Outcomes of Living Kidney Donor Candidate Evaluations in the Living Donor Collective Pilot Registry.
Journal
Transplantation direct
ISSN: 2373-8731
Titre abrégé: Transplant Direct
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101651609
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2021
May 2021
Historique:
received:
02
12
2020
revised:
16
01
2021
accepted:
01
02
2021
entrez:
29
4
2021
pubmed:
30
4
2021
medline:
30
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Gaps in our knowledge of long-term outcomes affect decision making for potential living kidney donors. The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was asked to determine the feasibility of a candidate registry. 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%). 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Gaps in our knowledge of long-term outcomes affect decision making for potential living kidney donors.
METHODS
METHODS
The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was asked to determine the feasibility of a candidate registry.
RESULTS
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
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33912656
doi: 10.1097/TXD.0000000000001143
pmc: PMC8078331
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e689Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Références
Prog Transplant. 2012 Dec;22(4):385-92
pubmed: 23187057
Transplantation. 2006 Oct 15;82(7):876-81
pubmed: 17038900
Am J Transplant. 2017 Dec;17(12):3040-3048
pubmed: 28520316
Am J Kidney Dis. 2020 Jun;75(6):919-925
pubmed: 31866225
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Nov;24(11):1872-9
pubmed: 23990679
Transplant Proc. 2019 Mar;51(2):504-508
pubmed: 30879577
Clin Transplant. 2016 Jan;30(1):17-25
pubmed: 26426147
JAMA. 2018 Jan 2;319(1):24-26
pubmed: 29297060
Nephrology (Carlton). 2018 Jul;23(7):616-624
pubmed: 28544308
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Dec;5(12):2338-47
pubmed: 20876682
Am J Transplant. 2014 Aug;14(8):1853-61
pubmed: 25039276
Transplantation. 2020 Jan;104(1):27-32
pubmed: 31449181
Kidney Int. 2014 Jul;86(1):162-7
pubmed: 24284516
Am J Kidney Dis. 2019 Oct;74(4):538-543
pubmed: 30982552
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015 Jan;26(1):201-7
pubmed: 25035519
JAMA. 2018 Jan 2;319(1):49-61
pubmed: 29297077
JAMA. 2010 Mar 10;303(10):959-66
pubmed: 20215610
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2000 Oct;15(10):1667-72
pubmed: 11007838
BMJ. 2004 Jun 26;328(7455):1519
pubmed: 15213107
Transplant Rev (Orlando). 2013 Apr;27(2):50-6
pubmed: 23481320
Clin Transplant. 2011 Sep-Oct;25(5):697-704
pubmed: 21044160
Am J Transplant. 2020 Jan;20 Suppl s1:20-130
pubmed: 31898417
Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 Feb;32(2):103-111
pubmed: 27352382
Am J Transplant. 2009 Sep;9(9):2150-6
pubmed: 19624564
Clin Transplant. 2011 Jan-Feb;25(1):136-45
pubmed: 20047616
Clin Transplant. 2009 Jan-Feb;23(1):39-46
pubmed: 18786138
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2004 May;19(5):1276-80
pubmed: 14993507
J Urol. 2004 Apr;171(4):1424-7
pubmed: 15017189
Transplantation. 2017 Aug;101(8S Suppl 1):S1-S109
pubmed: 28742762
Am J Transplant. 2020 Dec;20(12):3379-3389
pubmed: 32342620
Am J Transplant. 2020 Jan;20(1):25-33
pubmed: 31680449
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018 Apr;29(4):1309-1316
pubmed: 29339549
JAMA. 2014 Feb 12;311(6):579-86
pubmed: 24519297
Transplant Proc. 2013 Sep;45(7):2632-4
pubmed: 24034010
Transplantation. 2014 Nov 15;98(9):918-26
pubmed: 25250649
Transplant Proc. 2013 May;45(4):1347-50
pubmed: 23726569
Transplantation. 2017 Aug;101(8):1783-1792
pubmed: 28737659
JAMA. 2014 Feb 12;311(6):577-9
pubmed: 24519296
BMJ. 2012 Mar 01;344:e1203
pubmed: 22381674
Transplant Proc. 2005 Mar;37(2):605-6
pubmed: 15848472
Ann Intern Med. 2009 May 5;150(9):604-12
pubmed: 19414839