Cardiovascular disease in kidney donors: matched cohort study

Pros and cons of live kidney donation in prediabetics: A critical review and way forward

There is shortage of organs, including kidneys, worldwide. Along with deceased kidney transplantation, there is a significant rise in live kidney donation. The prevalence of prediabetes (PD), including impaired fasting glucose and impaired glucose tolerance, is on the rise across the globe. Transplant teams frequently come across prediabetic kidney donors for evaluation. Prediabetics are at risk of diabetes, chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular events, stroke, neuropathy, retinopathy, dementia, depression and nonalcoholic liver disease along with increased risk of all-cause mortality. Unfortunately, most of the studies done in prediabetic kidney donors are retrospective in nature and have a short follow up period. There is lack of prospective long-term studies to know about the real risk of complications after donation. Furthermore, there are variations in recommendations from various guidelines across the globe for donations in prediabetics, leading to more confusion among clinicians. This increases the responsibility of transplant teams to take appropriate decisions in the best interest of both donors and recipients. This review focuses on pathophysiological changes of PD in kidneys, potential complications of PD, other risk factors for development of type 2 diabetes, a review of guidelines for kidney donation, the potential role of diabetes risk score and calculator in kidney donors and the way forward for the evaluation and selection of prediabetic kidney donors.

'It is a life changing experience': The experiences of living kidney donors who live in rural Australia

INTRODUCTION

A growing body of research has examined the physical, psychological, social and financial impacts of living kidney donation. However, little is known about the unique experiences or additional burdens faced by living donors from regional or remote locations.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the experiences of living kidney donors who live outside metropolitan centres and to determine how support services could be orientated to better meet their unique needs.

DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Seventeen living kidney donors participated in semistructured telephone interviews. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

Eight themes were identified: (1) donor's emotional well-being is influenced by the recipient's outcome, (2) varied levels of access to medical support and other important services in rural areas, (3) travel takes a toll on time, finances and well-being, (4) varied level of financial impact, (5) medical, emotional and social challenges, (6) both lay and health professional support is valued, (7) varied levels of knowledge and experiences accessing information and (8) a worthwhile experience overall.

CONCLUSION

Despite many challenges, and travel adding to the complexity, rural living kidney donors generally consider it to be a worthwhile experience. The provision of additional emotional, practical and educational support would be welcomed by this group.

Recommendations for living donor kidney transplantation

This Guide for Living Donor Kidney Transplantation (LDKT) has been prepared with the sponsorship of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SEN), the Spanish Transplant Society (SET), and the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). It updates evidence to offer the best chronic renal failure treatment when a potential living donor is available. The core aim of this Guide is to supply clinicians who evaluate living donors and transplant recipients with the best decision-making tools, to optimise their outcomes. Moreover, the role of living donors in the current KT context should recover the level of importance it had until recently. To this end the new forms of incompatible HLA and/or ABO donation, as well as the paired donation which is possible in several hospitals with experience in LDKT, offer additional ways to treat renal patients with an incompatible donor. Good results in terms of patient and graft survival have expanded the range of circumstances under which living renal donors are accepted. Older donors are now accepted, as are others with factors that affect the decision, such as a borderline clinical history or alterations, which when evaluated may lead to an additional number of transplantations. This Guide does not forget that LDKT may lead to risk for the donor. Pre-donation evaluation has to centre on the problems which may arise over the short or long-term, and these have to be described to the potential donor so that they are able take them into account. Experience over recent years has led to progress in risk analysis, to protect donors' health. This aspect always has to be taken into account by LDKT programmes when evaluating potential donors. Finally, this Guide has been designed to aid decision-making, with recommendations and suggestions when uncertainties arise in pre-donation studies. Its overarching aim is to ensure that informed consent is based on high quality studies and information supplied to donors and recipients, offering the strongest possible guarantees.

Long-term Medical Outcomes of Living Kidney Donors

Historically, to minimize risks, living kidney donors have been highly selected and healthy. Operative risks are well-defined, yet concern remains about long-term risks. In the general population, even a mild reduction in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is associated with cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). However, reduction in GFR in the general population is due to kidney or systemic disease. Retrospective studies comparing donors with matched general population controls have found no increased donor risk. Prospective studies comparing donors with controls (maximum follow-up, 9 years) have reported that donor GFR is stable or increases slightly, whereas GFR decreases in controls. However, these same studies identified metabolic and vascular donor abnormalities. There are a few retrospective studies comparing donors with controls. Each has limitations in selection of the control group, statistical analyses, and/or length of follow-up. One such study reported increased donor mortality; 2 reported a small increase in absolute risk of ESKD. Risk factors for donor ESKD are similar to those in the general population. Postdonation pregnancies are also associated with increased risk of hypertension and preeclampsia. There is a critical need for long-term follow-up studies comparing donors with controls from the same era, geographic area, and socioeconomic status who are healthy, with normal renal function on the date matching the date of donation, and are matched on demographic characteristics with the donors. These data are needed to optimize donor candidate counseling and informed consent.

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.

Long-term renal and cardiovascular outcome of living kidney donors: A single-center retrospective observation study

Background

The nephrectomy for donation reduces the renal parenchyma and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). It is important to understand the clinical consequences of kidney donation by a living donor.

Methods

In this single-center, observational, retrospective study, we defined the renal and cardiovascular outcomes of living kidney donors. We analyzed data of 124 donors who donated at the Kidney Transplant Center (TC) of Bari between February 2002 and December 2018. Biometric data collected at visit 0, that is, at the time of the study of the donor candidate, and at visit 1, or rather at the last nephrological checkup (October-2018/August-2019) were compared.

Results

An overall drop in GFR of 29 mL/min was observed over the analyzed period of 81+/-59 months. At visit 1, two donors developed chronic renal failure, including one in ESKD who underwent a kidney transplant. No relationship between age at donation and GFR drop was found. A trend toward an increase in obese people was reported; 28% of patients had compensated dyslipidemia and 35% were treated for hypertension. During the follow-up time, 3% had major cardiovascular events and 24% were lost to follow-up. One patient died.

Conclusion

The age of the donor does not represent a basic element for reducing GFR or for the occurrence of major cardiovascular events. Furthermore, older donor candidates, in optimal health, should not be excluded from the donation. It is important to promote careful and timely follow-up of the donor, preventing the most common clinical consequences of nephrectomy, in consideration of the poor compliance of a large part of donors over the long-term post-donation period.

