1
|
Orandi BJ, Lofton H, Montgomery RA, Segev DL. Antiobesity pharmacotherapy to facilitate living kidney donation. Am J Transplant 2024; 24:328-337. [PMID: 38072121 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajt.2023.12.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2023] [Revised: 12/02/2023] [Accepted: 12/04/2023] [Indexed: 12/27/2023]
Abstract
Obesity is a chronic, relapsing disease that increases the risks of living kidney donation; at the same time, transplant centers have liberalized body mass index constraints for donors. With the increasing number of antiobesity medications available, the treatment of obesity with antiobesity medications may increase the pool of potential donors and enhance donor safety. Antiobesity medications are intended for long-term use given the chronic nature of obesity. Cessation of treatment can be expected to lead to weight regain and increase the risk of comorbidity rebound/development. In addition, antiobesity medications are meant to be used in conjunction with-rather than in replacement of-diet and physical activity optimization. Antiobesity medication management includes selecting medications that may ameliorate any coexisting medical conditions, avoiding those that are contraindicated in such conditions, and being sensitive to any out-of-pocket expenses that may be incurred by the potential donor. A number of questions remain regarding who will and should shoulder the costs of long-term obesity treatment for donors. In addition, future studies are needed to quantify the degree of weight loss and duration of weight loss maintenance needed to normalize the risk of adverse kidney outcomes relative to comparable nondonors and lower-weight donors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Babak J Orandi
- New York University Department of Surgery, New York, New York, USA; New York University Department of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
| | - Holly Lofton
- New York University Department of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Dorry L Segev
- New York University Department of Surgery, New York, New York, USA; New York University Department of Population Health, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Cholin LK, Ramos EF, Yahr J, Schold JD, Poggio ED, Delvalle CL, Huml AM. Psychosocial characteristics of potential and actual living kidney donors. BMC Nephrol 2024; 25:31. [PMID: 38267875 PMCID: PMC10807153 DOI: 10.1186/s12882-023-03375-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2022] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 01/26/2024] Open
Abstract
The psychosocial assessment is an essential component of the living kidney donor (LKD) evaluation. However, it remains uncertain how specific psychosocial factors impact LKD eligibility. We performed a retrospective chart review of LKD candidates who initiated the evaluation process and who had completed a required, in-person licensed social work (LSW) visit. LSW notes were reviewed for frequency of psychosocial factors that may impact the success of LKD candidate approval by the selection committee. 325 LKD candidates were included in the study: 104 not-approved and 221 approved. Not-approved LKD candidates were more likely to receive a negative family reaction to wanting to donate than approved LKD candidates (8.7% vs 1.4%, p < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, Black race, history of psychiatric illness, highest level of education being high school, and high psychosocial risk score assignment were all associated with a lower odds ratio of being approved. The majority of not-approved LKD candidates were disqualified for medical reasons (N = 76, 73.1%). In conclusion, psychosocial factors impact donation even after LKD candidates make it to an in-person evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liza K Cholin
- Department of Nephrology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 300 W 10Th Ave, Columbus, OH, #1150, USA.
