Psychosocial Evaluation of Living Kidney Donors: A Survey of Current Practices in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Best practices in psychosocial evaluation and care of living donor candidates and donors are not well established. METHODS: We surveyed 195 living kidney donor (LKD) transplant centers in United States from October 2021 to April 2022 querying (1) composition of psychosocial teams, (2) evaluation processes including clinical tools and domains assessed, (3) selection criteria, and (4) psychosocial follow-up post-donation. RESULTS: We received 161 responses from 104 programs, representing 53% of active LKD programs and 67% of LKD transplant volume in 2019. Most respondents (63%) were social workers/independent living donor advocates. Over 90% of respondents indicated donor candidates with known mental health or substance use disorders were initially evaluated by the psychosocial team. Validated psychometric or transplant-specific tools were rarely utilized but domains assessed were consistent. Active suicidality, self-harm, and psychosis were considered absolute contraindications in >90% of programs. Active depression was absolute contraindication in 50% of programs; active anxiety disorder was excluded 27%. Conditions not contraindicated to donation include those in remission: anxiety (56%), depression (53%), and posttraumatic stress disorder (41%). There was acceptance of donor candidates using alcohol, tobacco, or cannabis recreationally, but not if pattern met criteria for active use disorder. Seventy-one percent of programs conducted post-donation psychosocial assessment and use local resources to support donors. CONCLUSIONS: There was variation in acceptance of donor candidates with mental health or substance use disorders. Although most programs conducted psychosocial screening post-donation, support is not standardized and unclear if adequate. Future studies are needed for consensus building among transplant centers to form guidelines for donor evaluation, acceptance, and support.

APOL1 Kidney Risk Variants and Long-Term Kidney Function in Healthy Middle-Aged Black Individuals: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study.

Rationale & Objective: The effect of apolipoprotein L1(APOL1) genotype on future risk of kidney disease among middle-aged individuals with good kidney function is not well established. Study Design: Longitudinal cohort study. Setting & Participants: In total, 5,886 healthy individuals (45-64 years old) enrolled in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study with creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 80 mL/min who would be suitable kidney donors. Exposures: Race and APOL1 genotype. Outcomes: Creatinine- and cystatin C-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFRcr-cys) using the CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) 2021 equation, urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR), proportion with chronic kidney disease (CKD) 3a or worse, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and death. Analytical Approach: Participants grouped based on race and APOL1 genotype. Compared eGFRcr-cys and UACR across groups. Multinomial logistic regression models were used compare odds of CKD. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were created to compare rates of ESKD and death at last follow-up. Results: There were 5,075 Whites (86%), 701 Blacks carrying the low-risk APOL1 genotype (12%), and 110 Blacks carrying the high-risk APOL1 genotype (2%). The mean age at baseline was 53 ± 6 years. At 10 years, White participants had lower eGFRcr-cys than low-risk and high-risk groups (89 ± 16 vs 91 ± 16 and 92 ± 15 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively; P < 0.001). At 25 years, White participants continued to have lower eGFRcr-cys than the low-risk group (70 ± 18 vs 72 ± 19 mL/min/1.73 m2; P < 0.001) but not compared with the high-risk APOL1 genotype (67±23 mL/min/1.73 m2). There was no difference in UACR among groups at 10 and 25 years (P = 0.87 and 0.91, respectively). The odds of developing CKD stage 3a or worse were not different between low-risk and high-risk APOL1 group in both unadjusted and adjusted models (P = 0.26 and P = 0.39, respectively). At last follow-up, <5% developed ESKD, and 45% of individuals either died or reached ESKD with no difference in outcomes between the groups. Limitations: Low ascertainment because of death and long follow-up. Conclusions: Among middle-aged individuals, APOL1 genotype does not appear to be a major driver of future risk of kidney disease.

