The differential impact of size mismatch in live versus deceased donor kidney transplant.


Journal

Clinical transplantation
ISSN: 1399-0012
Titre abrégé: Clin Transplant
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 8710240

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 2021
Historique:
revised: 03 03 2021
received: 19 11 2020
accepted: 31 03 2021
pubmed: 6 4 2021
medline: 29 6 2021
entrez: 5 4 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The impact of weight mismatch between donors and recipients (D-R) undergoing living-donor kidney transplant (LDKT) versus weight-matched deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) is not established. To determine whether absolute weight mismatch between D-R affects graft survival following LDKT and how this relates to graft outcomes with DDKT when D-R are weight matched. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to determine the association of weight-mismatched D-R (>50 kg, 30-50 kg or 10-30 kg ((D < R); (D > R) and <10 kg (D = R)) with death-censored graft failure in US LDKT recipients from 2006 to 2017. We also explored outcomes relative to weight-matched DDKT and finally, the impact of combined D-R weight-sex mismatch. In LDKT, the risk of graft loss was highest in the setting of D < R (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.05-1.56 for >50 kg difference relative to D = R); however, this was still lower risk than weight-matched DDKT. D-R sex and combined weight-sex mismatch were only important for male recipients (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.27-1.71 for a male recipient >30 kg larger than their female donor, relative to weight-matched male donor-male recipient). This remained superior to weight-sex-matched DDKT however. D-R weight-sex mismatch is important in LDKT; however, graft survival remains superior to proceeding with matched DDKT. Optimizing D-R matching in LDKT could be facilitated through a national kidney-paired donation registry. LDKT weight-sex mismatch should not be deferred in favor of DDKT.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The impact of weight mismatch between donors and recipients (D-R) undergoing living-donor kidney transplant (LDKT) versus weight-matched deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) is not established.
AIM
To determine whether absolute weight mismatch between D-R affects graft survival following LDKT and how this relates to graft outcomes with DDKT when D-R are weight matched.
MATERIALS & METHODS
We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to determine the association of weight-mismatched D-R (>50 kg, 30-50 kg or 10-30 kg ((D < R); (D > R) and <10 kg (D = R)) with death-censored graft failure in US LDKT recipients from 2006 to 2017. We also explored outcomes relative to weight-matched DDKT and finally, the impact of combined D-R weight-sex mismatch.
RESULTS
In LDKT, the risk of graft loss was highest in the setting of D < R (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.05-1.56 for >50 kg difference relative to D = R); however, this was still lower risk than weight-matched DDKT. D-R sex and combined weight-sex mismatch were only important for male recipients (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.27-1.71 for a male recipient >30 kg larger than their female donor, relative to weight-matched male donor-male recipient). This remained superior to weight-sex-matched DDKT however.
CONCLUSION
D-R weight-sex mismatch is important in LDKT; however, graft survival remains superior to proceeding with matched DDKT. Optimizing D-R matching in LDKT could be facilitated through a national kidney-paired donation registry. LDKT weight-sex mismatch should not be deferred in favor of DDKT.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33818840
doi: 10.1111/ctr.14310
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e14310

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

Vinson AJ, Kiberd BA, Davis RB, Tennankore KK. Nonimmunologic donor-recipient pairing, HLA matching, and graft loss in deceased donor kidney transplantation. Transplant Direct. 2019;5:e414.
Miller AJ, Kiberd BA, Alwayn IP, Odutayo A, Tennankore KK. Donor-recipient weight and sex mismatch and the risk of graft loss in renal transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017;12:669-676.
Opelz G, Dohler B. Effect of human leukocyte antigen compatibility on kidney graft survival: comparative analysis of two decades. Transplantation. 2007;84:137-143.
Kasiske BL, Snyder JJ, Gilbertson D. Inadequate donor size in cadaver kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2002;13:2152-2159.
Giral M, Foucher Y, Karam G, et al. Kidney and recipient weight incompatibility reduces long-term graft survival. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010;21:1022-1029.
Hariharan S, Johnson CP, Bresnahan BA, et al. Improved graft survival after renal transplantation in the United States, 1988 to 1996. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:605-612.
Metzger RA, Delmonico FL, Feng S, et al. Expanded criteria donors for kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2003;3(Suppl. 4):114-125.
Grady RW, Novick AC. Hyperfiltration of renal injury: pathophysiology and clinical implications. Urology. 1996;47:273-283.
Modlin C, Goldfarb D, Novick AC. Hyperfiltration nephropathy as a cause of late graft loss in renal transplantation. World J Urol. 1996;14:256-264.
Gratwohl A, Döhler B, Stern M, Opelz G. H-Y as a minor histocompatibility antigen in kidney transplantation: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2008;372:49-53.
El-Agroudy AE, Hassan NA, Bakr MA, et al. Effect of donor/recipient body weight mismatch on patient and graft outcome in living-donor kidney transplantation. Am J Nephrol. 2003;23:294-299.
Dick AA, Mercer LD, Smith JM, McDonald RA, Young B, Healey PJ. Donor and recipient size mismatch in adolescents undergoing living-donor renal transplantation affect long-term graft survival. Transplantation. 2013;96:555-559.
McGee J, Magnus JH, Islam TM, et al. Donor-recipient gender and size mismatch affects graft success after kidney transplantation. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210(5):718-725.
Douverny JB, Baptista-Silva JC, Pestana JO, Sesso R. Importance of renal mass on graft function outcome after 12 months of living donor kidney transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2007;22:3646-3651.
Poggio ED, Hila S, Stephany B, et al. Donor kidney volume and outcomes following live donor kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2006;6:616-624.
Kayler LK, Rasmussen CS, Dykstra DM, et al. Gender imbalance and outcomes in living donor renal transplantation in the United States. Am J Transplant. 2003;3:452-458.
Nyengaard JR, Bendtsen TF. Glomerular number and size in relation to age, kidney weight, and body surface in normal man. Anat Rec. 1992;232:194-201.
Chang P, Gill J, Dong J, et al. Living donor age and kidney allograft half-life: implications for living donor paired exchange programs. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012;7:835-841.
Cecka JM. The OPTN/UNOS renal transplant registry 2003. Clin Transpl. 2003;2003:1-12.
Gjertson DW. Look-up survival tables for living-donor renal transplants: OPTN/UNOS data 1995-2002. Clin Transpl. 2003;2003:337-386.
Davis CL, Delmonico FL. Living-donor kidney transplantation: a review of the current practices for the live donor. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005;16:2098-2110.

Auteurs

Amanda Vinson (A)

Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Tom Skinner (T)

Department of Urology, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Bryce Kiberd (B)

Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.

David Clark (D)

Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Karthik Tennankore (K)

Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH