Kidney transplantation in patients declined by other centres

BACKGROUND

Transplant centres show considerable disagreement in the acceptance of transplant candidates with relative contraindications. The aim of this study is to investigate the outcomes of our patients who had been refused at other centres prior to transplantation at our centre.

METHODS

We included patients who had been excluded from transplantation or wait-listing at other centres before referral to our centre. We scored the reasons for refusal at other centres, the type of transplantation procedure, postoperative and long-term complications, patient and graft survival and how these patients experienced the transplantation and quality of life at our centre. All regular patients transplanted in 2010 functioned as a control group for outcome parameters.

RESULTS

We identified 23 patients in the period from January 2000 until March 2013. The most frequent reason for the refusal at other centres was obesity. Twenty of the 23 patients (87%) were alive and 19 had a functioning graft (83%) after a median follow-up of 21.0 months after transplantation (range 11.0-48.9). There were significantly more wound-related problems in the study group as compared with the control group (p = 0.029), but their kidney function at one year after transplantation was not significantly different. The patients indicated an improvement of quality of life after transplantation and in general were satisfied with the transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who had previously had been denied transplantation at other centres generally did well after kidney transplantation with an increased risk of wound complications but a satisfactory graft and patient survival.

Mental health among living kidney donors: a prospective comparison with matched controls from the general population

The impact of living kidney donation on donors' mental health has not been sufficiently nor comprehensively studied. Earlier studies demonstrated that mental health did not change in the majority of donors, however they often lacked a suitable control group and/or had other methodological limitations. Consequently, it remains unclear whether changes in mental health found among a minority of donors reflect normal fluctuations. In this study we matched 135 donors with individuals from the general Dutch population on gender and baseline mental health and compared changes in mental health over time. Mental health was measured using the Brief Symptom Inventory and Mental Health Continuum Short Form. Primary analyses compared baseline and 6 months follow-up. Secondary analyses compared baseline and 9 (controls) or 15 months (donors) follow-up. Primary multilevel regression analyses showed that there was no change in psychological complaints (p = 0.20) and wellbeing (p = 0.10) over time and donors and controls did not differ from one another in changes in psychological complaints (p = 0.48) and wellbeing (p = 0.85). Secondary analyses also revealed no difference in changes between the groups. We concluded that changes in mental health in the short term after donation do not significantly differ from normal fluctuations found in the Dutch general population.

Home-based family intervention increases knowledge, communication and living donation rates: a randomized controlled trial

Our aim was to develop and test an educational program to support well-informed decision making among patients and their social network regarding living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). One hundred sixty-three patients who were unable to find a living donor were randomized to standard care or standard care plus home-based education. In the education condition, patients and members of their social network participated in home-based educational meetings and discussed renal replacement therapy options. Patients and invitees completed pre-post self-report questionnaires measuring knowledge, risk perception, communication, self-efficacy and subjective norm. LDKT activities were observed for 6 months postintervention. Patients in the experimental group showed significantly more improvements in knowledge (p < 0.001) and communication (p = 0.012) compared with the control group. The invitees showed pre-post increases in knowledge (p < 0.001), attitude toward discussing renal replacement therapies (p = 0.020), attitude toward donating a kidney (p = 0.023) and willingness to donate a kidney (p = 0.039) and a decrease in risk perception (p = 0.003). Finally, there were significantly more inquiries (29/39 vs. 13/41, p < 0.001), evaluations (25/39 vs. 7/41, p < 0.001) and actual LDKTs (17/39 vs. 4/41, p = 0.003) in the experimental group compared with the control group. Home-based family education supports well-informed decision making and promotes access to LDKT.

