Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life in Non-Directed Versus Directed Kidney Donors: Implications for the Promotion of Non-Directed Donation.

Living kidney donation has increased significantly, but little is known about the post-donation health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of non-directed donors (NDs) vs. directed donors (DDs). We thus examined the outcomes of 112 living kidney donors (82 NDs, 30 DDs). For the primary outcomes-namely, the mean physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores of the 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) questionnaire-scores were significantly higher for the NDs vs. the DDs (PCS: +2.69, MCS: +4.43). For secondary outcomes, NDs had shorter hospital stays (3.4 vs. 4.4 days), returned to physical activity earlier (45 vs. 60 days), exercised more before and after donation, and continued physical activity post-donation. Regression analyses revealed that donor type and white blood cell count were predictive of the PCS-12 score, and donor type was predictive of the MCS-12 score. Non-directed donation was predictive of a shorter hospital stay (by 0.78 days, p < 0.001) and the odds of having PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores above 50 were almost 10 and 16 times higher for NDs, respectively (p < 0.05). These findings indicate the safety and potential benefits of promoting non-directed donation. However, careful selection processes must be maintained to prevent harm and exploitation.

Post-donation health-related quality of life, mood and life satisfaction in livingkidney donors; an explorative study from kidney transplant centre, Lahore Pakistan.

Objective: To explore post-donation life satisfaction, quality of life and mood status among kidney donors. METHODS: The cross-sectional study was conducted from February 5 to July 10, 2021, at the Department of Kidney Transplant Surgery, Pakistan Kidney and Liver Institute and Research Centre, Lahore, Pakistan, and comprised living kidney donors who had donated a kidney at least 6 months before the interview date. Data was collected through telephonic interviews, and, in addition to demographics, the questionnaire comprised the World Health Organisation Quality of Life Brief Version scale, the Satisfaction with Life Scale, and the Patient Health Questionnaire and General Anxiety Disorder. Data was analysed using SPSS 20. RESULTS: Of the 41 subjects, 22(53.7%) were females and 19(46.3%) were males. The overall mean age was 41.10±9.648 years (range: 19-62 years). The most common donor-recipient relationship was brother-sister 10(34.1%) and wife-husband 10(24.4%). Among the donors, there was a significant positive correlation between quality of life and satisfaction with life (r=0.381, p=0.014). Quality of life had a negative correlation with anxiety (r=-0.429, p=0.005), and a negative but non-significant association with depression (r=-0.283, p=0.073). Anxiety and depression were highly positively correlated (r=0.681, p=0.000). Quality of life was significantly associated with donor age (p=0.029) with a negative effect (Beta=-0.588), while satisfaction with life had a positive relationship with age (Beta=0.147). Conclusion: Higher life satisfaction among living kidney donors was associated with an improved quality of life, while increased anxiety levels were linked to a lower quality of life. Age was a critical determinant, with older donors reporting a lower quality of life.

Factors enabling transplant program participation in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective (LDC), the first effort to create a lifetime registry for living donor candidates in the United States, requires transplant programs to register donor candidates while the SRTR conducts follow-up. METHODS: To better understand facilitators and barriers to program participation, we conducted a brief electronic survey of U.S. transplant program staff from October 26, 2021 to December 17, 2021. RESULTS: We received 132 responses, with at least one response from 87 living donor programs (46 kidney programs, 33 kidney and liver programs, and eight liver programs alone). We found 86% of program representatives strongly agreed or agreed that funding adequate to cover the cost of data collection would facilitate LDC participation, 92% agreed or strongly agreed with importance of electronic data submission options, and 74% reported that elimination of requirements to submit duplicative pre-operative information to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) would be helpful. Other potentially enabling factors include reduction in duration of OPTN postdonation follow-up requirements, ease-of-use, protection from data use for regulation, adequate data security, and equity in data access. CONCLUSION: This survey identifies potential targets to strengthen participation in the effort to create a national living donor registry in the United States. Collaboration and investment to overcome barriers to LDC participation among transplant programs are vital to generate long-term data on living donation for donor candidates, donors, and patients in need of transplant.

Psychological Impact of Living Kidney Donation: A Systematic Review by the EAU-YAU Kidney Transplant Working Group.