Sex, Gender, and Cardiovascular Disease in Chronic Kidney Disease

This review on sex, gender, and cardiovascular diseases in chronic kidney disease attempts to summarize what we know and what we do not know about the effects of sex and gender on cardiovascular disease in chronic kidney disease. We discuss and define the terminology of sex and gender, and the underlying physiology for differences observed. We explore how sex and gender affect specific cardiovascular diseases such as coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, arrhythmias, cardiovascular mortality, and pre-eclampsia. We conclude with a review of recent randomized controlled trials and highlight the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences in both sexes.

Risk for subsequent hypertension and cardiovascular disease after living kidney donation: is it clinically relevant?

The first successful live donor kidney transplant was performed in 1954. Receiving a kidney transplant from a live kidney donor remains the best option for increasing both life expectancy and quality of life in patients with end-stage kidney disease. However, ever since 1954, there have been multiple questions raised on the ethics of live kidney donation in terms of negative impacts on donor life expectancy. Given the close relationship between reduced kidney function in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and hypertension, cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular mortality, information on the impact of kidney donation on these is particularly relevant. In this article, we review the existing evidence, focusing on the more recent studies on the impact of kidney donation on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular disease and hypertension, as well as markers of cardiovascular damage including arterial stiffness and uraemic cardiomyopathy. We also discuss the similarities and differences between the pathological reduction in renal function that occurs in CKD, and the reduction in renal function that occurs because of a donor nephrectomy. Kidney donors perform an altruistic act that benefits individual patients as well as the wider society. They deserve to have high-quality evidence on which to make informed decisions.

Long-term risk of all-cause mortality in live kidney donors: a matched cohort study

Background

Long-term outcomes of live kidney donors remain controversial, although this information is crucial for selecting potential donors. Thus, this study compared the long-term risk of all-cause mortality between live kidney donors and healthy control.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study including donors from seven tertiary hospitals in South Korea. Persons who underwent voluntary health screening were included as controls. We created a matched control group considering age, sex, era, body mass index, baseline hypertension, diabetes, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and dipstick albuminuria. The study outcome was progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and all-cause mortality as identified in the linked claims database.

Results

We screened 1,878 kidney donors and 78,115 health screening examinees from 2003 to 2016. After matching, 1,701 persons remained in each group. The median age of the matched study subjects was 44 years, and 46.6% were male. Among the study subjects, 2.7% and 16.6% had underlying diabetes and hypertension, respectively. There were no ESKD events in the matched donor and control groups. There were 24 (1.4%) and 12 mortality cases (0.7%) in the matched donor and control groups, respectively. In the age-sex adjusted model, the risk for all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the donor group than in the control group. However, the significance was not retained after socioeconomic status was included as a covariate (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-3.80).

Conclusion

All-cause mortality was similar in live kidney donors and matched non-donor healthy controls with similar health status and socioeconomic status in the Korean population.

The Canadian Women’s Heart Health Alliance Atlas on the Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Cardiovascular Disease in Women — Chapter 4: Sex- and Gender-Unique Disparities: CVD Across the Lifespan of a Woman

Women have unique sex- and gender-related risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) that can present or evolve over their lifespan. Pregnancy-associated conditions, polycystic ovarian syndrome, and menopause can increase a woman’s risk of CVD. Women are at greater risk for autoimmune rheumatic disorders, which play a role in the predisposition and pathogenesis of CVD. The influence of traditional CVD risk factors (eg, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, physical inactivity, depression, anxiety, and family history) is greater in women than men. Finally, there are sex differences in the response to treatments for CVD risk and comorbid disease processes. In this Atlas chapter we review sex- and gender-unique CVD risk factors that can occur across a woman’s lifespan, with the aim to reduce knowledge gaps and guide the development of optimal strategies for awareness and treatment.

Long-term mortality of living kidney donors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To date, several studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding the mortality risk faced by living kidney donors and controls. Our study assessed the methodological quality of previous studies and performed an updated meta-analysis of the mortality risk.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature searches were conducted involving the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases through September 2020. The search terms used included 'living donor' and 'kidney transplantation' and 'kidney donor' and 'mortality' or 'death' or 'survival'. We evaluated the risk of bias in such studies using ROBINS-I tool. Mortality risk was analyzed using OR and HR.

RESULTS

The qualitative review involved 18 studies and the meta-analysis included nine studies. We identified 3 studies with an overall risk of bias rated as "Low", 2 studies rated as "Moderate", 8 studies rated as "Serious", and 5 studies rated as "Critical". The pooled overall mortality risk in the meta-analysis was 0.984 (95% CI: 0.743, 1.302). In the subgroup analysis of HR and OR, the summary effect estimates did not reach statistical significance. The meta-regression analysis revealed that the donor group of more than 60,000 (1.836, 95% CI: 0.371, 6.410) carried a significantly high mortality risk compared with the donor group of less than 60,000 (0.810, 95% CI: 0.604, 1.086) (P = 0.007). The number of total patients was associated with slightly elevated mortality risks (0.796 for < 10,000, 0.809 for 10,000-60,000, and 1.852 for > 60,000; P < .054).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence based on this systematic review suggests that the methodology of previous studies was inconsistent and also carried a high risk in several aspects. Updated meta-analysis showed that the mortality risk was not significantly different. Future studies with well-designed methodology are necessary.

Is the risk of cardiovascular disease increased in living kidney donors? A Danish population-based cohort study

Reduced renal function is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD); however, how living donor nephrectomy affects the risk of CVD remains controversial. We conducted a nationwide cohort study including living kidney donors in Denmark from 1996 to 2018 to assess the risk of hypertension, atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; composite of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and death) and death after living kidney donation. As comparisons we identified: a cohort of healthy individuals from the general population and an external blood donor cohort. We followed kidney donors (1,103 when compared with the general population cohort; 1,007 when compared with blood donors) for a median of 8 years. Kidney donors had an increased risk of initiating treatment for hypertension when compared with blood donors (standardized incidence ratio [SIR], 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17-1.66) but they did not have increased risk of MACE neither when compared with the general population cohort (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.89) nor with blood donors (SIR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.88-1.55). Neither did they have increased risks of AF and death. Thus, living kidney donation may be associated with increased risk of hypertension; however, we did not identify increased risks of CVD or death.

Outcomes of Living Kidney Donor Candidate Evaluations in the Living Donor Collective Pilot Registry

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background.

Gaps in our knowledge of long-term outcomes affect decision making for potential living kidney donors.

Methods.

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was asked to determine the feasibility of a candidate registry.

Results.

Ten living kidney donor programs evaluated 2107 consecutive kidney donor candidates; 2099 of 2107 (99.6%) completed evaluations, 1578 of 2099 (75.2%) had a decision, and 790 of 1578 (50.1%) were approved to donate as of March 12, 2020. By logistic regression, candidates most likely to be approved were married or had attended college or technical school; those least likely to be approved had ≥1 of the following characteristics: Black race, history of cigarette smoking, and higher blood pressure, higher triglycerides, or higher urine albumin-to-creatinine ratios. Reasons for 617 candidates not being approved included medical issues other than chronic kidney disease risk (25.3%), chronic kidney disease risk (18.5%), candidate withdrawal (15.2%), recipient reason (13.6%), anatomical risk to the recipient (10.3%), noneconomic psychosocial (10.3%), economic (0.5%), and other reasons (6.4%).

Conclusions.

These results suggest that a comprehensive living donor registry is both feasible and necessary to assess long-term outcomes that may inform decision making for future living donor candidates. There may be socioeconomic barriers to donation that require more granular identification so that active measures can address inequities. Some candidates who did not donate may be suitable controls for discerning the appropriateness of acceptance decisions and the long-term outcomes attributable to donation. We anticipate that these issues will be better identified with modifications to the data collection and expansion of the registry to all centers over the next several years.

Renal function outcomes and kidney biopsy features of living kidney donors with hypertension

BACKGROUND

The medium- to long-term outcomes of living kidney donors with hypertension compared to normotensive donors are not well understood, especially with the recent changes in hypertension guidelines.

METHODS

We studied a cohort of 950 living kidney donors using different definitions of hypertension based on either ≥140/90 or ≥130/80 mmHg thresholds and based on either office or ambulatory blood pressure readings. Microstructural features on kidney biopsy at the time of donation were compared using different definitions of hypertension.

RESULTS

After adjusting for years of follow-up, age, sex, and baseline eGFR, hypertension (by any definition) did not significantly predict an eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m² at a median follow-up of 10 years postdonation, though there was a borderline association with ambulatory blood pressure ≥ 130/80 mmHg predicting a 40% decline in eGFR (OR = 1.53, 1.00-2.36; p = .051). Proteinuria was predicted by office blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mmHg and by nondipper profile on nocturnal ambulatory blood pressure measurements. At the time of donation, larger glomeruli and arterial hyalinosis on biopsy were associated with hypertension defined by either ≥140/90 or ≥130/80 mmHg (by office or ambulatory measurements). Nocturnal nondipper status was associated with larger glomeruli size but not arteriolar hyalinosis when compared to dippers.

CONCLUSIONS

In programs that accept donors with controlled hypertension, various definitions of hypertension are associated with histological findings in the donated kidney, but none predict a clinically significant decline in kidney function 10 years after donation. These data support allowing healthy individuals with controlled hypertension to donate a kidney. However, donors with office hypertension (≥140/90 mmHg) and nondippers (regardless of hypertension status) are at greater long-term risk for proteinuria, and particularly for these donors, longer follow-up is warranted.

Destination Transplant: Protocol for a Parallel-group Randomized Trial of an Educational Intervention to Increase Kidney Transplant Among Black People on the Transplant Waiting List

For most patients with kidney failure, living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is their best treatment option. Compared with White people, Black people are more likely to have kidney failure but less likely to receive LDKTs. In this study, the investigators will test an educational intervention, Destination Transplant, designed to reduce this disparity, among Black people already listed for kidney transplant.

Effects of living kidney donation on arterial stiffness: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Kidney donors have been reported to have accelerated progression of aortic stiffness and decreased glomerular filtration compared with healthy non-donors. This is a concern because increased aortic stiffness is an independent predictor of overall cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality in the general population. To confirm if arterial stiffness increases after donation, we will systematically review all studies that evaluated indices of arterial stiffness in healthy individuals who underwent unilateral nephrectomy for kidney donation compared with age-matched healthy non-nephrectomised controls.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

We will comprehensively search for studies published between 1 January 1960 and 15 March 2021 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, OVID and EBM reviews. All prospective (cohort, case-control, case series and before-and-after studies) and retrospective non-randomised studies reporting indices of arterial stiffness in nephrectomised and non-nephrectomised healthy participants will be included. Primary outcome will be the difference in the functional metrics of arterial stiffness between donors and non-donors. Secondary outcomes will be the differences in systolic/diastolic blood pressures, serum creatinine, glomerular filtration, carotid artery intima-media thickness and vascular calcification. Study screening, selection and data extraction will be performed by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias will be independently assessed with the ROBINS-I tool and confidence in evidence by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation recommendations. Qualitative and quantitative data syntheses as well as clinical and statistical heterogeneity (Forest plots, I2 and Cochran's Q statistics) will be evaluated. If clinical and statistical heterogeneity are acceptable, inverse variance-weighted effects will be analysed by random effect models.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical approval is necessary. Our results will be disseminated through peer-review publication and presentations to guide stakeholders on the evaluation and follow-up care of kidney donors.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020185551.

Increased risk of ischemic heart disease after kidney donation

Background

Previous reports suggest increased risk of hypertension and cardiovascular mortality after kidney donation. In this study we investigate the occurrence of ischaemic heart disease and cerebrovascular disease, diabetes and cancer in live kidney donors compared with healthy controls eligible for donation.

Methods

Different diagnoses were assessed in 1029 kidney donors and 16 084 controls. The diagnoses at follow-up were self-reported for the controls and registered by a physician for the donors. Stratified logistic regression was used to estimate associations with various disease outcomes, adjusted for gender, age at follow-up, smoking at baseline, body mass index at baseline, systolic blood pressure at baseline and time since the donation.

Results

The mean observation time was 11.3 years [standard deviation (SD) 8.1] for donors versus 16.4 years (SD 5.7) for controls. The age at follow-up was 56.1 years (SD 12.4) in donors versus 53.5 years (SD 11.1) in controls and 44% of donors were males versus 39.3% in the controls. At follow-up, 35 (3.5%) of the donors had been diagnosed with ischaemic heart disease versus 267 (1.7%) of the controls. The adjusted odds ratio for ischaemic heart disease was 1.64 (confidence interval 1.10–2.43; P = 0.01) in donors compared with controls. There were no significant differences for the risks of cerebrovascular disease, diabetes or cancer.

Conclusions

During long-term follow-up of kidney donors, we found an increased risk of ischaemic heart disease compared with healthy controls. This information may be important in the follow-up and selection process of living kidney donors.