Black patients with kidney disease carrying 2 variants of the apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) gene, referred to as the high-risk genotype, experience an accelerated decline in kidney function than those with 0 or 1 risk variant. It is unknown whether the high-risk genotype negatively affects kidney function of healthy middle-aged individuals. We evaluated the effect of APOL1 genotype on kidney function of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study participants (mean age 53 years) who had normal kidney function and blood pressure at baseline. At 25 years of follow-up, the APOL1 high-risk genotype did not appear to be a major driver of future risk of kidney disease. Our study findings are relevant for counseling older living donor candidates as well as family members of patients with APOL1-associated kidney disease.

Kidney Transplant Outcomes From Deceased Donors Who Received Dialysis.

Importance: Recipient outcomes after kidney transplant from deceased donors who received dialysis prior to kidney donation are not well described. Objective: To compare outcomes of transplant recipients who received kidneys from deceased donors who underwent dialysis prior to kidney donation vs recipients of kidneys from deceased donors who did not undergo dialysis. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted including data from 58 US organ procurement organizations on deceased kidney donors and kidney transplant recipients. From 2010 to 2018, 805 donors who underwent dialysis prior to kidney donation were identified. The donors who underwent dialysis prior to kidney donation were matched 1:1 with donors who did not undergo dialysis using a rank-based distance matrix algorithm; 1944 kidney transplant recipients were evaluated. Exposure: Kidney transplants from deceased donors who underwent dialysis prior to kidney donation compared with kidney transplants from deceased donors who did not undergo dialysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 4 study outcomes were delayed graft function (defined as receipt of dialysis by the kidney recipient ≤1 week after transplant), all-cause graft failure, death-censored graft failure, and death. Results: From 2010 to 2018, 1.4% of deceased kidney donors (805 of 58 155) underwent dialysis prior to kidney donation. Of these 805 individuals, 523 (65%) donated at least 1 kidney. A total of 969 kidneys (60%) were transplanted and 641 kidneys (40%) were discarded. Among the donors with kidneys transplanted, 514 (mean age, 33 years [SD, 10.8 years]; 98 had hypertension [19.1%] and 36 had diabetes [7%]) underwent dialysis prior to donation and were matched with 514 (mean age, 33 years [SD, 10.9 years]; 98 had hypertension [19.1%] and 36 had diabetes [7%]) who did not undergo dialysis. Kidney transplants from donors who received dialysis prior to donation (n = 954 kidney recipients) were associated with a higher risk of delayed graft function compared with kidney transplants from donors who did not receive dialysis (n = 990 kidney recipients) (59.2% vs 24.6%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 4.17 [95% CI, 3.28-5.29]). The incidence rates did not significantly differ at a median follow-up of 34.1 months for all-cause graft failure (43.1 kidney transplants per 1000 person-years from donors who received dialysis prior to donation vs 46.9 kidney transplants per 1000 person-years from donors who did not receive dialysis; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.70-1.15]), for death-censored graft failure (22.5 vs 20.6 per 1000 person-years, respectively; adjusted HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 0.83-1.69]), or for death (24.6 vs 30.8 per 1000 person-years; adjusted HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.55-1.04]). Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with receiving a kidney from a deceased donor who did not undergo dialysis, receiving a kidney from a deceased donor who underwent dialysis prior to kidney donation was associated with a significantly higher incidence of delayed graft function, but no significant difference in graft failure or death at follow-up.

Understanding Delayed Graft Function to Improve Organ Utilization and Patient Outcomes: Report of a Scientific Workshop Sponsored by the National Kidney Foundation.

Delayed graft function (DGF) is a common complication after kidney transplant. Despite extensive literature on the topic, the extant definition of DGF has not been conducive to advancing the scientific understanding of the influences and mechanisms contributing to its onset, duration, resolution, or long-term prognostic implications. In 2022, the National Kidney Foundation sponsored a multidisciplinary scientific workshop to comprehensively review the current state of knowledge about the diagnosis, therapy, and management of DGF and conducted a survey of relevant stakeholders on topics of clinical and regulatory interest. In this Special Report, we propose and defend a novel taxonomy for the clinical and research definitions of DGF, address key regulatory and clinical practice issues surrounding DGF, review the current state of therapies to reduce and/or attenuate DGF, offer considerations for clinical practice related to the outpatient management of DGF, and outline a prospective research and policy agenda.