| | - Everly F Ramos
- Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, USA
| | - Jordana Yahr
- Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, USA
| | - Jesse D Schold
- Department of Surgery and Transplant, University of CO Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO,, USA
| | - Emilio D Poggio
- Department of Kidney Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Department of Transplantation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | - Anne M Huml
- Department of Kidney Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Department of Transplantation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lentine KL, Amanda M, Xiao H, Wisniewski A, Levan M, Al Ammary F, Sharfuddin A, Axelrod DA, Waterman AD, Kasiske B. Factors enabling transplant program participation in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective: A national survey. Clin Transplant 2023; 37:e14908. [PMID: 36622257 PMCID: PMC10423496 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14908] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2022] [Revised: 12/24/2022] [Accepted: 01/03/2023] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective (LDC), the first effort to create a lifetime registry for living donor candidates in the United States, requires transplant programs to register donor candidates while the SRTR conducts follow-up. METHODS To better understand facilitators and barriers to program participation, we conducted a brief electronic survey of U.S. transplant program staff from October 26, 2021 to December 17, 2021. RESULTS We received 132 responses, with at least one response from 87 living donor programs (46 kidney programs, 33 kidney and liver programs, and eight liver programs alone). We found 86% of program representatives strongly agreed or agreed that funding adequate to cover the cost of data collection would facilitate LDC participation, 92% agreed or strongly agreed with importance of electronic data submission options, and 74% reported that elimination of requirements to submit duplicative pre-operative information to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) would be helpful. Other potentially enabling factors include reduction in duration of OPTN postdonation follow-up requirements, ease-of-use, protection from data use for regulation, adequate data security, and equity in data access. CONCLUSION This survey identifies potential targets to strengthen participation in the effort to create a national living donor registry in the United States. Collaboration and investment to overcome barriers to LDC participation among transplant programs are vital to generate long-term data on living donation for donor candidates, donors, and patients in need of transplant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Krista L. Lentine
- Saint Louis University Transplant Center, SSM-Saint Louis Univeristy Hospital, St. Louis, MO
| | | | - Huiling Xiao
- Saint Louis University Transplant Center, SSM-Saint Louis Univeristy Hospital, St. Louis, MO
| | - Addie Wisniewski
- Saint Louis University Transplant Center, SSM-Saint Louis Univeristy Hospital, St. Louis, MO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bugeja A, Eldaba M, Ahmed S, Shorr R, Clark EG, Burns KD, Knoll G, Hiremath S. Kidney function, cardiovascular outcomes and survival of living kidney donors with hypertension: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e064132. [PMID: 36521905 PMCID: PMC9756152 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064132] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hypertension has been considered a contraindication for living kidney donation in the past. Since transplantation from living kidney donors remains the best modality for kidney failure, there is now an increased acceptance of living kidney donors with hypertension. However, the safety of this practice for the cardiovascular and kidney health of the donor is unclear. We will conduct a systematic review to summarise and synthesise the existing literature on this topic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS A systematic review of prospective randomised and non-randomised and retrospective studies will be conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and EBM reviews published from January 1946 to December 2021 will be reviewed. Primary outcome will be the difference in the survival, major adverse cardiovascular events, estimated glomerular filtration rate of 45 mL/min or less and development of end-stage kidney failure, between living kidney donors with and without hypertension. Study screening, selection, and data extraction will be performed by two independent reviewers. Studies must fulfil all eligibility criteria for inclusion into the systematic review and meta-analysis. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised studies tool will be used to assess bias. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION No ethical approval is required for this systematic review. The results of this review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed, open-access journal to ensure access to all stakeholders in kidney transplantation and to inform clinical guidelines on the evaluation and follow-up care of living kidney donor candidates. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42022300119.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ann Bugeja
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Kidney Research Centre, and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mariam Eldaba
- Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sumaiya Ahmed
- Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Risa Shorr
- Learning Services, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Edward G Clark
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Kidney Research Centre, and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kevin D Burns
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Kidney Research Centre, and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Greg Knoll
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Kidney Research Centre, and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Swapnil Hiremath
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Kidney Research Centre, and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Characteristics of Potential and Actual Living Kidney Donors: A Single-center Experience. Transplantation 2022; 107:941-951. [PMID: 36476994 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004357] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are limited data and no national capture of barriers associated with initiating and completing the donation process for potential living kidney donors (LKDs). METHODS We performed a retrospective analysis of 3001 intake forms completed by prospective LKDs from 2016 to 2019 at a single transplant center. We analyzed data from all potential donors who completed the intake until they became ineligible or withdrew or donation was complete. We used univariate and multivariate models to evaluate independent factors associated with donation at various stages in the donation process. RESULTS The donation process was deconstructed into 5 steps: intake form, immunologic compatibility testing, clinic evaluation, selection committee review, and donation. The highest percentage of potential donors dropped out after completing the intake form, primarily because of not responding to the follow-up phone call (22.6%). Of 455 potential LKDs that completed immunologic compatibility testing, 36% were ABO or crossmatch incompatible. One-hundred eighty-eight (7.5%) of all LKD applicants reached donation, the majority of whom were White (91.0%) and female (63.8%). CONCLUSIONS A minority of LKD applicants make it to donation. Our ability to track all potential LKDs from the initial touch point to the transplant center will help us develop interventions to address barriers to a successful donation.