We performed a systematic literature review of the psychological impact on donors of living kidney donation. We conducted a literature review in PubMed/Medline according to PRISMA guidelines which included both qualitative (based on interviews) and quantitative studies (based on standardized questionnaire). There were 15 quantitative studies and 8 qualitative studies with 2,732 donors. Given that the methodologies of qualitative and quantitative studies are fundamentally different, we narratively synthetized results of studies according to four axes: quality of life, anxiety/depression, consequences of donation on the donor/recipient relationship, overall satisfaction and regret. The quantitative studies reported that donor quality of life remained unchanged or improved. Donor regret rates were very low and donor-recipient relationships also remained unchanged or improved. Qualitative studies reported more complex donation experiences: one can regret donation and still decide to recommend it as in a social desirability bias. In both study types, donor-recipient relationships were closer but qualitative studies reported that post-donation rebonding was required. The qualitative studies therefore highlighted the psychological complexity of donation for donors, showing that living donation impacts the donor's life whether it is successful or not. A better understanding of the impact of donation on donors could provide better care for donors.

Risk factors for loss to follow-up and outcomes after kidney donation in New Caledonian living donors.

AIM: For patients with end-stage kidney disease, living-donor kidney transplantation is the best therapy. There is a duty to ensure that the donor is followed-up after donation on a regular and long-term basis. Conditions may arise, such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease, metabolic conditions, and these should be identified and treated as soon as possible for the donor's own longer term wellbeing. In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the risk of loss to follow-up after kidney donation for living donors. METHODS: Data were collected from the unique Caledonian nephrology medical record software and a phone survey. We evaluated the association between being lost to follow up and donor recipient relationship, donor socio-demographic characteristics, donation characteristics and care access. We performed a multivariate analysis to identify risk factors of loss to follow-up. RESULTS: Among the the 86 donors included, 38 (44%) had no nephrology consultation for more than 16 months. The rate of donor follow up decreased from 81% at 2 years to 49% at 10 years after donation. In the multivariate analysis, age less than 45 years old at donation increased the risk of loss to follow up to 4.5 (95% CI 2.0-10.3) and not being a spouse increased the risk to 3.9 (95% CI 1.5-11.1). CONCLUSION: To conclude, efforts should be made to improve the rate at which donors are followed up in New Caledonia with special attention to younger donors and donors without a marital link with the recipient.

Long-term end-stage renal disease risks after living kidney donation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown that donor nephrectomy can induce renal function impairment. However, few meta-analysis studies about this have proceeded. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis including all data of recent research studies was to determine whether living donor nephrectomy (LDN) could induce renal function impairment. METHODS: By November 2020, comprehensive literature searches were performed on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Inclusion criteria were: (1) observational studies with data about overall end-stage renal disease (ESRD) or chronic kidney disease (CKD) of living kidney donors, (2) control group consisted of people without donor nephrectomy, and (3) outcomes of studies included long-term end-stage renal disease risks after living kidney donation. Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool was used to evaluate our methodological quality. RESULTS: The qualitative review included 11 studies and the meta-analysis included 5 studies. In the meta-analysis, the integrated overall ESRD risk was 5.57 (95% CI: 2.03-15.30). Regarding the overall risk of bias using ROBINS-I assessment tool, 0 studies was rated as "Low", 7 studies were rated as "moderate", 2 studies were rated as "Serious", and two studies were rated as "Critical". CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that LDN increased ESRD risk in LDN patients. However, in our meta-analysis, variables in included studies were not uniform and the number of included studies was small. To have a definite conclusion, meta-analyses of well-planned and detailed studies need to be conducted in the future.

Kidney transplantation and kidney donation do not affect short-term blood pressure variability.