Current landscape of kidney allocation: Organ procurement organization perspectives.

Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) play a central role in the recovery, preservation, and distribution of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation in the United States. We conducted a national survey to gather information on OPO practices and perceived barriers to efficient organ placement in the face of the new circle-based allocation and asked for suggestions to overcome them. Of the 57 OPOs, 44 responded (77%). The majority of OPOs (61%) reported barriers to obtaining a kidney biopsy, including lack of an available pathologist. Most OPOs (55%) indicated barriers to pumping owing to a lack of available staff and transportation. Respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the new allocation system has worsened transportation challenges (85%), increased provisional acceptances of kidneys (66%), increased communication challenges with transplant centers (68%), and worsened the efficiency of organ allocation (83%). OPO-suggested solutions include making transplant centers more accountable for inefficient selection practices, developing reliable transportation options, and removing the requirement for national sharing. These findings underscore the need to examine closely the trade-offs of the new allocation system with respect to costs, organ ischemia, and discard. These findings may help inform practice and policy for overcoming transportation barriers and improving the efficiency of organ placement.

Untargeted metabolomics of perfusate and their association with hypothermic machine perfusion and allograft failure.

Although hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) is associated with improved kidney graft viability and function, the underlying biological mechanisms are unknown. Untargeted metabolomic profiling may identify potential metabolites and pathways that can help assess allograft viability and contribute to organ preservation. Therefore, in this multicenter study, we measured all detectable metabolites in perfusate collected at the beginning and end of deceased-donor kidney perfusion and evaluated their associations with graft failure. In our cohort of 190 kidney transplants, 33 (17%) had death-censored graft failure over a median follow-up of 5.0 years (IQR 3.0-6.1 years). We identified 553 known metabolites in perfusate and characterized their experimental and biological consistency through duplicate samples and unsupervised clustering. After perfusion-time adjustment and false discovery correction, six metabolites in post-HMP perfusate were significantly associated with death-censored graft failure, including alpha-ketoglutarate, 3-carboxy-4-methyl-5-propyl-2-furanpropanoate, 1-carboxyethylphenylalanine, and three glycerol-phosphatidylcholines. All six metabolites were associated with an increased risk of graft failure (Hazard Ratio per median absolute deviation range 1.04-1.45). Four of six metabolites also demonstrated significant interaction with donation after cardiac death with notably greater risk in the donation after cardiac death group (Hazard Ratios up to 1.69). Discarded kidneys did not have significantly different levels of any death-censored graft failure-associated metabolites. On interrogation of pathway analysis, production of reactive oxygen species and increased metabolism of fatty acids were upregulated in kidneys that subsequently developed death-censored graft failure. Thus, further understanding the role of these metabolites may inform the HMP process and help improve the objective evaluation of allograft offers, thereby reducing the discard of potentially viable organs.

Deceased-Donor Acute Kidney Injury and Acute Rejection in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Multicenter Cohort.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Donor acute kidney injury (AKI) activates innate immunity, enhances HLA expression in the kidney allograft, and provokes recipient alloimmune responses. We hypothesized that injury and inflammation that manifested in deceased-donor urine biomarkers would be associated with higher rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and allograft failure after transplantation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 862 deceased donors for 1,137 kidney recipients at 13 centers. EXPOSURES: We measured concentrations of interleukin 18 (IL-18), kidney injury molecule 1 (KIM-1), and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) in deceased donor urine. We also used the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) criteria to assess donor clinical AKI. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was a composite of BPAR and graft failure (not from death). A secondary outcome was the composite of BPAR, graft failure, and/or de novo donor-specific antibody (DSA). Outcomes were ascertained in the first posttransplant year. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multivariable Fine-Gray models with death as a competing risk. RESULTS: Mean recipient age was 54 ± 13 (SD) years, and 82% received antithymocyte globulin. We found no significant associations between donor urinary IL-18, KIM-1, and NGAL and the primary outcome (subdistribution hazard ratio [HR] for highest vs lowest tertile of 0.76 [95% CI, 0.45-1.28], 1.20 [95% CI, 0.69-2.07], and 1.14 [95% CI, 0.71-1.84], respectively). In secondary analyses, we detected no significant associations between clinically defined AKI and the primary outcome or between donor biomarkers and the composite outcome of BPAR, graft failure, and/or de novo DSA. LIMITATIONS: BPAR was ascertained through for-cause biopsies, not surveillance biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of kidney recipients who almost all received induction with thymoglobulin, donor injury biomarkers were associated with neither graft failure and rejection nor a secondary outcome that included de novo DSA. These findings provide some reassurance that centers can successfully manage immunological complications using deceased-donor kidneys with AKI.