Collapse
|
6
|
Cholin LK, Delvalle CL, Fatica RA, Huml AM, Augustine JJ. Self-reported marijuana use and its effects on overall approval in potential living kidney donors. Clin Transplant 2022; 36:e14758. [PMID: 35771094 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14758] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2022] [Revised: 06/08/2022] [Accepted: 06/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Past and present substance use is an important part of the psychosocial evaluation of potential living kidney donors (LKDs). Increasing state legalizations and social acceptance of marijuana (MJ) use can create challenges for transplant centers. METHODS We investigated the frequency of reporting MJ use, and its effect on the LKD evaluation. A retrospective chart review was performed on all living donor candidates from December 2016 to December 2019 for reports of MJ use, both on an electronic intake form and during clinic evaluation with a licensed social worker (SW).Active MJ use was defined as current use or use within one year of evaluation. Baseline characteristics between MJ users and non-users were compared at each step of donor evaluation. We explored variables associated with MJ use including additional consults and testing during the donor evaluation. Overall approval and donation rates for living donors with active MJ use were compared to non-users. Additionally, 1-year donor follow up was compared between the two groups. Results Of 1,818 living donor candidates who completed the intake form, 132 admitted to active MJ use. Compared to non-users, MJ users were more likely to be younger, male, single, renting a home, and with a lower level of education. 33 of 338 candidates who completed a social work evaluation reported MJ use. Compared to non-users, MJ users were more frequently classified as moderate or high risk on SW evaluation, and often required a toxicology screen or psychiatry visit for clearance to donate. 24.2% of MJ users vs 9.5% of non-users discontinued their evaluation (P<0.01). 42.4% of MJ users vs 56.1% of non-users donated their kidney (P = 0.13). For those who donated, MJ users were less likely than non-users to follow up at 1 year (57.1% vs 83.0, p-value 0.02). CONCLUSION MJ users were often asked to complete additional steps in their evaluation before an approval decision was made, which may have led to the higher rate of donor drop out observed in this group. Further research is needed to assess the effects of MJ use on living donor candidacy, as well as any effects of MJ use on long-term donor outcomes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Richard A Fatica
- Department of Nephrology and Hypertension.,Department of Transplantation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | | | - Joshua J Augustine
- Department of Nephrology and Hypertension.,Department of Transplantation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Mamode N, Van Assche K, Burnapp L, Courtney A, van Dellen D, Houthoff M, Maple H, Moorlock G, Dor FJMF, Lennerling A. Donor Autonomy and Self-Sacrifice in Living Organ Donation: An Ethical Legal and Psychological Aspects of Transplantation (ELPAT) View. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10131. [PMID: 35387400 PMCID: PMC8979023 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10131] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2021] [Accepted: 02/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Clinical teams understandably wish to minimise risks to living kidney donors undergoing surgery, but are often faced with uncertainty about the extent of risk, or donors who wish to proceed despite those risks. Here we explore how these difficult decisions may be approached and consider the conflicts between autonomy and paternalism, the place of self-sacrifice and consideration of risks and benefits. Donor autonomy should be considered as in the context of the depth and strength of feeling, understanding risk and competing influences. Discussion of risks could be improved by using absolute risk, supra-regional MDMs and including the risks to the clinical team as well as the donor. The psychological effects on the donor of poor outcomes for the untransplanted recipient should also be taken into account. There is a lack of detailed data on the risks to the donor who has significant co-morbidities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nizam Mamode
- Department of Transplantation, Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- *Correspondence: Nizam Mamode,
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Lisa Burnapp
- Department of Transplantation, Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Aisling Courtney
- Regional Nephrology and Transplant Unit, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, United Kingdom
| | - David van Dellen
- Department of Renal and Pancreas Transplantation, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Mireille Houthoff
- Erasmus MC Transplant Institute, Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Hannah Maple
- Department of Transplantation, Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Greg Moorlock
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
| | - Frank J. M. F. Dor
- Imperial College Renal and Transplant Centre, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Annette Lennerling
