family, potential expectations and misconceptions held by pediatric patients and parents, the role of health literacy, decision-making factors, and the informational needs of pediatric patients and parents. We elucidate steps that providers can take to enhance transplant referral and provide suggestions for much needed research within this area.