PURPOSE: Blood pressure variability (BPV) is an independent cardiovascular risk factor in CKD. Kidney transplantation (KTx) is associated with improved BP levels for kidney transplant recipient (KTRs), without evoking significant changes in donors. The aim of this study was to assess the short- and mid-time effects of KTx and donation on short-term BPV in KTRs and their respective living kidney donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty KTRs and their respective donors were evaluated with 24-h ABPM (Mobil-O-Graph-NG) at baseline (1 month before), 3-months and 12-months after KTx. Standard-deviation (SD), weighted-SD (wSD), coefficient-of-variation (CV), average-real-variability (ARV) and variability independent of mean (VIM) for SBP/DBP were calculated with validated formulas. RESULTS: All 24-h systolic and diastolic BPV indexes studied did not change significantly from baseline to 3-month (SBP-wSD: 12.8 ± 3.0 vs 13.2 ± 3.4 mmHg, p = 0.608; SBP-ARV: 10.3 ± 2.4 vs 10.8 ± 2.6 mmHg, p = 0.463) and 12-month evaluation (SBP-wSD 12.8 ± 3.0 vs 12.1 ± 2.8; p = 0.424 and SBP-ARV: 10.3 ± 2.4 vs 10.2 ± 2.5; p = 0.615) after kidney transplantation in the KTRs.In kidney donors, all 24-h systolic BPV indices displayed a trend towards higher values at 3 months compared to baseline, but without reaching statistical significance (SBP-wSD: 12.2 ± 2.8 vs 13.6 ± 4.2 mmHg, p = 0.107 and SBP-ARV: 10.1 ± 2.1 vs 11.2 ± 3.1 mmHg, p = 0.099), the levels of 24-h systolic SBP indices at 12-months were almost identical to baseline values. 24-h diastolic BPV indices at 3-month and 12-month evaluation were similar to baseline. CONCLUSION: Short-term BPV did not change significantly 3 and 12 months after kidney transplantation/donation neither in KTRs nor in living kidney donors. Longitudinal studies examining associations of BPV with adverse outcomes in these individuals are needed.

What is the context? Previous studies have shown that both office and ambulatory BP levels are significantly reduced after kidney transplantation in KTRs.On the other hand, existing evidence suggests that kidney donors' BP levels do not change significantly after kidney donation.Existing studies on BPV in KTRs are limited. The available data for living kidney donors are even fewer.What is new? This is the first study assessing short-term BPV levels in ΚTRs undergoing living donor kidney transplantation, and their respective donors in short-term and mid-term follow-up. The main findings were:All 24-h, daytime and night-time BPV indexes did not change significantly from baseline to 3- and 12-month evaluation after kidney transplantation in the KTRs.No significant changes for the 24-h, daytime and night-time BPV were observed in their respective kidney donors at the same follow-up periods.What is the impact?High BPV, which seems to remain unaltered after kidney transplantation, may be one of the many factors involved in the high cardiovascular risk observed in KTRs.Unchanged BPV levels further supports the evidence suggesting no higher risks of arrhythmias, cardiovascular events or death after living kidney donation.

The psychological examination and evaluation of unrelated kidney donors in Israel: a suggested model.

Altruistic organ donors represent a special population when compared to related living donors, requiring appropriate protection and attention regarding informed consent and psychological aspects related to the donation. Following the introduction of the Israeli Transplant Law of 2008, a retrospective study of altruistic donor files revealed that important psycho-diagnostic aspects were not emphasized in the existing guidelines. Thus, a new tool was formulated which incorporated those elements, including assessment of emotional maturity, ego strength, degree of interest in others, reality testing, degree of pressure to donate, anxiety, dysphoric and depressive factors and the ability to function under stress. The study examined 598 cases reviewed by the Central Evaluation Board over the period May 2008 - June 2016. Overall, 23.4% candidates were disqualified of whom 41% were declined on grounds related to mental health. Most of the donors were rejected based on 3-5 elements. Of these, a deficient assessment of reality in ambiguous situations, lack of emotional maturity, and lacking or partial ability to function effectively under stress, were most commonly cited as reasons for rejection. This model allowed the detection of important conditions previously not incorporated into existing guidelines and may serve as a model for other transplantation programs worldwide.

Age-adapted percentiles of measured glomerular filtration in healthy individuals: extrapolation to living kidney donors over 65 years.

OBJECTIVES: Most data on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) originate from subjects <65 years old, complicating decision-making in elderly living kidney donors. In this retrospective multi-center study, we calculated percentiles of measured GFR (mGFR) in donors <65 years old and extrapolated these to donors ≥65 years old. METHODS: mGFR percentiles were calculated from a development cohort of French/Belgian living kidney donors <65 years (n=1,983), using quantiles modeled as cubic splines (two linear parts joining at 40 years). Percentiles were extrapolated and validated in an internal cohort of donors ≥65 years (n=147, France) and external cohort of donors and healthy subjects ≥65 years (n=329, Germany, Sweden, Norway, France, The Netherlands) by calculating percentages within the extrapolated 5th-95th percentile (P5-P95). RESULTS: Individuals in the development cohort had a higher mGFR (99.9 ± 16.4 vs. 86.4 ± 14 and 82.7 ± 15.5 mL/min/1.73 m2) compared to the individuals in the validation cohorts. In the internal validation cohort, none (0%) had mGFR below the extrapolated P5, 12 (8.2%) above P95 and 135 (91.8%) between P5-P95. In the external validation cohort, five subjects had mGFR below the extrapolated P5 (1.5%), 25 above P95 (7.6%) and 299 (90.9%) between P5-P95. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that extrapolation of mGFR from younger donors is possible and might aid with decision-making in elderly donors.

Vitamin D metabolism in living kidney donors before and after organ donation.

OBJECTIVES: Living kidney donors provide a unique setting to study functional and metabolic consequences after organ donation. Since the lack of data of the homoeostasis of numerous vitamin D metabolites in these healthy subjects, the aim of this study was to assess the vitamin D metabolism before and after kidney donation. METHODS: We investigated the 25-dihydroxyvitamin D2 (25[OH]D2), 25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (25[OH]D3), 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (1,25[OH]2D3), 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (24,25[OH]2D3), 25,26-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (25,26[OH]2D3), and the native vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol) and vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) in a well characterized study cohort of 32 healthy living kidney donors before and after organ donation. RESULTS: Thirty-two healthy subjects after kidney donation had significantly lower median (interquartile range) 1,25(OH)2D3 serum concentrations (88.6 [62.6-118.8] vs. 138.0 [102.6-152.4] pmol/L, p<0.001) and significantly higher median 25(OH)D2 serum levels (1.80 [1.19-2.19] vs. 1.11 [0.74-1.59] nmol/L, p=0.019) than before donation. Similar serum concentrations of 25(OH)D3 and 25,26(OH)2D3 were observed before and after donation. The 24,25(OH)2D3 blood levels distinctly decreased after organ donation (4.1 [2.3-5.3] vs. 5.3 [2.2-6.9] nmol/L, p=0.153). Native vitamin D2 (0.10 [0.08-0.14] vs. 0.08 [0.06-0.12] nmol/L, p=0.275) was slightly increased and vitamin D3 (1.6 [0.6-7.2] vs. 2.5 [0.9-8.6] nmol/L, p=0.957) decreased after kidney donation. CONCLUSIONS: Living kidney donors were found with decreased 1,25(OH)2D3 and 24,25(OH)2D3, increased 25(OH)D2 and consistent 25(OH)D3 and 25,26(OH)2D3 serum concentrations after organ donation. The current study advances the understanding on vitamin D metabolism suggesting that altered hydroxylase-activities after donation is accompanied by compensatory elevated dietary-related 25(OH)D2 blood concentrations.

Interaction between socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity for likelihood of receiving living-donor kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The interplay between ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation for living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) opportunities is unclear. METHODS: Data for 2040 consecutive kidney-alone transplant recipients receiving an allograft between 1st January 2007 and 30th June 2020 at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. The associations between the proportions of transplants that were LDKT (versus deceased donation) and both ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation were assessed, with the latter quantified by the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) quintile. RESULTS: The cohort comprised recipients of White (64.7%), South Asian (21.7%), Black (7.0%) and other (6.6%) ethnic groups. Recipients tended to be from socioeconomically deprived areas, with the most deprived quintile being the most frequently observed (quintile 1: 38.6% of patients); non-White recipients were significantly more likely to live in socioeconomically deprived areas (p < 0.001). Overall, 36.5% of transplants were LDKT, with this proportion declining progressively with socioeconomic deprivation, from 50.4 to 27.6% in the least versus most deprived IMD quintile (p < 0.001). A significant difference across recipient ethnicities was also observed, with the proportion of LDKTs ranging from 43.2% in White recipients to 17.8% in Black recipients (p < 0.001). Both socioeconomic deprivation (p < 0.001) and ethnicity (p = 0.005) remained significant predictors of LDKT on multivariable analysis, with a significant interaction between these factors also being observed (p < 0.001). Further assessment of this interaction effect found that, whilst there was a marked difference in the proportions of transplants that were LDKT between White versus non-White recipients in the most socioeconomically deprived groups (39.5% versus 19.3%), no such difference was seen in the least deprived recipients (48.5% versus 51.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Whilst both socioeconomic deprivation and non-White ethnicity are independent predictors for lower proportions of LDKTs, the significant interaction between the two factors should be appreciated.

The relationship between serum uric acid levels and development of obesity in living kidney donors after donor nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Hyperuricaemia plays a role in the pathogenesis of obesity and related metabolic disorders. The aim of this study to investigate the relationship between pre-donation serum uric acid (SUA) level and obesity development after nephrectomy in living kidney donors. METHODS: Living donors of kidney transplants between 1998 and 2019 were evaluated. Donors with less than 1 year of follow-up were excluded from the study. The participants were divided into two groups according to last control body mass index (BMI) (obese; ≥ 30 kg/m2 and nonobese; <30 kg/m2 ) and median baseline SUA level (<4.6 mg/dL and ≥4.6 mg/dL). RESULTS: In the included 240 donors, the mean follow-up was 50 ± 44 (12-216) months. The mean age was 47 ± 11 (19-82) years, and 46.6% of donors were male. At last control, the percentage of obese donors had increased significantly compared to pre-donation time (22.5% vs 33.8%; P < .001) and last control obese donors had both higher baseline SUA (5.1 ± 1.4 vs 4.5 ± 1.2; P < .01) and BMI (30.7 ± 2.6 vs 24.8 ± 3.0; P < .001). Cox regression analysis showed that there is an independent relationship between the baseline SUA level and development of obesity (odds ratio: 1.30 [CI; 1.12-1.50]; P < .001). In Kaplan-Meier analysis, the development of obesity was significantly higher in kidney donors with high SUA level. CONCLUSION: Living kidney donors (LKD) have a tendency to obesity after nephrectomy. Preoperative serum uric acid level gives important information in LKDs that it could foresee the development of obesity after donation.

Temporal trends in living kidney donation in France between 2007 and 2017.

BACKGROUND: Long-term studies have demonstrated a slight increased risk for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) for living kidney donors (LKD). In France, living kidney donation doubled within the past 10 years. We investigated the change in characteristics of LKD between 2007 and 2017 and the adequacy of follow-up. METHODS: Data were obtained from the national registry for LKD. We compared characteristics of LKD between two study periods: 2007-11 and 2012-17, and stratified donors by age and relation to recipient. We aggregated four characteristics associated with higher ESRD risk [young age, first-degree relation to recipient, obesity, low glomerular filtration rate (GFR) for age] in a single risk indicator ranging from 0 to 4. RESULTS: We included 3483 donors. The proportion of unrelated donors >56 years of age increased significantly. The proportion of related donors <56 years of age decreased significantly. The body mass index and proportion of obese donors did not change significantly. The proportion of donors with low estimated GFR for age decreased significantly from 5% to 2.2% (P < 0.001). The proportion of donors with adequate follow-up after donation increased from 19.6% to 42.5% (P < 0.001). No donor had a risk indicator equal to 4, and the proportion of donors with a risk indicator equal to 0 increased significantly from 19.2% to 24.9% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in living kidney donation in France does not seem to be associated with the selection of donors at higher risk of ESRD and the proportion of donors with adequate annual follow-up significantly increased.

COVID-19 infection in former living kidney donors.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought living donor kidney transplant programs across the United States to a near halt in March 2020. As programs have begun to reopen, potential donor candidates often inquire about their risk of a COVID-19 infection and its potential impact on kidney function after donation. To address their concerns, we surveyed 1740 former live kidney donors at four transplant centers located in New York and Michigan. Of these, 839 (48.2%) donors responded, their mean age was 46 ± 12.5 years, 543 (65%) were females, and 611 (73%) were white. Ninety-two donors (11%) had symptoms suggestive of a COVID-19 infection with fever (48%) and fatigue (43%) being the most common. Among those with symptoms, 42 donors underwent testing and 16 tested positive. Testing was more common among donors with private insurance, and a positive test result was more common among young black donors. Only one donor surveyed required hospitalization and none required dialysis. Fourteen donors have recovered completely and two partially. Our survey highlights that a COVID-19 infection in former donors results in a mild disease with good recovery. These data will be useful for transplant programs to counsel living donors who are considering kidney donation during this pandemic.

Living kidney donor evaluation for all candidates with normal estimated GFR for age.

Multiple days assessments are frequent for the evaluation of candidates to living kidney donation, combined with an early GFR estimation (eGFR). Living kidney donation is questionable when eGFR is <90 ml/min/1.73 m2 (KDIGO guidelines) or 80 ml/min/1.73 m2 (most US centres). However, age-related GFR decline results in a lower eGFR for older candidates. That may limit the number of older kidney donors. Yet, continuing the screening with a GFR measure increases the number of eligible donors. We hypothesized that in-depth screening should be proposed to all candidates with a normal eGFR for age. We compared the evolution of eGFR after donation between three groups of predonation eGFR: normal for age (Sage ) higher than 90 or 80 ml/min/1.73 m2 (S90 and S80, respectively); across three age groups (<45, 45-55, >55 years) in a population of 1825 French living kidney donors with a median follow-up of 5.9 years. In donors younger than 45, postdonation eGFR, absolute- and relative-eGFR variation were not different between the three groups. For older donors, postdonation eGFR was higher in S90 than in S80 or Sage but other comparators were identical. Postdonation eGFR slope was comparable between all groups. Our results are in favour of in-depth screening for all candidates to donation with a normal eGFR for age.

Individual uromodulin serum concentration is independent of glomerular filtration rate in healthy kidney donors.

OBJECTIVES: The mucoprotein uromodulin is considered to correlate with glomerular filtration rates (GFR) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Here we investigated how serum uromodulin is associated with measured GFR using inulin-clearance and GFR estimated by CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) equation in healthy subjects. METHODS: We assessed possible correlations between uromodulin serum concentrations, inulin-GFR and CKD-EPI-GFR in a well characterized study cohort of 112 healthy living kidney donors with two kidneys before and 64 with one kidney after kidney donation. A subgroup of 32 individuals, which presented data before and after nephrectomy, was assessed separately. RESULTS: All 112 healthy living kidney donors with two kidneys revealed individual serum uromodulin concentrations between 60.1 and 450.5 µg/L. Sixty-four healthy kidney donors after nephrectomy had significantly lower median (interquartile range) serum uromodulin concentrations (124 [101-166] vs. 185 [152-238] µg/L), inulin-GFR (67.3 [60.6-74.6] vs. 93.5 [82.1-104.4] mL/min/1.73 m2), and CKD-EPI-GFR (61.2 [53.1-69.7] vs. 88.6 [80.0-97.1] mL/min/1.73 m2) as compared to the 112 donors before donation (p<0.001). The subgroup of 32 subjects, which presented data before and after nephrectomy, showed almost the same pattern of kidney function. No statistically relevant associations were found between serum uromodulin and inulin-GFR or CKD-EPI-GFR regarding this healthy population. CONCLUSIONS: These novel findings indicate that - in contrast to patients with CKD - serum uromodulin concentrations are not correlated with measured and estimated GFR in healthy individuals.

Long-term impact of baseline serum uric acid levels on living kidney donors: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative characteristics of living kidney donors are commonly considered during donor selection and postoperative follow-up. However, the impact of preoperative uric acid (UA) levels is poorly documented. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between preoperative serum UA levels and post-donation long-term events and renal function. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective analysis of 183 living kidney donors. The donors were divided into high (≥5.5 mg/dl) and low (< 5.5 mg/dl) UA groups. We analyzed the relationship between preoperative UA levels and postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), as well as adverse events (cardiovascular events and additional prescriptions for hypertension, gout, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus), over 5 years after donation. RESULTS: In total, 44 donors experienced 52 adverse events over 5 years. The incidence of adverse events within 5 years was significantly higher in the high UA group than in the low UA group (50% vs. 24%, p = 0.003); this was true even after the exclusion of hyperuricemia-related events (p = 0.047). UA emerged as an independent risk factor for adverse events (p = 0.012). Donors with higher UA levels had lower eGFRs after donation, whereas body mass index, hemoglobin A1c, blood pressure, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol did not have any impact on the eGFR. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that preoperative UA levels should be considered during donor selection and postoperative follow-up.