- The Transplant Centre, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Institute of Health and Care Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Lentine KL, Fleetwood VA, Caliskan Y, Randall H, Wellen JR, Lichtenberger M, Dedert C, Rothweiler R, Marklin G, Brockmeier D, Schnitzler MA, Husain SA, Mohan S, Kasiske BL, Cooper M, Mannon RB, Axelrod DA. Deceased Donor Procurement Biopsy Practices, Interpretation, and Histology-Based Decision Making: A Survey of U.S. Transplant Centers. Kidney Int Rep 2022; 7:1268-1277. [PMID: 35685316 PMCID: PMC9171615 DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2022.03.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2022] [Revised: 03/13/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Methods Results Conclusion
Collapse
|
9
|
Nestor JG, Li AJ, King KL, Husain SA, McIntosh TJ, Sawinski D, Iltis AS, Goodman MS, Walsh HA, DuBois JM, Mohan S. Impact of education on APOL1 testing attitudes among prospective living kidney donors. Clin Transplant 2022; 36:e14516. [PMID: 34661305 PMCID: PMC9113661 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14516] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/05/2021] [Revised: 10/05/2021] [Accepted: 10/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
It is unknown how providing prospective living donors with information about APOL1, including the benefits and drawbacks of testing, influences their desire for testing. In this study, we surveyed 102 participants with self-reported African ancestry and positive family history of kidney disease, recruited from our nephrology waiting room. We assessed views on APOL1 testing before and after presentation of a set of potential benefits and drawbacks of testing and quantified the self-reported level of influence individual benefits and drawbacks had on participants' desire for testing in the proposed context of living donation. The majority of participants (92%) were aware of organ donation and more than half (56%) had considered living donation. And though we found no significant change in response following presentation of the potential benefits and the drawbacks of APOL1 testing by study end significance, across all participants, "becoming aware of the potential risk of kidney disease among your immediate family" was the benefit with the highest mean influence (3.3±1.4), while the drawback with the highest mean influence (2.9±1.5) was "some transplant centers may not allow you to donate to a loved one". This study provides insights into the priorities of prospective living donors and suggests concern for how the information affects family members may strongly influence desires for testing. It also highlights the need for greater community engagement to gain a deeper understanding of the priorities that influence decision making on APOL1 testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jordan G. Nestor
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Amber J. Li
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Kristen L. King
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
| | - S. Ali Husain
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
- The Columbia University Renal Epidemiology (CURE) Group, New York, New York, USA
| | - Tristan J. McIntosh
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Deirdre Sawinski
- Department of Medicine, Renal Electrolyte and Hypertension Division, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Ana S. Iltis
- Center for Bioethics Health and Society and Department of Philosophy, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | - Melody S. Goodman
- School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Heidi A. Walsh
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - James M. DuBois
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Sumit Mohan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
- The Columbia University Renal Epidemiology (CURE) Group, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Arabi Z, Bukhari M, Hamad A, Altheaby A, Kaysi S. Practice Patterns in the Acceptance of Medically Complex Living Kidney Donors with Obesity, Hypertension, Family History of Kidney Disease, or Donor-Recipient Age Discrepancy. Avicenna J Med 2021; 11:172-184. [PMID: 34881200 PMCID: PMC8648409 DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1736541] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ziad Arabi
- Department of the Organ Transplant Center, Division of Adult Transplant Nephrology, King Abdulaziz Medical City, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Muhammad Bukhari
- Department of Medicine, Division of Adult Nephrology, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia
| | - Abdullah Hamad
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Regional Medical Center of Orangeburg and Calhoun Counties, Orangeburg, South Carolina, United States
| | - Abdulrahman Altheaby
- Department of the Organ Transplant Center, Division of Adult Transplant Nephrology, King Abdulaziz Medical City, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Saleh Kaysi