Outcomes in Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: The Role of Donor's Kidney Function

INTRODUCTION

Living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is one of the best therapeutic options for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Guidelines identify different estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) thresholds to determine the eligibility of donors. The aim of our study was to evaluate whether pretransplant donor eGFR was associated with kidney function in the recipient.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied LDKT recipients who received a kidney graft between September 1, 2005, and June 30, 2016 in the same transplant center in France and that had eGFR data available at 3, 12, 24, and 36 months posttransplant.

RESULTS

We studied 90 donor-recipient pairs. The average age at time of transplant was 51.47 ± 10.95 for donors and 43.04 ± 13.52 years for recipients. Donors' average eGFR was 91.99 ± 15.37 mL/min/1.73 m2. Donor's age and eGFR were significantly correlated (p < 0.0001, r2 0.023). Donor's age and eGFR significantly correlated with recipient's eGFR at 3, 12, and 24 months posttransplant (age: p < 0.001 at all intervals; eGFR p = 0.001, 0.003, and 0.016, respectively); at 36 months, only donor's age significantly correlated with recipient's eGFR. BMI, gender match, and year of kidney transplant did not correlate with graft function. In the multivariable analyses, donor's eGFR and donor's age were found to be associated with graft function; correlation with eGFR was lost at 36 months; and donor's age retained a strong correlation with graft function at all intervals (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Donor's eGFR and age are strong predictors of recipient's kidney function at 3 years. We suggest that donor's eGFR should be clinically balanced with other determinants of kidney function and in particular with age.

Cardiovascular Effects of Unilateral Nephrectomy in Living Kidney Donors at 5 Years

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Kidney donation reduces renal function by ≈30% allowing study of the cardiovascular effects of a reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate without comorbidities. We report 5-year results of a longitudinal, parallel-group, blinded end-point study of living kidney donors (n=50) and healthy controls (n=45). The primary end point, left ventricular mass, was measured using cardiac magnetic resonance. Secondary end points, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure, and pulse wave velocity were measured using validated blood pressure monitors and the SphygmoCor device. Effect sizes were calculated as differences between change from baseline in the donor and control groups. In donors, estimated glomerular filtration rate was 95±15 mL/min per 1.73 m2 at baseline (predonation) and 67±14 mL/min per 1.73 m2 at 5 years. In controls, there was a −1±2 mL/min per 1.73 m2 decline per annum. Change in left ventricular mass at 5 years was not significantly different between donors and controls (mean difference, +0.40 g [95% CI, −4.68 to 5.49] P=0.876), despite an initial increase in mass in donors compared with controls at 12 months. Pulse wave velocity, which increased in donors at 12 months, returned to levels not different from controls at 5 years (mean difference, −0.24 m/s [95% CI, −0.69 to 0.21]). Change in ambulatory systolic blood pressure was not different in donors compared with controls (mean difference, +1.91 mm Hg [95% CI, −2.72 to 6.54]). We found no evidence that the reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate after kidney donation was associated with a change in left ventricular mass detectable by magnetic resonance imaging at 5 years.

Prevalence, Mechanisms, Treatment, and Complications of Hypertension Postliving Kidney Donation

Living kidney donors represent a unique population of patients. Potential donors are selected based on the belief that their preoperative fitness is likely to mitigate the risks of long- and short-term harm following uninephrectomy. Studies performed on postdonation outcomes have largely focused on mortality and the risk of end-stage renal failure, but have also investigated secondary outcomes such as cardiovascular morbidity and hypertension. It has been postulated that hypertension is a possible outcome of living kidney donation. A variety of studies have been conducted to investigate the prevalence, epidemiology, mechanisms, treatment strategies, and long-term ramifications of hypertension postdonation. These studies are heterogeneous in their population, design, methodology, and outcome measures and have presented contradicting outcomes. Additionally, the absence of a well-matched control group has made it challenging to interpret and generalise the reported findings. As such, it is not possible to definitively conclude that hypertension occurs at a higher rate among donors than the general population. This article will review the evidence of postdonation hypertension prevalence, mechanisms, treatment, and complications.

One size does not fit all: understanding individual living kidney donor risk

Living donor kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) but confers a risk upon the donor, both in the short term and many years after donation. While perioperative mortality is low and longevity does not appear to be adversely affected, there are small increases in the risk of other important morbidities. The overall risk of ESKD among donors is low but appears to be three- to five-fold higher than among healthy non-donors, and this relative risk is even higher among donors of African ancestry. For these individuals, apolipoprotein L1 genotyping may be helpful. Kidney donors also have an increased risk of developing hypertension post-donation and a modestly increased risk of developing gout. Living kidney donation also increases the risk of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia while not affecting other important pregnancy outcomes. As our understanding of donor risk grows, it is important to counsel prospective donors according to their individual risk and so obtain better informed donor consent. As knowledge advances, it is also important that all clinicians who manage kidney transplant candidates have an up to date understanding of donor risk to inform shared decision making.

Changes in Blood Pressure and Arterial Hemodynamics following Living Kidney Donation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Effect of a Reduction in GFR after Nephrectomy on Arterial Stiffness and Central Hemodynamics (EARNEST) study was a multicenter, prospective, controlled study designed to investigate the associations of an isolated reduction in kidney function on BP and arterial hemodynamics.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Prospective living kidney donors and healthy controls who fulfilled criteria for donation were recruited from centers with expertise in vascular research. Participants underwent office and ambulatory BP measurement, assessment of arterial stiffness, and biochemical tests at baseline and 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 469 participants were recruited, and 306 (168 donors and 138 controls) were followed up at 12 months. In the donor group, mean eGFR was 27 ml/min per 1.73 m² lower than baseline at 12 months. Compared with baseline, at 12 months the mean within-group difference in ambulatory day systolic BP in donors was 0.1 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -1.7 to 1.9) and 0.6 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -0.7 to 2.0) in controls. The between-group difference was -0.5 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -2.8 to 1.7; P=0.62). The mean within-group difference in pulse wave velocity in donors was 0.3 m/s (95% confidence interval, 0.1 to 0.4) and 0.2 m/s (95% confidence interval, -0.0 to 0.4) in controls. The between-group difference was 0.1 m/s (95% confidence interval, -0.2 to 0.3; P=0.49).

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in ambulatory peripheral BP and pulse wave velocity in kidney donors at 12 months after nephrectomy were small and not different from controls.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01769924 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01769924).