Changes in kidney function follow living donor nephrectomy.

Better understanding of kidney function after living donor nephrectomy and how it differs by donor characteristics can inform patient selection, counselling, and follow-up care. To evaluate this, we conducted a retrospective matched cohort study of living kidney donors in Alberta, Canada between 2002-2016, using linked healthcare administrative databases. We matched 604 donors to 2,414 healthy non-donors from the general population based on age, sex, year of cohort entry, urban residence and the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) before cohort entry (nephrectomy date for donors and randomly assigned date for non-donors). The primary outcome was the rate of eGFR change over time (median follow-up seven years; maximum 15 years). The median age of the cohort was 43 years, 64% women, and the baseline (pre-donation) eGFR was 100 mL/min/1.73 m2. Overall, from six weeks onwards, the eGFR increased by +0.35 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year (95% confidence interval +0.21 to +0.48) in donors and significantly decreased by -0.85 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year (-0.94 to -0.75) in the matched healthy non-donors. The change in eGFR between six weeks to two years, two to five years, and over five years among donors was +1.06, +0.64, and -0.06 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year, respectively. In contrast to the steady age-related decline in kidney function in non-donors, post-donation kidney function on average initially increased by 1 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year attributable to glomerular hyperfiltration, which began to plateau by five years post-donation. Thus, the average change in eGFR over time is significantly different between donors and non-donors.

The first increase in live kidney donation in the United States in 15 years.

The first sustained increase in live kidney donation in the United States in 15 years was observed from 2017 to 2019. To help sustain this surge, we studied 35 900 donors (70.3% white, 14.5% Hispanic, 9.3% black, 4.4% Asian) to understand the increase in 2017-2019 vs 2014-2016 using Poisson regression. Among biologically related donors aged <35, 35-49, and ≥50 years, the number of donors did not change across race/ethnicity but increased by 38% and 29% for Hispanic and black ≥50. Among unrelated donors <35, 35-49, and ≥50, white donors increased by 18%, 14%, and 27%; Hispanic donors <35 did not change but increased by 22% and 35% for 35-49 and ≥50; black donors <35 declined by 23% and did not change for 35-49 and ≥50; Asian donors did not change. Among kidney paired donors <35, 35-49, and ≥50, white donors increased by 42%, 50%, and 68%; Hispanic donors <35 and 35-49 increased by 36% and 55% and did not change for ≥50; black donors did not change; Asian donors <35 did not change but increased by 107% and 82% for 35-49 and ≥50. The increase in donation was driven predominantly by unrelated and paired white donors. Donation among unrelated black individuals should be promoted.

Comparison of the impact of propofol versus sevoflurane on early postoperative recovery in living donors after laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a prospective randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Enhancing postoperative recovery of the donor is important to encourage living kidney donation. We investigated the effects of anesthetic agents (intravenous [IV] propofol versus inhaled [IH] sevoflurane) on the quality of early recovery of healthy living kidney donors after hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HALN) under analgesic intrathecal morphine injection. METHODS: This single-center, prospective randomized controlled study enrolled 80 living donors undergoing HALN from October 2019 to June 2020 at Seoul St. Mary's Hospital. Donors were randomly assigned to the IV propofol group or IH sevoflurane group. To measure the quality of recovery, we used the Korean version of the Quality of Recovery-40 questionnaire (QoR-40 K) on postoperative day (POD) 1, and ambulation (success rate, number of footsteps) 6-12 h after surgery and on POD 1. The pain score for the wound site, IV opioid requirement, postoperative complications including incidences of nausea/vomiting, and length of in-hospital stay were also assessed. RESULTS: The global QoR-40 K score and all subscale scores (physical comfort, emotional state, physical independence, psychological support, and pain) were significantly higher in the IV propofol group than in the IH sevoflurane group. The numbers of footsteps at all time points were also higher in the IV propofol group. Donors in the IV propofol group had a lower incidence of nausea/vomiting, and a shorter hospitalization period. CONCLUSIONS: Total IV anesthesia with propofol led to better early postoperative recovery than that associated with IH sevoflurane. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea (approval number: KCT0004351 ) on October 18, 2019.