Medical evaluation of living kidney donors with nephrolithiasis: a survey of practices in the United States.

BACKGROUND: A scarcity of organs has driven the transplant community to broaden selection criteria for both living and deceased donors. Living donor transplants offer better patient and allograft survival when compared with deceased donor transplants. Many transplant centers now allow complex living donors such as those with nephrolithiasis to undergo nephrectomy. METHODS: We conducted a survey of medical and surgical directors of kidney transplant programs in the United States to shed light on current practices pertaining to medical evaluation of living kidney donors with nephrolithiasis. 353 surveys were e-mailed to medical directors and surgical directors of transplant programs after contacts were obtained from UNOS. RESULTS: 49 completed surveys were returned (13.9%). 77.7% (38/49) of survey participants said their centers will consider living kidney donor candidates with a history of symptomatic kidney stones, 69.4% (34/49) said their centers will consider candidates who are incidentally found to have kidney stones and 10.2% (5/49) said their centers decline all potential donors with nephrolithiasis. CONCLUSIONS: Several programs are still reluctant to allow potential donors with nephrolithiasis to donate. There is an unmet need to develop evidence-based guidelines to optimize outcomes in this population of kidney donors with nephrolithiasis and their recipients.

Repeat A2 Into B Kidney Transplantation After Failed Prior A2 Into B Transplant: A Case Report.

Kidneys from donors with blood type A2 can be successfully transplanted into blood type B and O recipients without the need for desensitization if the recipient's starting anti-A hemagglutinin titer is within an acceptable range. National kidney allocation policy now offers priority for eligible B recipients to receive A2 or A2B deceased donor kidneys, and therefore, the frequency with which A2 or A2B to B transplants will occur is expected to increase. The precise mechanisms by which antibody-mediated rejection is averted in these cases despite the presence of both circulating anti-A antibody and expression of the A2 antigen on the graft endothelium are not known. Whether this process mirrors proposed mechanisms of accommodation, which can occur in recipients of ABO incompatible transplants, is also not known. Repeated exposure to mismatched antigens after retransplantation could elicit memory responses resulting in antibody rebound and accelerated antibody-mediated rejection. Whether this would occur in the setting of repeated A2 donor exposure was uncertain. Here we report the case of a patient with history of a prior A2 to B transplant which failed owing to nonimmunologic reasons; the patient successfully underwent a repeat A2 to B transplant. Neither rebound in anti-A2 antibody nor clinical evidence of antibody-mediated rejection were observed after the transplant. Current kidney allocation will likely enable more such transplants in the future, and this may provide a unique patient population in whom the molecular mechanisms of incompatible graft accommodation may be investigated.