Serum Klotho in Living Kidney Donors and Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Meta-Analysis

α-Klotho is a known anti-aging protein that exerts diverse physiological effects, including phosphate homeostasis. Klotho expression occurs predominantly in the kidney and is significantly decreased in patients with chronic kidney disease. However, changes in serum klotho levels and impacts of klotho on outcomes among kidney transplant (KTx) recipients and kidney donors remain unclear. A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database from inception through October 2019 to identify studies evaluating serum klotho levels and impacts of klotho on outcomes among KTx recipients and kidney donors. Study results were pooled and analyzed utilizing a random-effects model. Ten cohort studies with a total of 431 KTx recipients and 5 cohort studies with a total of 108 living kidney donors and were identified. After KTx, recipients had a significant increase in serum klotho levels (at 4 to 13 months post-KTx) with a mean difference (MD) of 243.11 pg/mL (three studies; 95% CI 67.41 to 418.81 pg/mL). Although KTx recipients had a lower serum klotho level with a MD of = -234.50 pg/mL (five studies; 95% CI -444.84 to -24.16 pg/mL) compared to healthy unmatched volunteers, one study demonstrated comparable klotho levels between KTx recipients and eGFR-matched controls. Among kidney donors, there was a significant decrease in serum klotho levels post-nephrectomy (day 3 to day 5) with a mean difference (MD) of -232.24 pg/mL (three studies; 95% CI -299.41 to -165.07 pg/mL). At one year following kidney donation, serum klotho levels remained lower than baseline before nephrectomy with a MD of = -110.80 pg/mL (two studies; 95% CI 166.35 to 55.24 pg/mL). Compared to healthy volunteers, living kidney donors had lower serum klotho levels with a MD of = -92.41 pg/mL (two studies; 95% CI -180.53 to -4.29 pg/mL). There is a significant reduction in serum klotho levels after living kidney donation and an increase in serum klotho levels after KTx. Future prospective studies are needed to assess the impact of changes in klotho on clinical outcomes in KTx recipients and living kidney donors.

Canadian Society of Transplantation and Canadian Society of Nephrology Commentary on the 2017 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors

Purpose of review:

To review an international guideline on the evaluation and care of living kidney donors and provide a commentary on the applicability of the recommendations to the Canadian donor population.

Sources of information:

We reviewed the 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors and compared this guideline to the Canadian 2014 Kidney Paired Donation (KPD) Protocol for Participating Donors.

Methods:

A working group was formed consisting of members from the Canadian Society of Transplantation and the Canadian Society of Nephrology. Members were selected to have representation from across Canada and in various subspecialties related to living kidney donation, including nephrology, surgery, transplantation, pediatrics, and ethics.

Key findings:

Many of the KDIGO Guideline recommendations align with the KPD Protocol recommendations. Canadian researchers have contributed to much of the evidence on donor evaluation and outcomes used to support the KDIGO Guideline recommendations.

Limitations:

Certain outcomes and risk assessment tools have yet to be validated in the Canadian donor population.

Implications:

Living kidney donors should be counseled on the risks of postdonation outcomes given recent evidence, understanding the limitations of the literature with respect to its generalizability to the Canadian donor population.

Partial vs. radical nephrectomy and the risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular, and nephrological outcomes

INTRODUCTION

The study's objective was to examine the effects of renal-preservation surgery on long-term mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, and renal-related outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all partial (n=575) and radical nephrectomies (n=882) for tumors ≤7 cm in diameter between 2002 and 2010 across three academic centers in Ontario, Canada. We linked records from provincial databases to assess patient characteristics and outcomes (median seven years' followup using retrospective data). A weighted propensity score was used to reduce confounding. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization with major cardiovascular events, non-cancer related mortality, kidney cancer-related mortality, and dialysis.

RESULTS

Mean one-year postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 71 mL/min/1.73 m² in the partial group and 52 mL/min/1.73 m² in the radical group. Partial nephrectomy was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality in the first five years after surgery (hazard ratio [HR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27-0.66), which did not extend beyond five years (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.68-1.49). Kidney cancer-related mortality was lower in the partial compared to the radical group for the first four years after surgery (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04-0.72). There were no significant differences between the groups for cardiovascular outcomes or non-cancer related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall survival and cancer-specific survival was reduced in radical nephrectomy patients. However, despite reduced renal function in the radical nephrectomy group, non-cancer-related death, cardiovascular events, and dialysis were not significantly different between groups. Long-term benefits of partial nephrectomy may be less than previously believed.

Long-term prognosis after kidney donation: a propensity score matched comparison of living donors and non-donors from two population cohorts

Background

Live donor nephrectomy is a safe procedure. However, long-term donor prognosis is debated, necessitating high-quality studies.

Methods

A follow-up study of 761 living kidney donors was conducted, who visited the outpatient clinic and were propensity score matched and compared to 1522 non-donors from population-based cohort studies. Primary outcome was kidney function. Secondary outcomes were BMI (kg/m²), incidences of hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular events, cardiovascular and overall mortality, and quality of life.

Results

Median follow-up after donation was 8.0 years. Donors had an increase in serum creatinine of 26 μmol/l (95% CI 24–28), a decrease in eGFR of 27 ml/min/1.73 m² (95% CI − 29 to − 26), and an eGFR decline of 32% (95% CI 30–33) as compared to non-donors. There was no difference in outcomes between the groups for ESRD, microalbuminuria, BMI, incidence of diabetes or cardiovascular events, and mortality. A lower risk of new-onset hypertension (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.33–0.62) was found among donors. The EQ-5D health-related scores were higher among donors, whereas the SF-12 physical and mental component scores were lower.

Conclusion

Loss of kidney mass after live donation does not translate into negative long-term outcomes in terms of morbidity and mortality compared to non-donors.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register NTR3795.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10654-020-00647-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Survival in Living Kidney Donors: An Australian and New Zealand Cohort Study Using Data Linkage

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background.

Living kidney donors are a highly selected healthy population expected to have high survival postdonation, but mortality studies are limited. Our study aimed to compare mortality in living kidney donors with the general population in Australia and New Zealand, hypothesizing that donor survival would exceed average survival.

Methods.

All living kidney donors in Australia, 2004–2013, and New Zealand, 2004–2012, from the Australian and New Zealand Living Kidney Donor Registry were included. We ascertained primary cause of death from data linkage with national death registers. Standardized mortality ratios and relative survival were estimated, matching on age, sex, calendar year, and country.

Results.

