Project description:In the US, African Americans and other minority groups have longer wait times to deceased donor kidney transplantation than Caucasians. To date, the role of geographic distribution of racial and ethnic groups as a determinant of wait times has not been fully elucidated. Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database, all registrants for kidney transplant between 2004 and 2007 (n=126,094) were analyzed from time of waitlisting until nonzero antigen mismatched deceased donor kidney transplant. Nationally, deceased donor transplantation occurred at a lower rate for African Americans (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85, confidence interval [CI] 0.83-0.87), Hispanics (HR 0.68, CI 0.66-0.70), Asians/Pacific Islanders (HR 0.77, CI 0.73-0.80) and Other minority groups (HR 0.74, CI 0.69-0.81) compared to Caucasians. Multivariate modeling for age, gender, cause of end-stage renal disease, ABO type, panel reactive antibody, HLA-DR frequency, expanded criteria donor status and prior kidney donation only partially accounted for this difference. Adjusting for these variables and organ procurement organization of listing, African Americans (HR 1.03, CI 1.00-1.06), Hispanics (HR 1.15, CI 1.10-1.19), Asians/Pacific Islanders (HR 1.36, CI 1.30-1.43) and Other minority groups (HR 1.00, CI 0.92-1.09) were transplanted at similar or higher rates than Caucasians. Our findings show that geographic location of waitlisted candidates is the most important contributor to racial disparities in waiting times for deceased donor kidney transplantation.
Project description:Children receive priority in the allocation of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation in the United States, but because allocation begins locally, geographic differences in population and organ supply may enable variation in pediatric access to transplantation. We assembled a cohort of 3764 individual listings for pediatric kidney transplantation in 2005-2010. For each donor service area, we assigned a category of short (<180 days), medium (181-270 days), or long (>270 days) median waiting time and calculated the ratio of pediatric-quality kidneys to pediatric candidates and the percentage of these kidneys locally diverted to adults. We used multivariable Cox regression analyses to examine the association between donor service area characteristics and time to deceased donor kidney transplantation. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of median waiting time to transplantation was 284 days (95% confidence interval, 263 to 300 days) and varied from 14 to 1313 days across donor service areas. Overall, 29% of pediatric-quality kidneys were locally diverted to adults. Compared with areas with short waiting times, areas with long waiting times had a lower ratio of pediatric-quality kidneys to candidates (3.1 versus 5.9; P<0.001) and more diversions to adults (31% versus 27%; P<0.001). In multivariable regression, a lower kidney to candidate ratio remained associated with longer waiting time (hazard ratio, 0.56 for areas with <2:1 versus reference areas with ?5:1 kidneys/candidates; P<0.01). Large geographic variation in waiting time for pediatric deceased donor kidney transplantation exists and is highly associated with local supply and demand factors. Future organ allocation policy should address this geographic inequity.
Project description:IntroductionKidney transplantation (KT) remains the treatment of choice for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), but access to transplantation is limited by a disparity between supply and demand for suitable organs. This organ shortfall has resulted in the use of a wider range of donor kidneys and, in parallel, a reexamination of potential alternative renal replacement therapies. Previous studies comparing Canadian intensive home hemodialysis (IHHD) with deceased donor (DD) KT in the United States reported similar survival, suggesting IHHD might be a plausible alternative.MethodsUsing data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and an experienced US-based IHHD program in Lynchburg, VA, we retrospectively compared mortality outcomes of a cohort of IHHD patients with transplant recipients within the same geographic region between October 1997 and June 2014.ResultsWe identified 3073 transplant recipients and 116 IHHD patients. Living donor KT (n = 1212) had the highest survival and 47% reduction in risk of death compared with IHHD (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-0.83). Survival of IHHD patients did not statistically differ from that of DD transplant recipients (n = 1834) in adjusted analyses (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.62-1.48) or when exclusively compared with marginal (Kidney Donor Profile Index >85%) transplant recipients (HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 0.84-2.16).ConclusionOur study showed comparable overall survival between IHHD and DD KT. For appropriate patients, IHHD could serve as bridging therapy to transplant and a tenable long-term renal replacement therapy.