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, CHU, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Doshi MD, Singh N, Hippen BE, Woodside KJ, Mohan P, Byford HL, Cooper M, Dadhania DM, Ainapurapu S, Lentine KL. Transplant Clinician Opinions on Use of Race in the Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2021; 16:1552-1559. [PMID: 34620650 PMCID: PMC8499001 DOI: 10.2215/cjn.05490421] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Accepted: 08/13/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Current race-based eGFR calculators assign a higher eGFR value to Black patients, which could affect the care of kidney transplant candidates and potential living donors. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS We conducted a survey of staff at adult kidney transplant centers in the United States (December 17, 2020 to February 28, 2021) to assess opinions on use of race-based eGFR equations for waitlisting and living donor candidate evaluation, availability of serum cystatin C testing and measured GFR, and related practices. RESULTS Respondents represented 57% (124 of 218) of adult kidney transplant programs, and the responding centers conducted 70% of recent kidney transplant volume. Most (93%) programs use serum creatinine-based eGFR for listing candidates. However, only 6% of respondents felt that current race-based eGFR calculators are appropriate, with desire for change grounded in concerns for promotion of health care disparities by current equations and inaccuracies in reporting of race. Most respondents (70%) believed that elimination of race would allow more preemptive waitlisting for Black patients, but a majority (79%) also raised concerns that such an approach could incur harms. More than one third of the responding programs lacked or were unsure of availability of testing for cystatin C or measured GFR. At this time, 40% of represented centers did not plan to remove race from eGFR calculators, 46% were planning to remove, and 15% had already done so. There was substantial variability in eGFR reporting and listing of multiracial patients with some Black ancestry. There was no difference in GFR acceptance thresholds for Black versus non-Black living donors. CONCLUSIONS This national survey highlights a broad consensus that extant approaches to GFR estimation are unsatisfactory, but it also identified a range of current opinions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Neeraj Singh
- Willis Knighton Health System, Shreveport, Louisiana
| | | | | | - Prince Mohan
- Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Axelrod DA, Ince D, Harhay MN, Mannon RB, Alhamad T, Cooper M, Josephson MA, Caliskan Y, Sharfuddin A, Kumar V, Guenette A, Schnitzler MA, Ainapurapu S, Lentine KL. Operational challenges in the COVID era: Asymptomatic infections and vaccination timing. Clin Transplant 2021; 35:e14437. [PMID: 34297878 PMCID: PMC8420523 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14437] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2021] [Revised: 06/23/2021] [Accepted: 07/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has created unprecedented challenges for solid organ transplant programs. While transplant activity has largely recovered, appropriate management of deceased donor candidates who are asymptomatic but have positive nucleic acid testing (NAT) for SARS‐CoV‐2 is unclear, as this result may reflect active infection or prolonged viral shedding. Furthermore, candidates who are unvaccinated or partially vaccinated continue to receive donor offers. In the absence of robust outcomes data, transplant professionals at US adult kidney transplant centers were surveyed (February 13, 2021 to April 29, 2021) to determine community practice (N: 92 centers, capturing 41% of centers and 57% of transplants performed). The majority (97%) of responding centers declined organs for asymptomatic NAT+ patients without documented prior infection. However, 32% of centers proceed with kidney transplant in NAT+ patients who were at least 30 days from initial diagnosis with negative chest imaging. Less than 7% of programs reported inactivating patients who were unvaccinated or partially vaccinated. In conclusion, despite national recommendations to wait for negative testing, many centers are proceeding with kidney transplant in patients with positive SARS‐CoV‐2 NAT results due to presumed viral shedding. Furthermore, few centers are requiring COVID‐19 vaccination prior to transplantation at this time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dilek Ince
- University of Iowa/Transplant Institute, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | - Meera N Harhay
- Drexel University Tower Health Transplant Institute, Philadelphia, USA
| | | | | | - Matthew Cooper
- Medstar Georgetown Transplant Institute, Washington, DC, USA
| | | | - Yasar Caliskan
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | | | - Vineeta Kumar
- University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Alexis Guenette
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Mark A Schnitzler
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Sruthi Ainapurapu
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Krista L Lentine
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Al Ammary F, Yu S, Muzaale AD, Segev DL, Liyanage L, Crews DC, Brennan DC, El-Meanawy A, Alqahtani S, Atta MG, Levan ML, Caffo BS, Welling PA, Massie AB. Long-term kidney function and survival in recipients of allografts from living kidney donors with hypertension: a national cohort study. Transpl Int 2021; 34:1530-1541. [PMID: 34129713 DOI: 10.1111/tri.13947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2021] [Revised: 04/08/2021] [Accepted: 06/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