Among 3253 living kidney donors, there were 32 deaths over 20 331 person-years, with median follow-up 6.2 years [interquartile range: 3.9–8.4]. Only 25 donors had diabetes-fasting blood sugar level predonation, of which 3 had impaired glucose tolerance. At discharge, the median creatinine was 108 µmol/L and estimated glomerular filtration rate was 58 mL/min/1.72 m². Four deaths occurred in the first year: 2 from immediate complications of donation, and 2 from unrelated accidental causes. The leading cause of death was cancer (n = 16). The crude mortality rate was 157 (95% confidence interval [CI], 111-222)/100 000 person-y, and the standardized mortality ratio was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.24-0.47). The 5-year cumulative relative survival was 1.019 (95% CI, 1.014-1.021), confirming that the survival probability in living kidney donors was 2% higher relative to the general population.

Conclusions.

As expected, mortality in living kidney donors was substantially lower than the general population and is reassuring for potential donor counseling. The Living Donor Registry only captured a third of the deaths, highlighting the benefit of data linkage to national death registries in the long-term follow-up of living kidney donors.

Long-term Mortality Risks Among Living Kidney Donors in Korea

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Living kidney donors may have a higher risk for death and kidney failure. This study aimed to investigate the long-term mortality experience of living kidney donors compared with members of the general public in Korea who underwent voluntary health examinations.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

We first calculated standardized mortality ratios for 1,292 Korean living kidney donors who underwent donor nephrectomy between 1982 and 2016 and 72,286 individuals who underwent voluntary health examinations between 1995 and 2016. Next we compared survival between the 1,292 living kidney donors and a subgroup of the health examination population (n=33,805) who had no evident contraindications to living kidney donation at the time of their examinations. Last, a matched comparator group was created from the health examination population without apparent contraindication to donation by matching 4,387 of them to donors (n=1,237) on age, sex, body mass index, estimated glomerular filtration rate, urine dipstick albumin excretion, previously diagnosed hypertension and diabetes, and era.

EXPOSURES

Donor nephrectomy.

OUTCOMES

All-cause mortality and other clinical outcomes after kidney donation.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

First, standardized mortality ratios were calculated separately for living kidney donors and the health examination population standardized to the general population. Second, we used Cox regression analysis to compare mortality between living kidney donors versus the subgroup of the health examination population without evident donation contraindications. Third, we used Cox regression analysis to compare mortality between living kidney donors and matched comparators from the health examination population without apparent contraindication to donation.

RESULTS

The living kidney donors and health examination population had excellent survival rates compared with the general population. 52 (4.0%) of 1,292 kidney donors died during a mean follow-up of 12.3±8.1 years and 1,072 (3.2%) of 33,805 in the health examiner subgroup without donation contraindications died during a mean follow-up of 11.4±6.1 years. Donor nephrectomy did not elevate the hazard for mortality after multivariable adjustment in kidney donors and the 33,805 comparators (adjusted HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.71-1.44; P=0.9). Moreover, living donors showed a similar mortality rate compared with the group of matched healthy comparators.

LIMITATIONS

Donors from a single transplantation center. Residual confounding owing to the observational study design.

CONCLUSIONS

Kidney donors experienced long-term rates of death comparable to nondonor comparators with similar health status.

Why do not all living kidney donor candidates proceed to donation?

There are national and international guidelines for donor workup and acceptance criteria of potential living kidney donor candidates (LKDC), but there is significant variation in clinical practice. We examined our local practice in assessing potential LKDC against current guidelines; nearly all of our accepted donors met these guidelines. LKDC who did not proceed to donation had an identified health issue (60%), the presence of risk factors for long-term end-stage kidney disease (17%), social (13%) or immunological reasons (7%).

Cardiovascular rEmodelling in living kidNey donorS with reduced glomerular filtration rate: rationale and design of the CENS study

Purpose: Until recently, it has been believed that donating a kidney not represents any risk for development of cardiovascular disease. However, a recent Norwegian epidemiological study suggests that kidney donors have an increased long-term risk of cardiovascular mortality. The pathophysiological mechanisms linking reduced kidney function to cardiovascular disease are not known. Living kidney donors are screened for cardiovascular morbidity before unilateral nephrectomy, and are left with mildly reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) after donation. Therefore, they represent an unique model for investigating the pathogenesis linking reduced GFR to cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular remodelling. We present the study design of Cardiovascular rEmodelling in living kidNey donorS with reduced glomerular filtration rate (CENS), which is an investigator-initiated prospective observational study on living kidney donors. The hypothesis is that living kidney donors develop cardiovascular remodelling due to a reduction of GFR.Materials and methods: 60 living kidney donors and 60 age and sex matched healthy controls will be recruited. The controls will be evaluated to fulfil the Norwegian transplantation protocol for living kidney donors. Investigations will be performed at baseline and after 1, 3, 6 and 10 years in both groups. The investigations include cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, echocardiography, bone density scan, flow mediated dilatation, laser Doppler flowmetry, nailfold capillaroscopy, office blood pressure, 24-h ambulatory blood pressure, heart rate variability and investigation of microbiota and biomarkers for inflammation, cardiovascular risk and the calcium-phosphate metabolism.Conclusions: The present study seeks to provide new insight in the pathophysiological mechanisms linking reduced kidney function to cardiovascular disease. In addition, we aim to enlighten predictors of adverse cardiovascular outcome in living kidney donors. The study is registered at Clinical-Trials.gov (identifier: NCT03729557).

Preserved Kidney Volume, Body Mass Index, and Age Are Significant Preoperative Factors for Predicting Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate in Living Kidney Donors at 1 Year After Donation

BACKGROUND

Securing postdonation renal function in the lifetime of donors is a consequential subject for physicians, and precise prediction of postdonation renal function would be considerably beneficial when judging the feasibility of kidney donation. The aim of this study was to investigate the optimum model for predicting eGFR at 1 year after kidney donation.

METHODS

We enrolled 101 living-related kidney donors for the development cohort and 44 for the external validation cohort. All patients in each cohort underwent thin-sliced (1 mm) enhanced computed tomography (CT) scans. We excluded individuals with diabetes, glucose intolerance, or albuminuria from this study. We evaluated preoperative factors including age, sex, hypertension, body mass index (BMI), serum uric acid, baseline eGFR, and body surface area (BSA)-adjusted preserved kidney volume (PKV) by using 3-dimensional reconstruction of thin-sliced enhanced CT images. To detect independent predictors, we performed multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

The multivariable regression analysis revealed that age, BMI, predonation eGFR, and BSA-adjusted PKV were independent predictors of eGFR at 1 year after kidney donation (correlation coefficient: -0.15, -0.476, 0.521, 0.127, respectively). A strong correlation between predicted eGFR and observed eGFR was obtained in the development cohort (r = 0.839, P < .0001). The significance of this predictive model was also confirmed with the external validation cohort (r = 0.797, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Age, BMI, predonation eGFR, and BSA-adjusted PKV may be useful for precisely predicting eGFR at 1 year after living kidney donation and be helpful to determine the feasibility of kidney donation from marginal donors.

Chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy: a clinically-significant entity?

Worldwide, the kidney is the ninth and 14th most common primary site of cancer in men and women respectively. Surgical management with either radical or partial nephrectomy is the mainstay of treatment. Surgical resection of functional kidney parenchyma is associated with reductions in glomerular filtration rate, and can lead to the development of chronic kidney disease (CKD); however, there is currently debate as to whether CKD secondary to surgical removal of a kidney is of clinical significance. Here, it will be argued that CKD is of clinical significance regardless of aetiology, due to the higher cardiovascular and mortality risk which is associated with low glomerular filtration rate.

Correlation and Prediction of Living-Donor Remaining Function by Using Predonation Computed Tomography-Based Volumetric Measurements: Role of Remaining Kidney Volume

OBJECTIVES

Kidney volume in healthy living donors may serve as a surrogate marker of renal function. Here, we evaluated whether preserved kidney volume correlated with and could predict donor renal function at 2 years postdonation using the CKD-EPI estimated glomerular filtration rate equation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Healthy living donors (n = 208) with computed tomography volume measurements were evaluated for renal function before and after donation. Preserved kidney volume was adjusted to body surface area. Demographic characteristics (including race/ethnicity and sex) and renal function variables of donors were analyzed for postdonation renal function.

RESULTS

Donor mean age was 39.4 ± 10.7 years (36.2% males, 91.9% white). Median adjusted preserved kidney volume was 180.6 mL. At 2 years postdonation, median estimated glomerular filtration rate was 62.4 mL/min (interquartile range, 54.8-73.2 mL/min). Predonation estimated glomerular filtration rate, age, and adjusted preserved kidney volume were found to be inde-pendent predictors of 2-year estimated glomerular filtration rate (P < .001). We further analyzed data by stratifying preserved kidney volumes into tertiles. Mean 2-year estimated glomerular filtration rates were 57.9 ± 12, 65 ± 16, and 73 ± 17 mL/min for lowest to highest tertile groups, respectively (P < .05). The odds ratio of having a 2-year postdonation estimated glomerular filtration rate of < 60 mL/min for donors in the lowest tertile group was 3.51 (95% confidence interval, 1.9-6.4; P < .001), whereas the risk for donors in the highest tertile group was 0.23 (95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.44; P< .001). Sensitivity analysis result was 0.764 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.82; P = .005) for adjusted preserved kidney volume and estimated glomerular filtration rate of < 60 mL/min.

CONCLUSIONS

Remaining kidney volume before donation correlated with and predicted estimated glomerular filtration rate after donation. Remaining kidney volume should be assessed when selecting kidneys from healthy donors.

Risks of Living Kidney Donation: Current State of Knowledge on Outcomes Important to Donors

In the past decade, there have been increasing efforts to better define and quantify the short- and long-term risks of living kidney donation. Recent studies have expanded upon the previous literature by focusing on outcomes that are important to potential and previous donors, applying unique databases and/or registries to follow large cohorts of donors for longer periods of time, and comparing outcomes with healthy nondonor controls to estimate attributable risks of donation. Leading outcomes important to living kidney donors include kidney health, surgical risks, and psychosocial effects of donation. Recent data support that living donors may experience a small increased risk of severe CKD and ESKD compared with healthy nondonors. For most donors, the 15-year risk of kidney failure is <1%, but for certain populations, such as young, black men, this risk may be higher. New risk prediction tools that combine the effects of demographic and health factors, and innovations in genetic risk markers are improving kidney risk stratification. Minor perioperative complications occur in 10%-20% of donor nephrectomy cases, but major complications occur in <3%, and the risk of perioperative death is <0.03%. Generally, living kidney donors have similar or improved psychosocial outcomes, such as quality of life, after donation compared with before donation and compared with nondonors. Although the donation process should be financially neutral, living kidney donors may experience out-of-pocket expenses and lost wages that may or may not be completely covered through regional or national reimbursement programs, and may face difficulties arranging subsequent life and health insurance. Living kidney donors should be fully informed of the perioperative and long-term risks before making their decision to donate. Follow-up care allows for preventative care measures to mitigate risk and ongoing surveillance and reporting of donor outcomes to inform prior and future living kidney donors.

Pre-donation BMI and preserved kidney volume can predict the cohort with unfavorable renal functional compensation at 1-year after kidney donation

BACKGROUND

The magnitude of renal function recovery after kidney donation differs in donors with a heterogeneous background. Preoperative assessment of candidates with potentially unfavorable renal functional compensation is critical when baseline kidney function is marginal. We explored the significance of preserved kidney volume (PKV) and known preoperative risk factors for the prediction of unfavorable renal function compensation.

METHODS

We enrolled 101 living donors for whom a 1-mm sliced enhanced computed tomography scan was performed preoperatively and clinical data could be collected up to 1 year after donation. The donors whose estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 1 year after donation was 70% or higher of baseline eGFR were assigned to the "favorable renal compensation" group and the others to the "unfavorable renal compensation" group.

RESULTS

Age, sex, and preoperative serum uric acid level were not significant predictors for "unfavorable renal compensation." Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index (BMI) and body surface area (BSA)-adjusted PKV were independent preoperative risk factors for "unfavorable renal compensation" (adjusted odds ratio, 1.342 and 0.929, respectively). Hypertension and preoperative eGFR were not independent predictors when adjusted with BMI and BSA-adjusted PKV. Receiver operative characteristic analysis revealed that the predictive equation with the two independent predictors yielded a good accuracy to detect donor candidates with unfavorable renal functional compensation (area under the curve = 0.803), and the optimal cut-off values were identified as 23.4 kg/m2 for BMI and 107.3 cm3/m2 for BSA-adjusted PKV.

CONCLUSIONS

BMI and BSA-adjusted PKV may be useful to select candidates with potentially unfavorable renal function compensation before kidney donation.

Helping More Patients Receive a Living Donor Kidney Transplant

The best treatment option for many patients with kidney failure is a kidney transplant from a living donor. Countries that successfully increase their rate of living kidney donation will decrease their reliance on dialysis, the most expensive and high-risk form of kidney replacement therapy. Outlined here are some barriers that prevent some patients from pursuing living kidney donation and current knowledge on some potential solutions to these barriers. Also described are strategies to promote living kidney donation in a defensible system of practice. Safely increasing the rate of living kidney donation will require better programs and policies to improve the experiences of living donors and their recipients, to safeguard the practice for years to come.

Donor Nephrectomy May Compromise the Cardiovascular System: A Retrospective, Single-Center Study

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to determine the short-term effects of donor nephrectomy on the cardiovascular system and to gain a better understanding of the recently recognized long-term increased risk of end-stage renal disease and cardiovascular mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Living kidney donors who underwent donor nephrectomy between January 2010 and January 2015 at the Hacettepe University Transplantation Unit were retrospectively screened. Echocardiographic parameters, kidney volumes, and renal functions before nephrectomy were compared with measurements after nephrectomy. Flow-mediated dilatation values of living kidney donors were compared with healthy individuals.

RESULTS

The study included 73 female and 31 male living kidney donors with a mean age of 46.1 ± 10.8 years. In the comparative analysis of donors versus 35 healthy individuals, the changes in flow-mediated dilatation were 12.3 ± 5.7% and 15.4 ± 6.3%, respectively (P = .016). In the comparative analysis of preoperative versus the last visit transthoracic echocardiographic results, left ventricular end-systolic and end-diastolic diameters decreased and left ventricular posterior wall thickness and septum thickness increased (P = .025, P = .002, P = .026, and P = .019, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrectomy may cause several hemodynamic changes in living kidney donors, which may exacerbate cardiovascular risks in this population.

Follow-up Care of Living Kidney Donors in Alberta, Canada

Background

Previous guidelines recommend that living kidney donors receive lifelong annual follow-up care to assess renal health.

Objective

To determine whether these best practice recommendations are currently being followed.

Design

Retrospective cohort study using linked health care databases.

Setting

Alberta, Canada (2002-2014).

Patients

Living kidney donors.

Measurements

We determined the proportion of donors who had annual outpatient physician visits and laboratory measurements for serum creatinine and albuminuria.

Results

There were 534 living kidney donors with a median follow-up of 7 years (maximum 13 years). The median age at the time of donation was 41 years and 62% were women. Overall, 25% of donors had all 3 markers of care (physician visit, serum creatinine, albuminuria measurement) in each year of follow-up. Adherence to physician visits was higher than serum creatinine or albuminuria measurements (67% vs 31% vs 28% of donors, respectively). Donors with guideline-concordant care were more likely to be older, reside closer to the transplant center, and receive their nephrectomy in more recent years.

Limitations

Our results may not be generalizable to other countries that do not have a similar universal health care system.

Conclusions

These findings suggest significant evidence-practice gaps, in that the majority of donors saw a physician, but the minority had measurements of kidney function or albuminuria. Future interventions should target improving follow-up care for all donors.

Identifying Outcomes that Are Important to Living Kidney Donors: A Nominal Group Technique Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Living kidney donor candidates accept a range of risks and benefits when they decide to proceed with nephrectomy. Informed consent around this decision assumes they receive reliable data about outcomes they regard as critical to their decision making. We identified the outcomes most important to living kidney donors and described the reasons for their choices.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Previous donors were purposively sampled from three transplant units in Australia (Sydney and Melbourne) and Canada (Vancouver). In focus groups using the nominal group technique, participants identified outcomes of donation, ranked them in order of importance, and discussed the reasons for their preferences. An importance score was calculated for each outcome. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Across 14 groups, 123 donors aged 27-78 years identified 35 outcomes. Across all participants, the ten highest ranked outcomes were kidney function (importance=0.40, scale 0-1), time to recovery (0.27), surgical complications (0.24), effect on family (0.22), donor-recipient relationship (0.21), life satisfaction (0.18), lifestyle restrictions (0.18), kidney failure (0.14), mortality (0.13), and acute pain/discomfort (0.12). Kidney function and kidney failure were more important to Canadian participants, compared with Australian donors. The themes identified included worthwhile sacrifice, insignificance of risks and harms, confidence and empowerment, unfulfilled expectations, and heightened susceptibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Living kidney donors prioritized a range of outcomes, with the most important being kidney health and the surgical, lifestyle, functional, and psychosocial effects of donation. Donors also valued improvements to their family life and donor-recipient relationship. There were clear regional differences in the rankings.

Mood, body image, fear of kidney failure, life satisfaction, and decisional stability following living kidney donation: Findings from the KDOC study

Prior studies demonstrate that most living kidney donors (LKDs) report no adverse psychosocial outcomes; however, changes in psychosocial functioning at the individual donor level have not been routinely captured. We studied psychosocial outcomes predonation and at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months postdonation in 193 LKDs and 20 healthy controls (HCs). There was minimal to no mood disturbance, body image concerns, fear of kidney failure, or life dissatisfaction, indicating no incremental changes in these outcomes over time and no significant differences between LKDs and HCs. The incidence of any new-onset adverse outcomes postdonation was as follows: mood disturbance (16%), fear of kidney failure (21%), body image concerns (13%), and life dissatisfaction (10%). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that LKDs with more mood disturbance symptoms, higher anxiety about future kidney health, low body image, and low life satisfaction prior to surgery were at highest risk of these same outcomes postdonation. It is important to note that some LKDs showed improvement in psychosocial functioning from pre- to postdonation. Findings support the balanced presentation of psychosocial risks to potential donors as well as the development of a donor registry to capture psychosocial outcomes beyond the mandatory 2-year follow-up period in the United States.

Chronic kidney disease as a cardiovascular risk factor: lessons from kidney donors

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease but is often associated with other risks such as diabetes and hypertension and can be both a cause and an effect of cardiovascular disease. Although epidemiologic data of an independent association of reduced glomerular filtration rate with cardiovascular risk are strong, causative mechanisms are unclear.

Living kidney donors provide a useful model for assessing the “pure” effects of reduced kidney function on the cardiovascular system. After nephrectomy, the glomerular filtration rate ultimately falls by about one-third so many can be classified as having chronic kidney disease stages 2 or 3. This prompts concern based on the data showing an elevated cardiovascular risk with these stages of chronic kidney disease. However, initial data suggested no increase in adverse cardiovascular effects compared with control populations. Recent reports have shown a possible late increase in cardiovascular event rates and an early increase in left ventricular mass and markers of risk such as urate and albuminuria. The long-term significance of these small changes is unknown. More detailed and long-term research is needed to determine the natural history of these changes and their clinical significance.

•

Subjects with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease.

•

Kidney donors have a reduced glomerular filtration rate and biochemical changes similar to CKD subjects.

•

Most studies of donors have not shown an elevated risk of death or cardiac disease.

•

Donors have structural and functional cardiovascular changes similar to early CKD.

•

The clinical significance of these changes is currently unknown.