Project description:Deceased donor kidneys with acute kidney injury (AKI) are often discarded due to fear of poor outcomes. We performed a multicenter study to determine associations of AKI (increasing admission-to-terminal serum creatinine by AKI Network stages) with kidney discard, delayed graft function (DGF) and 6-month estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). In 1632 donors, kidney discard risk increased for AKI stages 1, 2 and 3 (compared to no AKI) with adjusted relative risks of 1.28 (1.08-1.52), 1.82 (1.45-2.30) and 2.74 (2.0-3.75), respectively. Adjusted relative risk for DGF also increased by donor AKI stage: 1.27 (1.09-1.49), 1.70 (1.37-2.12) and 2.25 (1.74-2.91), respectively. Six-month eGFR, however, was similar across AKI categories but was lower for recipients with DGF (48 [interquartile range: 31-61] vs. 58 [45-75] ml/min/1.73m(2) for no DGF, p < 0.001). There was significant favorable interaction between donor AKI and DGF such that 6-month eGFR was progressively better for DGF kidneys with increasing donor AKI (46 [29-60], 49 [32-64], 52 [36-59] and 58 [39-71] ml/min/1.73m(2) for no AKI, stage 1, 2 and 3, respectively; interaction p = 0.05). Donor AKI is associated with kidney discard and DGF, but given acceptable 6-month allograft function, clinicians should consider cautious expansion into this donor pool.
Project description:BackgroundIn kidney transplantation, nonimmunologic donor-recipient (D-R) pairing is generally not given the same consideration as immunologic matching. The aim of this study was to determine how nonimmunologic D-R pairing relates to independent donor and recipient factors, and to immunologic HLA match for predicting graft loss.MethodsSeven D-R pairings (race, sex, age, weight, height, cytomegalovirus serostatus, and HLA match) were assessed for their association with the composite outcome of death or kidney graft loss using a Cox regression-based forward stepwise selection model. The best model for predicting graft loss (including nonimmunologic D-R pairings, independent D-R factors, and/or HLA match status) was determined using the Akaike Information Criterion.ResultsTwenty three thousand two hundred sixty two (29.9%) people in the derivation data set and 9892 (29.7%) in the validation data set developed the composite outcome of death or graft loss. A model that included both independent and D-R pairing variables best predicted graft loss. The c-indices for the derivation and validation models were 0.626 and 0.629, respectively. Size mismatch (MM) between donor and recipient (>30 kg [D < R} and >15 cm [D < R]) was associated with poor patient and graft survival even with 0 HLA MM, and conversely, an optimal D-R size pairing mitigated the risk of graft loss seen with 6 HLA MM.ConclusionsD-R pairing is valuable in predicting patient and graft outcomes after kidney transplant. D-R size matching could offset the benefit and harm seen with 0 and 6 HLA MM, respectively. This is a novel finding.
Project description:Socioeconomically deprived individuals with renal disease are less likely to receive a live-donor kidney transplant than less-deprived individuals. This qualitative study aimed to identify reasons for the observed socioeconomic disparity in live-donor kidney transplantation.A qualitative study using face-to-face in-depth semistructured interviews.A UK tertiary renal referral hospital and transplant centre.Purposive sampling was used to select deceased-donor transplant recipients from areas of high socioeconomic deprivation (SED) (19 participants), followed by a low SED comparison group (13 participants), aiming for maximum diversity in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, primary renal disease and previous renal replacement therapy.Participants were interviewed following their routine transplant clinic review. Interviews were digitally audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded using NVivo software and analysed using the constant comparison method described in Grounded Theory.Themes common and distinct to each socioeconomic group emerged. 6 themes appeared to distinguish between individuals from areas of high and low SED. 4 themes were distinct to participants from areas of high SED: (1) Passivity, (2) Disempowerment, (3) Lack of social support and (4) Short-term focus. 2 themes were distinct to the low SED group: (1) Financial concerns and (2) Location of donor.Several of the emerging themes from the high SED individuals relate to an individual's lack of confidence and skill in managing their health and healthcare; themes that are in keeping with low levels of patient activation. Inadequate empowerment of socioeconomically deprived individuals by healthcare practitioners was also described. Financial concerns did not emerge as a barrier from interviews with the high SED group. Interventions aiming to redress the observed socioeconomic inequity should be targeted at both patients and clinical teams to increase empowerment and ensure shared decision-making.
Project description:Deceased donor kidneys with AKI are often discarded for fear of poor transplant outcomes. Donor biomarkers that predict post-transplant renal recovery could improve organ selection and reduce discard. We tested whether higher levels of donor urinary YKL-40, a repair phase protein, associate with improved recipient outcomes in a prospective cohort study involving deceased kidney donors from five organ procurement organizations. We measured urinary YKL-40 concentration in 1301 donors (111 had AKI, defined as doubling of serum creatinine) and ascertained outcomes in the corresponding 2435 recipients, 756 of whom experienced delayed graft function (DGF). Donors with AKI had higher urinary YKL-40 concentration (P<0.001) and acute tubular necrosis on procurement biopsies (P=0.05). In fully adjusted analyses, elevated donor urinary YKL-40 concentration associated with reduced risk of DGF in both recipients of AKI donor kidneys (adjusted relative risk, 0.51 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.32 to 0.80] for highest versus lowest YKL-40 tertile) and recipients of non-AKI donor kidneys (adjusted relative risk, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.65 to 0.97]). Furthermore, in the event of DGF, elevated donor urinary YKL-40 concentration associated with higher 6-month eGFR (6.75 [95% CI, 1.49 to 12.02] ml/min per 1.73 m2) and lower risk of graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.27 to 0.94]). These findings suggest that YKL-40 is produced in response to tubular injury and is independently associated with recovery from AKI and DGF. If ultimately validated as a prognostic biomarker, urinary YKL-40 should be considered in determining the suitability of donor kidneys for transplant.