Allografts from living kidney donors with hypertension may carry subclinical kidney disease from the donor to the recipient and, thus, lead to adverse recipient outcomes. We examined eGFR trajectories and all-cause allograft failure in recipients from donors with versus without hypertension, using mixed-linear and Cox regression models stratified by donor age. We studied a US cohort from 1/1/2005 to 6/30/2017; 49 990 recipients of allografts from younger (<50 years old) donors including 597 with donor hypertension and 21 130 recipients of allografts from older (≥50 years old) donors including 1441 with donor hypertension. Donor hypertension was defined as documented predonation use of antihypertensive therapy. Among recipients from younger donors with versus without hypertension, the annual eGFR decline was -1.03 versus -0.53 ml/min/m2 (P = 0.002); 13-year allograft survival was 49.7% vs. 59.0% (adjusted allograft failure hazard ratio [aHR] 1.23; 95% CI 1.05-1.43; P = 0.009). Among recipients from older donors with versus without hypertension, the annual eGFR decline was -0.67 versus -0.66 ml/min/m2 (P = 0.9); 13-year allograft survival was 48.6% versus 52.6% (aHR 1.05; 95% CI 0.94-1.17; P = 0.4). In secondary analyses, our inferences remained similar for risk of death-censored allograft failure and mortality. Hypertension in younger, but not older, living kidney donors is associated with worse recipient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fawaz Al Ammary
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Sile Yu
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Abimereki D Muzaale
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Dorry L Segev
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Luckmini Liyanage
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Deidra C Crews
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Daniel C Brennan
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ashraf El-Meanawy
- Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Saleh Alqahtani
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Mohamed G Atta
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Macey L Levan
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Brian S Caffo
- Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Paul A Welling
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Department of Physiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Allan B Massie
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Garg N, Poggio ED, Mandelbrot D. The Evaluation of Kidney Function in Living Kidney Donor Candidates. KIDNEY360 2021; 2:1523-1530. [PMID: 35373109 PMCID: PMC8786144 DOI: 10.34067/kid.0003052021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2021] [Accepted: 06/28/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Living kidney donors incur a small increased risk of ESKD, of which predonation GFR is an important determinant. As a result, kidney function assessment is central to the donor candidate evaluation and selection process. This article reviews the different methods of GFR assessment, including eGFR, creatinine clearance, and measured GFR, and the current guidelines on GFR thresholds for donor acceptance. eGFR obtained using the 2009 CKD Epidemiology Collaboration equation that, although the best of estimating estimations, tends to underestimate levels and has limited accuracy, especially near-normal GFR values. In the United States, the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network policy on living donation mandates either measured GFR or creatinine clearance as part of the evaluation. Measured GFR is considered the gold standard, although there is some variation in performance characteristics, depending on the marker and technique used. Major limitations of creatinine clearance are dependency on accuracy of timed collection, and overestimation as a result of distal tubular creatinine secretion. GFR declines with healthy aging, and most international guidelines recommend use of age-adapted selection criteria. The 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes Guideline for the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors diverges from other guidelines and recommends using absolute cutoff of <60 ml/min per 1.73m2 for exclusion and ≥90 ml/min per 1.73m2 for acceptance, and determination of candidacy with intermediate GFR on the basis of long-term ESKD risk. However, several concerns exist for this strategy, including inappropriate acceptance of younger candidates due to underestimation of risk, and exclusion of older candidates whose kidney function is in fact appropriate for age. The role of cystatin C and other newer biomarkers, and data on the effect of predonation GFR on not just ESKD risk, but also advanced CKD risk and cardiovascular outcomes are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neetika Garg
- Division of Nephrology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Emilio D. Poggio
- Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Didier Mandelbrot