Living kidney donors: impact of age on long-term safety

The safety of older live kidney donors, especially the decline in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) after donation, has been debated. In this study we evaluated long-term renal outcome in older live kidney donors. From 1994 to 2006 follow-up data of 539 consecutive live kidney donations were prospectively collected, during yearly visits to the outpatient clinic. Donors were categorized into two groups, based on age: < 60 (n = 422) and ≥ 60 (n = 117). Elderly had lower GFR predonation (80 vs. 96 mL/min respectively, p < 0.001). During median follow-up of 5.5 years, maximum decline in eGFR was 38% ± 9% and the percentage maximum decline was not different in both groups. On long-term follow-up, significantly more elderly had an eGFR < 60 mL/min (131 (80%) vs. 94 (31%), p < 0.001). However, renal function was stable and no eGFR of less than 30 mL/min was seen. In multivariate analysis higher body mass index (HR 1.09, 95%CI 1.03-1.14) and more HLA mismatches (HR 1.17, 95%CI 1.03-1.34) were significantly correlated with worse graft survival. Donor age did not influence graft survival. After kidney donation decline in eGFR is similar in younger and older donors. As kidney function does not progressively decline, live kidney donation by elderly is considered safe.

For love or money? Attitudes toward financial incentives among actual living kidney donors

Due to lengthening waiting lists for kidney transplantation, a debate has emerged as to whether financial incentives should be used to stimulate living kidney donation. In recent surveys among the general public approximately 25% was in favor of financial incentives while the majority was opposed or undecided. In the present study, we investigated the opinion of living kidney donors regarding financial incentives for living kidney donation. We asked 250 living kidney donors whether they, in retrospect, would have wanted a financial reward for their donation. We also investigated whether they were in favor of using financial incentives in a government-controlled system to stimulate living anonymous donation. Additionally, the type of incentive deemed most appropriate was also investigated. In general almost half (46%) of the study population were positive toward introducing financial incentives for living donors. The majority (78%) was not in favor of any kind of reward for themselves as they had donated out of love for the recipient or out of altruistic principles. Remarkably, 60% of the donors were in favor of a financial incentive for individuals donating anonymously. A reduced premium or free health insurance was the preferred incentive.

Long-term follow-up of a randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and mini-incision open live donor nephrectomy

Long-term physical and psychosocial effects of laparoscopic and open kidney donation are ill defined. We performed long-term follow-up of 100 live kidney donors, who had been randomly assigned to mini-incision open donor nephrectomy (MIDN) or laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). Data included blood pressure, glomerular filtration rate, quality of life (SF-36), fatigue (MFI-20) and graft survival. After median follow-up of 6 years clinical and laboratory data were available for 47 donors (94%) in both groups; quality of life data for 35 donors (70%) in the MIDN group, and 37 donors (74%) in the LDN group. After 6 years, mean estimated glomerular filtration rates did not significantly differ between MIDN (75 mL/min) and LDN (76 mL/min, p = 0.39). Most dimensions of the SF-36 and MFI-20 did not significantly differ between groups at long-term follow-up, and most scores had returned to baseline. Twelve percent of the donors reported persistent complaints, but no major complications requiring surgical intervention. Five-year death-censored graft survival was 90% for LDN, and 85% for MIDN (p = 0.50). Long-term outcome of live kidney donation is excellent from the perspective of both the donor and the recipient.

Encouraging psychological outcomes after altruistic donation to a stranger

In a growing number of transplant centers worldwide, altruistic donors are accepted to anonymously donate a kidney to a stranger. An important hesitation to expand these transplantation programs is the fear of evoking psychological distress in the altruistic donor after donation. To what extent this fear is justified has not yet been systematically investigated. In this study, 24 altruistic donors were interviewed on average 2 years after donation. Lifetime mental health history, current psychological complaints, satisfaction with and impact of the donation on well-being, motives for donation, communication with recipient and donation experience were assessed. Altruistic donors report a considerable positive impact of donation on psychological well-being, whereas negative impact was limited. Satisfaction with donation was very high. Although a history of a psychiatric diagnosis was ascertained in almost half of the donors, psychological complaints before and after donation were comparable to national average norm scores. Motives for donation were genuine and the experience of donation generally conformed to their expectations. In conclusion, living kidney donation to a stranger does not appear to exacerbate psychological complaints. Moreover, altruistic donors report considerable satisfaction and personal benefit. The exceptional gift of altruistic donors can contribute toward solving the current organ shortage issue.