Project description:Rationale & objectiveThere is debate on whether weight loss, a hallmark of frailty, signals higher risk for adverse outcomes among recipients of deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT).Study designRetrospective cohort study.Setting & participantsUsing national Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data, we included all DDKT recipients in the United States between December 4, 2004, and December 3, 2014, who were adults (aged ≥ 18 years) when listed for DDKT.ExposuresRelative pre-DDKT weight change as a continuous predictor and categorized as <5% weight change from listing to DDKT, ≥5% to <10% weight loss, ≥10% weight loss, ≥5% to <10% weight gain, and ≥10% weight gain.OutcomesWe examined 3 post-DDKT outcomes: (1) transplant hospitalization length of stay (LOS) in days, (2) all-cause graft failure, and (3) mortality.Analytic approachUnadjusted fractional polynomial methods, multivariable log-gamma models, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsAmong 94,465 recipients of DDKT, median pre-DDKT weight change was 0 (interquartile range, -3.5 to +3.9) kg. There were nonlinear unadjusted associations between relative pre-DDKT weight loss and longer transplant hospitalization LOS, higher all-cause graft loss, and higher mortality. Compared with recipients with <5% pre-DDKT weight change (n = 49,366; 52%), recipients who lost ≥10% of their listing weight (n = 10,614; 11%) had 0.66 (95% CI, 0.23-1.09) days longer average transplant hospitalization LOS (P = 0.003), 1.11-fold higher graft loss (adjusted HR [aHR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.17; P < 0.001), and 1.18-fold higher mortality (aHR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.11-1.25; P < 0.001) independent of recipient, donor, and transplant factors. Pre-DDKT dialysis exposure, listing body mass index category, and waiting time modified the association of pre-DDKT weight change with hospital LOS (interaction P < 0.10), but not with all-cause graft loss and mortality.LimitationsUnmeasured confounders and inability to identify volitional weight change. Also, the higher significance level set to increase the power of detecting interactions with the fixed sample size may have resulted in increased risk for type 1 error.ConclusionsDDKT recipients with ≥10% pre-DDKT weight loss are at increased risk for adverse outcomes and may benefit from augmented support post-DDKT.
Project description:BackgroundSignificant variability in organ acceptance thresholds have been demonstrated across the United States, but data regarding the rate and rationale for kidney donor organ decline in Canada are lacking.ObjectiveTo examine decision making regarding deceased kidney donor acceptance and non-acceptance in a population of Canadian transplant professionals.DesignA survey study of theoretical deceased donor kidney cases of increasing complexity.SettingCanadian transplant nephrologists, urologists, and surgeons making donor call decisions responding to an electronic survey between July 22 and October 4, 2022.ParticipantsInvitations to participate were distributed to 179 Canadian transplant nephrologists, surgeons, and urologists through e-mail. Participants were identified by contacting each transplant program and requesting a list of physicians who take donor call.MeasurementsSurvey respondents were asked whether they would accept or decline a given donor, assuming there was a suitable recipient. They were also asked to cite reasons for donor non-acceptance.MethodsDonor scenario-specific acceptance rates (total acceptance divided by total number of respondents for a given scenario and overall) and reasons for decline were determined and presented as a percentage of the total cases declined.ResultsIn all, 72 respondents from 7 provinces completed at least one question of the survey, with considerable variability between acceptance rates for centers; the most conservative center declined 60.9% of donor cases, whereas the most aggressive center declined only 28.1%, P-value < .001. There was an increased risk of non-acceptance with advancing age, donation after cardiac death, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and comorbidities.LimitationsAs with any survey, there is the potential for participation bias. In addition, this study examines donor characteristics in isolation, however, asks respondent to assume there is a suitable candidate available. In reality, whenever donor quality is considered, it should be considered in the context of the intended recipient.ConclusionIn a survey of increasingly medically complex deceased kidney donor cases, there was significant variability in donor decline among Canadian transplant specialists. Given relatively high rates of donor decline and apparent heterogeneity in acceptance decisions, Canadian transplant specialists may benefit from additional education regarding the benefits achieved from even medically complex kidney donors for appropriate candidates relative to remaining on dialysis on the transplant waitlist.