- Division of Nephrology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Loiselle MM, Gulin S, Rose T, Burker E, Bolger L, Smith P. The relationship between marijuana use and psychosocial variables in living kidney donor candidates. Clin Transplant 2021; 35:e14248. [PMID: 33555627 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14248] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2020] [Revised: 01/26/2021] [Accepted: 02/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We investigate whether marijuana use in living kidney donor candidates is associated with psychosocial risk factors that place donors at higher risk for adverse outcomes and the unique associations between marijuana use and donor candidacy. METHODS Medical records of 757 living kidney donor candidates were reviewed. Patients were grouped into marijuana users/abstainers; demographic, psychiatric, and substance use variables were compared. Multivariate logistic regression assessed the independent association of marijuana use on committee approval for donation. RESULTS Marijuana use was associated with lack of health insurance, legal history, lower education level, active and history of substance use disorder, active psychiatric disorder, history of multiple psychiatric diagnoses, and history of suicidality. Marijuana users were also more likely to be young, male, unmarried, and less likely to be approved for donation by the multidisciplinary selection committee. This latter association persisted in multivariate models. CONCLUSIONS This is the first study to show that marijuana use is associated with psychosocial factors that could impact behavioral adherence following kidney donation, while reducing chances of committee approval for kidney donation. Special attention to potential overlay between psychosocial risk factors and marijuana use should be considered when evaluating kidney donors, particularly in context of increasingly legal use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marci M Loiselle
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Division of Behavioral Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Shaina Gulin
- Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Terra Rose
- Department of Allied Health Sciences and Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Eileen Burker
- Department of Allied Health Sciences and Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Lauren Bolger
- Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Patrick Smith
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Division of Behavioral Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Lentine KL, Vest LS, Schnitzler MA, Mannon RB, Kumar V, Doshi MD, Cooper M, Mandelbrot DA, Harhay MN, Josephson MA, Caliskan Y, Sharfuddin A, Kasiske BL, Axelrod DA. Survey of US Living Kidney Donation and Transplantation Practices in the COVID-19 Era. Kidney Int Rep 2020; 5:1894-1905. [PMID: 32864513 PMCID: PMC7445484 DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2020.08.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2020] [Revised: 08/14/2020] [Accepted: 08/17/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The scope of the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) practices is not well defined. METHODS We surveyed US transplant programs to assess practices, strategies, and barriers to living LDKT during the COVID-19 pandemic. After institutional review board approval, the survey was distributed from 9 May 2020 to 30 May 2020 by e-mail and postings to professional society list-servs. Responses were stratified based on state COVID-19 cumulative incidence levels. RESULTS Staff at 118 unique centers responded, representing 61% of US living donor recovery programs and 75% of LKDT volume in the prepandemic year. Overall, 66% reported that LDKT surgery was on hold (81% in "high" vs. 49% in "low" COVID-19 cumulative incidence states). A total of 36% reported that evaluation of new donor candidates had paused, 27% reported that evaluations were very much decreased (>0% to <25% typical), and 23% reported that evaluations were moderately decreased (25% to <50% typical). Barriers to LDKT surgery included program concerns for donor (85%) and recipient (75%) safety, patient concerns (56%), elective case restrictions (47%), and hospital administrative restrictions (48%). Programs with higher local COVID-19 cumulative incidence reported more barriers related to staff and resource diversion. Most centers continuing donor evaluations used remote strategies (video, 82%; telephone, 43%). As LDKT resumes, all programs will screen for COVID-19, although timeframe and modalities will vary. Recommendations for presurgical self-quarantine are also variable. CONCLUSION The COVID-19 pandemic has had broad impacts on LDKT practice. Ongoing research and consensus building are needed to reduce barriers, to guide optimal practices, and to support safe restoration of LDKT across centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Krista L. Lentine
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Luke S. Vest
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Mark A. Schnitzler
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Roslyn B. Mannon
- Department of Medicine, University of Nebraska, Omaha, Nebraska, USA
| | - Vineeta Kumar
- University of Alabama Comprehensive Transplant Center, Birmingham, Alabama, USA
| | - Mona D. Doshi
- Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Matthew Cooper
- Medstar Georgetown Transplant Institute, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Didier A. Mandelbrot
- Comprehensive Transplant Program, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Meera N. Harhay
- Department of Medicine, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | | | - Yasar Caliskan
- Saint Louis University Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Asif Sharfuddin
- Department of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
| | - Bertram L. Kasiske
- Department of Medicine, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - David A. Axelrod
- Organ Transplant Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
| |
Collapse
|