Survey of Salary and Job Satisfaction of Transplant Nephrologists in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are no standardized benchmarks to measure productivity and compensation of transplant nephrologists in the United States, and consequently, criteria set for general nephrologists are often used. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: A web-based survey was sent to 809 nephrologists who were members of the American Society of Transplantation to gather data on measures of productivity, compensation, and job satisfaction. Factors associated with higher total compensation and job satisfaction were examined. RESULTS: Of 365 respondents, 260 were actively practicing in the United States and provided data on compensation. Clinical productivity was assessed variably, and although 194 (76%) had their work relative value units (wRVUs) reported to them, only 107 (44%) had an established RVU target. Two hundred thirty-four respondents (90%) had fixed base compensation, and 172 (66%) received a bonus on the basis of clinical workload (68%), academic productivity (31%), service (32%), and/or teaching responsibility (31%). Only 127 respondents (49%) filled out time studies, and 92 (35%) received some compensation for nonbillable transplant activity. Mean total compensation (base salary and bonus) was $274,460±$91,509. The unadjusted mean total compensation was higher with older age and was higher for men; Hispanic and White respondents; adult care transplant nephrologists; residents of the western United States; US medical school graduates; nonuniversity hospital employees; and those with an administrative title, higher academic rank, and a higher number of years in practice. Two hundred and nine respondents (80%) thought their compensation was unfair, and 180 (70%) lacked a clear understanding of how they were compensated. One hundred forty-five respondents (55%) reported being satisfied or highly satisfied with their job. Job satisfaction was greater among those with higher amounts of compensation and US medical school graduates. CONCLUSIONS: We report significant heterogeneity in the assessment of productivity and compensation for transplant nephrologists and the association of compensation with job satisfaction.

Exacerbation of Racial Disparities in Living Donor Kidney Transplantation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic profoundly impacted transplant services, with a particularly strong impact on living donor kidney transplantation.The COVID-19 pandemic appears to have disproportionately impacted Black patients' access to living donor kidney transplantation.As the pandemic evolves through surges and vaccine acceptance disparities persist, ongoing attention to transplant disparities is needed.

Clinical Utility in Adopting Race-free Kidney Donor Risk Index.

Recent events of racial injustice prompted us to study potential impact of removing race from kidney donor risk index (KDRI) calculator. Methods: We used Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients data to analyze outcomes of 66 987 deceased-donor kidney transplants performed in the United States between 2010 and 2016. Graft failure (GF) was defined as death or return to dialysis or requiring repeat transplant. We compared original KDRI and a race-free KDRI (Black donor coefficient zeroed out in the KDRI formula) with respect to recategorization of perceived GF risk (based on KDPI categories: ≤20, 21-34, 35-85, ≥86)' risk discrimination (using the C statistic) and predictive accuracy (using Brier score), and GF risk prediction (using Cox regression on time-to-GF). We used logistic regression to study the impact of donor race on discard probability. Results: There were 10 949 (16.3% of recipients) GF, and 1893 (17% of GFs) were among recipients of kidneys from Black donors. The use of race-free KDRI resulted in reclassification of 49% of kidneys from Black donors into lower GF risk categories. The impact on GF risk discrimination was minimal, with a relative decrease in C statistic of 0.16% and a change in GF predictive accuracy of 0.07%. For a given recipient/donor combination, transplants from Black (compared with non-Black) donors are estimated to decrease predicted graft survival at 1-y by 0.3%-3%, and 5-y by 1%-6%. Kidneys from Black donors are significantly more likely to be discarded (odds ratio adjusted for KDRI except race = 1.24). We estimate that an equal discard probability for Black and non-Black donors would yield 70 additional kidney transplants annually from Black donors. Conclusions: Use of race-free KDRI did not impact GF risk discrimination or predictive accuracy and may lower discard of kidneys from Black donors. We recommend use of race-free KDRI calculator acknowledging the possibility of miscalculation of GF risk in small proportion of kidneys from Black donors.

Telemedicine services for living kidney donation: A US survey of multidisciplinary providers.

Individuals considering living kidney donation face geographic, financial, and logistical challenges. Telemedicine can facilitate healthcare access/care coordination. Yet difficulties exist in telemedicine implementation and sustainability. We sought to examine centers' practices and providers' attitudes toward telemedicine to improve services for donors. We surveyed multidisciplinary providers from 194 active adult US living donor kidney transplant centers; 293 providers from 128 unique centers responded to the survey (center representation rate = 66.0%), reflecting 83.9% of practice by donor volume and 91.5% of US states/territories. Most centers (70.3%) plan to continue using telemedicine beyond the pandemic for donor evaluation/follow-up. Video was mostly used by nephrologists, surgeons, and psychiatrists/psychologists. Telephone and video were mostly used by social workers, while video or telephone was equally used by coordinators. Half of respondent nephrologists and surgeons were willing to accept a remote completion of physical exam; 68.3% of respondent psychiatrists/psychologists and social workers were willing to accept a remote completion of mental status exam. Providers strongly agreed that telemedicine was convenient for donors and would improve the likelihood of completing donor evaluation. However, providers (65.5%) perceived out-of-state licensing as a key policy/regulatory barrier. These findings help inform practice and underscore the instigation of policies to remove barriers using telemedicine to increase living kidney donation.

Clinically adjudicated deceased donor acute kidney injury and graft outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) in deceased donors is not associated with graft failure (GF). We hypothesize that hemodynamic AKI (hAKI) comprises the majority of donor AKI and may explain this lack of association. METHODS: In this ancillary analysis of the Deceased Donor Study, 428 donors with available charts were selected to identify those with and without AKI. AKI cases were classified as hAKI, intrinsic (iAKI), or mixed (mAKI) based on majority adjudication by three nephrologists. We evaluated the associations between AKI phenotypes and delayed graft function (DGF), 1-year eGFR and GF. We also evaluated differences in urine biomarkers among AKI phenotypes. RESULTS: Of the 291 (68%) donors with AKI, 106 (36%) were adjudicated as hAKI, 84 (29%) as iAKI and 101 (35%) as mAKI. Of the 856 potential kidneys, 669 were transplanted with 32% developing DGF and 5% experiencing GF. Median 1-year eGFR was 53 (IQR: 41-70) ml/min/1.73m2. Compared to non-AKI, donors with iAKI had higher odds DGF [aOR (95%CI); 4.83 (2.29, 10.22)] and had lower 1-year eGFR [adjusted B coefficient (95% CI): -11 (-19, -3) mL/min/1.73 m2]. hAKI and mAKI were not associated with DGF or 1-year eGFR. Rates of GF were not different among AKI phenotypes and non-AKI. Urine biomarkers such as NGAL, LFABP, MCP-1, YKL-40, cystatin-C and albumin were higher in iAKI. CONCLUSION: iAKI was associated with higher DGF and lower 1-year eGFR but not with GF. Clinically phenotyped donor AKI is biologically different based on biomarkers and may help inform decisions regarding organ utilization.

Trends in the procurement and discard of kidneys from deceased donors with acute kidney injury.

Kidney allocation trends from deceased donors with acute kidney injury (AKI) have not been characterized since initial Kidney Donor Profile Index reporting in 2012 and its use under the revised Kidney Allocation System (KAS) in 2014. We conducted a retrospective analysis of US registry data to characterize kidney procurement and discard trends in deceased donors with AKI, defined by ≥50% or ≥0.3 mg/dl (≥4.0 mg/dl or ≥200% for stage 3) increase in terminal serum creatinine from admission. From 2010 to 2020, 172 410 kidneys were procured from 93 341 deceased donors 16 years or older; 34 984 kidneys were discarded (17 559 from AKI donors). The proportion of stage 3 AKI donors doubled from 6% (412/6841) in 2010 to 12% (1365/11493) in 2020. Procurement of stage 3 AKI kidneys increased from 51% (423/824) to 80% (2183/2730). While discard of stage 3 AKI kidneys increased from 41% (175/423) in 2010 to 44% (960/2183) in 2020, this increase was not statistically significant in interrupted time-series analysis following KAS implementation (slope difference -0.41 [-3.22, 2.4], and level change 3.09 [-6.4, 12.6]). In conclusion, the absolute number of stage 3 AKI kidneys transplanted has increased. Ongoing high discard rates of these kidneys suggest opportunities for improved utilization.

Transplant Clinician Opinions on Use of Race in the Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Current race-based eGFR calculators assign a higher eGFR value to Black patients, which could affect the care of kidney transplant candidates and potential living donors. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We conducted a survey of staff at adult kidney transplant centers in the United States (December 17, 2020 to February 28, 2021) to assess opinions on use of race-based eGFR equations for waitlisting and living donor candidate evaluation, availability of serum cystatin C testing and measured GFR, and related practices. RESULTS: Respondents represented 57% (124 of 218) of adult kidney transplant programs, and the responding centers conducted 70% of recent kidney transplant volume. Most (93%) programs use serum creatinine-based eGFR for listing candidates. However, only 6% of respondents felt that current race-based eGFR calculators are appropriate, with desire for change grounded in concerns for promotion of health care disparities by current equations and inaccuracies in reporting of race. Most respondents (70%) believed that elimination of race would allow more preemptive waitlisting for Black patients, but a majority (79%) also raised concerns that such an approach could incur harms. More than one third of the responding programs lacked or were unsure of availability of testing for cystatin C or measured GFR. At this time, 40% of represented centers did not plan to remove race from eGFR calculators, 46% were planning to remove, and 15% had already done so. There was substantial variability in eGFR reporting and listing of multiracial patients with some Black ancestry. There was no difference in GFR acceptance thresholds for Black versus non-Black living donors. CONCLUSIONS: This national survey highlights a broad consensus that extant approaches to GFR estimation are unsatisfactory, but it also identified a range of current opinions.

Donor Family History of ESKD and Long-term Outcomes Among African American Living Kidney Donors: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Live kidney donation is associated with a small increased risk for kidney disease and hypertension in African American donors. We investigated a possible association between donor family history of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and their postdonation kidney function and the development of hypertension. We tested whether this association was modified by kidney donation. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Former African American live kidney donors between 1993 and 2010. Healthy nondonors were selected from the Coronary Artery Disease in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study. EXPOSURE: Family history of ESKD in a first-degree relative. OUTCOMES: Kidney function and blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive medications at follow-up. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Donors were grouped based on family history of ESKD. Outcomes were first compared between donor groups and then between donors and healthy nondonors matched for demographics, follow-up time, and family history. A mixed-effect model was used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: Of 179 donors, 139 (78%) had a first degree relative with ESKD. Predonation characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. At a median follow-up of 11 years postdonation, there was no difference in postdonation estimated glomerular filtration rates (68 ± 19 vs 69 ± 13 mL/min/1.73 m2; P = 0.71) and the presence of albuminuria (P = 0.16). There was a trend toward a higher incidence of hypertension (51% vs 35%; P = 0.08) among donors with a family history of ESKD than for those without. Although there was no difference in annual change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (P = 0.17), the risk for hypertension was higher in donors than nondonors (relative risk, 2.44 [95% CI, 1.56-3.84]), but there was no interaction by family history (P = 0.11). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective small study. Lack of data across donor-recipient specific biological relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Family history of ESKD is not associated with postdonation kidney function among African American kidney donors. Live kidney donation is associated with an increased risk for hypertension among African Americans, independent of donor family history of ESKD.