Dataset Information

Living or deceased-donor kidney transplant: the role of psycho-socioeconomic factors and outcomes associated with each type of transplant.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Kidney transplant improves patients' survival and quality of life. Worldwide, concern about the equality of access to the renal transplant wait-list is increasing. In Iran, patients have the choice to be placed on either the living or deceased-donor transplant wait-list. METHODS:This was a prospective study performed on 416 kidney transplant recipients (n?=?217 (52.2%) from living donors and n?=?199 (47.8%) from deceased donors). Subjects were recruited from four referral kidney transplant centers across Tehran, Iran, during 2016-2017. The primary outcome was to identify the psycho-socioeconomic factors influencing the selection of type of donor (living versus deceased). Secondary objective was to compare the outcomes associated with each type of transplant. The impact of psycho-socioeconomic variables on selecting type of donor was evaluated by using multiple logistic regression and the effect of surgical and non-surgical variables on the early post-transplant creatinine trend was assessed by univariate repeated measure ANOVA. RESULTS:Based on standardized coefficients, the main predictors for selecting living donor were academic educational level (adjusted OR?=?3.25, 95% CI: 1.176-9.005, p?=?0.023), psychological status based on general health questionnaire (GHQ) (adjusted OR?=?2.46, 95% CI: 1.105-5.489, p?=?0.028), and lower monthly income (adjusted OR?=?2.20, 95% CI: 1.242-3.916, p?=?0.007). The waiting time was substantially shorter in patients who received kidneys from living donors (p?

SUBMITTER: Basiri A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7268666 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Living or deceased-donor kidney transplant: the role of psycho-socioeconomic factors and outcomes associated with each type of transplant.

Basiri Abbas A Taheri Maryam M Khoshdel Alireza A Golshan Shabnam S Mohseni-Rad Hamed H Borumandnia Nasrin N Simforoosh Nasser N Nafar Mohsen M Aliasgari Majid M Nourbala Mohammad Hossein MH Pourmand Gholamreza G Farhangi Soudabeh S Khalili Nastaran N

International journal for equity in health 20200601 1

<h4>Background</h4>Kidney transplant improves patients' survival and quality of life. Worldwide, concern about the equality of access to the renal transplant wait-list is increasing. In Iran, patients have the choice to be placed on either the living or deceased-donor transplant wait-list.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a prospective study performed on 416 kidney transplant recipients (n = 217 (52.2%) from living donors and n = 199 (47.8%) from deceased donors). Subjects were recruited from four referr ...[more]

PMID: 32487079

Similar Datasets

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:Background and objectivesIn kidney transplantation, the relative contribution of donor versus other factors on clinical outcomes is unknown. We sought to quantify overall donor effects on transplant outcomes for kidney donations from deceased donors.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsFor paired donations from deceased donors resulting in transplants to different recipients, the magnitude of donor effects can be quantified by examining the excess of concordant outcomes within kidney pairs beyond chance concordance. Using data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network between the years 2013 and 2017, we examined concordance measures for delayed graft function, death-censored 1-year graft failure, and death-censored 3-year graft failure. The concordance measures were excess relative risk, excess absolute risk, and the fixation index (where zero is no concordance and one is perfect concordance). We further examined concordance in strata of kidneys with similar values of the Kidney Donor Profile Index, a common metric of organ quality.ResultsIf the transplant of the kidney mate resulted in delayed graft function, risk for delayed graft function was 19% higher (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 18% to 20%), or 1.76-fold higher (95% CI, 1.73- to 1.80-fold), than baseline. If a kidney graft failed within 1 year, then the kidney mate's risk of failure was 6% higher (95% CI, 4% to 9%), or 2.85-fold higher (95% CI, 2.25- to 3.48-fold), than baseline. For 3-year graft failure, the excess absolute risk was 7% (95% CI, 4% to 10%) but excess relative risk was smaller, 1.91-fold (95% CI, 1.56- to 2.28-fold). Fixation indices were 0.25 for delayed graft function (95% CI, 0.24 to 0.27), 0.07 for 1-year graft failure (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.09), and 0.07 for 3-year graft failure (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.10). Results were similar in strata of kidneys with a similar Kidney Donor Profile Index.ConclusionsOverall results indicated that the donor constitution has small or moderate effect on post-transplant clinical outcomes.

Project description:ImportanceIn the United States, substantial disparities in access to kidney transplant exist for wait-listed candidates with end-stage renal disease. The implications of transplant centers' willingness to accept kidney offers for access to transplant and mortality outcomes are unknown.ObjectiveTo determine the outcomes for wait-listed kidney transplant candidates after the transplant center's refusal of a deceased donor kidney offer.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study obtained data from the United Network for Organ Sharing Potential Transplant Recipient data set on all deceased donor kidney offers in the United States made between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2015. The final study cohort included adult patients who were wait-listed for kidney transplant and received at least 1 allograft offer during the study period (N?=?280?041). Data analysis was conducted from June 1, 2018, to March 30, 2019.ExposureCandidate state of residence.Main outcomes and measuresWaiting list outcome event groups included received deceased donor allograft, received living donor allograft, died while on the waiting list, removed from the waiting list without a transplant, or still on the waiting list at the end of follow-up.ResultsAmong the 280?041 kidney transplant candidates included in the study, the mean (SD) age at wait-listing was 51.1 (13.1) years, and male patients were predominant (171 517 [61.2%]). In this cohort, 81 750 candidates (29.2%) received a deceased donor kidney allograft, 30 870 (11.0%) received a living donor allograft, 25 967 (9.3%) died while on the waiting list, and 59 359 (21.2%) were removed from the waiting list. Overall, 10 candidates with at least 1 previous allograft offer died each day during the study period. Time to first offer was similar for candidates who received deceased donor kidney allograft compared with those who died while waiting (median [interquartile range {IQR}] time, 79 [16-426] days vs 78 [17-401] days, respectively). Deceased donor allograft recipients had a median of 17 offers (IQR, 6-44) over 422 days (IQR, 106-909 days), whereas candidates who died while waiting received a median of 16 offers (IQR, 6-41) over 651 days (IQR, 304-1117 days). Most kidneys (84%) were declined on behalf of at least 1 candidate before being accepted for transplant. As reported by centers, organ or donor quality concerns accounted for 8 416 474 (92.6%) of all declined offers, whereas offers were infrequently refused because of patient-related factors (232 193 [2.6%]), logistical limitations (49 492 [0.5%]), or other concerns. The odds of death after an offer and the median number of offers received prior to death varied considerably by state.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that transplant candidates appeared to receive a large number of viable deceased donor kidney offers that were refused on their behalf by transplant centers, potentially exacerbating the detrimental consequences of the organ shortage; increased transparency in organ allocation process and decisions may improve patient-centered care and access to kidney transplant.

Project description:Background and objectivesData reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) are used in kidney transplant research, policy development, and assessment of center quality, but the accuracy of early post-transplant outcome measures is unknown.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsThe Deceased Donor Study (DDS) is a prospective cohort study at five transplant centers. Research coordinators manually abstracted data from electronic records for 557 adults who underwent deceased donor kidney transplantation between April of 2010 and November of 2013. We compared the post-transplant outcomes of delayed graft function (DGF; defined as dialysis in the first post-transplant week), acute rejection, and post-transplant serum creatinine reported to the OPTN with data collected for the DDS.ResultsMedian kidney donor risk index was 1.22 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.97-1.53). Median recipient age was 55 (IQR, 46-63) years old, 63% were men, and 47% were black; 93% had received dialysis before transplant. Using DDS data as the gold standard, we found that pretransplant dialysis was not reported to the OPTN in only 11 (2%) instances. DGF in OPTN data had a sensitivity of 89% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 84% to 93%) and specificity of 98% (95% CI, 96% to 99%). Surprisingly, the OPTN data accurately identified acute allograft rejection in only 20 of 47 instances (n=488; sensitivity of 43%; 95% CI, 17% to 73%). Across participating centers, sensitivity of acute rejection varied widely from 23% to 100%, whereas specificity was uniformly high (92%-100%). Six-month serum creatinine values in DDS and OPTN data had high concordance (n=490; Lin concordance correlation =0.90; 95% CI, 0.88 to 0.92).ConclusionsOPTN outcomes for recipients of deceased donor kidney transplants have high validity for DGF and 6-month allograft function but lack sensitivity in detecting rejection. Future studies using OPTN data may consider focusing on allograft function at 6 months as a useful outcome.

Project description:BackgroundAfrican American (AA) recipients of deceased-donor (DD) kidney transplants (KT) have shorter allograft survival than recipients of other ethnic groups. Reasons for this disparity encompass complex interactions between donors and recipients characteristics.MethodsOutcomes from 3872 AA and 19,719 European American (EA) DDs who had one kidney transplanted in an AA recipient and one in an EA recipient were analyzed. Four donor/recipient pair groups (DRP) were studied, AA/AA, AA/EA, EA/AA, and EA/EA. Survival random forests and Cox proportional hazard models were fitted to rank and evaluate modifying effects of DRP on variables associated with allograft survival. These analyses sought to identify factors contributing to the observed disparities in transplant outcomes among AA and EA DDKT recipients.ResultsTransplant era, discharge serum creatinine, delayed graft function, and DRP were among the top predictors of allograft survival and mortality among DDKT recipients. Interaction effects between DRP with the kidney donor risk index and transplant era showed significant improvement in allograft survival over time in EA recipients. However, AA recipients appeared to have similar or poorer outcomes for DDKT performed after 2010 versus before 2001; allograft survival hazard ratios (95% CI) were 1.15 (0.74, 1.76) and 1.07 (0.8, 1.45) for AA/AA and EA/AA, compared to 0.62 (0.54, 0.71) and 0.5 (0.41, 0.62) for EA/EA and AA/EA DRP, respectively. Recipient mortality improved over time among all DRP, except unemployed AA/AAs. Relative to DDKT performed pre-2001, employed AA/AAs had HR = 0.37 (0.2, 0.69) versus 0.59 (0.31, 1.11) for unemployed AA/AA after 2010.ConclusionRelative to DDKT performed before 2001, similar or worse overall DCAS was observed among AA/AAs, while EA/EAs experienced considerable improvement regardless of employment status, KDRI, and EPTS. AA recipients of an AA DDKT, especially if unemployed, had worse allograft survival and mortality and did not appear to benefit from advances in care over the past 20 years.

Dataset Information

Living or deceased-donor kidney transplant: the role of psycho-socioeconomic factors and outcomes associated with each type of transplant.

Publications

Living or deceased-donor kidney transplant: the role of psycho-socioeconomic factors and outcomes associated with each type of transplant.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets