Dataset Information

Donor type and 3-month hospital readmission following kidney transplantation: results from the Netherlands organ transplant registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Hospital readmission after transplantation is common in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). In this study, we aim to compare the risk of 3-month hospital readmission after kidney transplantation with different donor types in the overall population and in both young (< 65 years) and elderly (≥65 years) KTRs.

Methods

We included all first-time adult KTRs from 2016 to 2018 in the Netherlands Organ Transplant Registry. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the effect while adjusting for baseline confounders.

Results

Among 1917 KTRs, 615 (32.1%) had at least one hospital readmission. Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) recipients had an adjusted OR of 0.76 (95%CI, 0.61 to 0.96; p = 0.02) for hospital readmission compared to deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) recipients. In the young and elderly, the adjusted ORs were 0.69 (95%CI, 0.52 to 0.90, p = 0.01) and 0.93 (95%CI, 0.62 to 1.39, p = 0.73) and did not differ significantly from each other (p-value for interaction = 0.38). In DDKT, the risk of hospital readmission is similar between recipients with donation after cardiac death (DCD) or brain death (DBD) and the risk was similar between the young and elderly.

Conclusion

A lower risk of post-transplant 3-month hospital readmission was found in recipients after LDKT compared to DDKT, and this benefit of LDKT might be less dominant in elderly patients. In DDKT, having either DCD or DBD donors is not associated with post-transplant 3-month hospital readmission, regardless of age. Tailored patient management is needed for recipients with DDKT and elderly KTRs.

SUBMITTER: Wang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8077946 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: As in younger recipients, post-transplant infection is a frequent and devastating complication after kidney transplantation (KT) in older recipients. However, few studies have analyzed characteristics of post-transplant infection in older kidney recipients. In this study of a nation-wide cohort of older kidney recipients, we investigated the current epidemiology, risk factors, and clinical impacts of early post-transplant infection, which was defined as infectious complications requiring hospitalization within the first 6?months after KT.Methods: Three thousand seven hundred thirty-eight kidney recipients registered in the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry between 2014 and 2017 were enrolled. Recipients were divided into two groups, younger (n?=?3081) and older (n?=?657), with a cutoff age of 60?years. We observed characteristics of early post-transplant infection, and investigated risk factors for the development of infection. We also analyzed the association of early post-transplant infection with clinical outcomes including cardiac events, rejection, graft loss, and all-cause mortality.Results: The incidence of early post-transplant infection was more frequent in older recipients (16.9% in younger group and 22.7% in older group). Bacteria were the most common causative pathogens of early post-transplant infection, and the most frequent site of infection was the urinary tract in both older and younger recipients. Older recipients experienced more mycobacterial infections, co-infections, and multiple site infections compared with younger recipients. In older recipients, female sex (HR 1.398, 95% CI 1.199-1.631), older donor age (HR 1.010, 95% CI 1.004-1.016), longer hospitalization after KT (HR 1.010, 95% CI 1.006-1.014), and experience of acute rejection (HR 2.907, 95% CI 2.471-3.419) were independent risk factors for the development of early post-transplant infection. Experiencing infection significantly increases the incidence of rejection, graft loss, and all-cause mortality.Conclusion: Our results illustrate current trends, risk factors, and clinical impacts of early post-transplant infection after KT in older recipients. Considering the poor outcomes associated with early post-transplant infection, careful screening of recipients at high risk for infection and monitoring of recipients who experience infection are advised. In addition, since older recipients exhibit different clinical characteristics than younger recipients, further studies are needed to establish effective strategies for treating older recipients.

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:Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) offers better quality of life and clinical outcomes, including patient survival, compared with remaining on dialysis or receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant. Although LDKT education within transplant centers for both potential recipients and living donors is very important, outreach and education to kidney patients in settings other than transplant centers and to the general public is also critical to increase access to this highly beneficial treatment. In June 2014, the American Society of Transplantation's Live Donor Community of Practice, with the support of 10 additional sponsors, convened a consensus conference to determine best practices in LDKT, including a workgroup focused on developing a set of recommendations for optimizing outreach and LDKT education outside of transplant centers. Members of this workgroup performed a structured literature review, conducted teleconference meetings, and met in person at the 2-day conference. Their efforts resulted in consensus around the following recommendations. First, preemptive transplantation should be promoted through increased LDKT education by primary care physicians and community nephrologists. Second, dialysis providers should be trained to educate their own patients about LDKT and deceased donor kidney transplantation. Third, partnerships between community organizations, organ procurement organizations, religious organizations, and transplant centers should be fostered to support transplantation. Fourth, use of technology should be improved or expanded to better educate kidney patients and their support networks. Fifth, LDKT education and outreach should be improved for kidney patients in rural areas. Finally, a consensus-driven, evidence-based public message about LDKT should be developed. Discussion of the effect and potential for implementation around each recommendation is featured, particularly regarding reducing racial and socioeconomic disparities in access to LDKT. To accomplish these recommendations, the entire community of professionals and organizations serving kidney patients must work collaboratively toward ensuring accurate, comprehensive, and up-to-date LDKT education for all patients, thereby reducing barriers to LDKT access and increasing LDKT rates.

Project description:Several recipient biomarkers are reported to predict graft dysfunction, but these are not useful in decision making for the acceptance or allocation of deceased donor kidneys; thus, it is necessary to develop donor biomarkers predictive of graft dysfunction. To address this issue, we prospectively enrolled 94 deceased donors and their 109 recipients who underwent transplantation between 2010 and 2013 at 4 Korean transplantation centers. We investigated the predictive values of donor urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), and L-type fatty acid binding protein (L-FABP) for reduced graft function (RGF). We also developed a prediction model of RGF using these donor biomarkers. RGF was defined as delayed or slow graft function. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to generate a prediction model, which was internally validated using a bootstrapping method. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to assess the association of biomarkers with 1-year graft function. Notably, donor urinary NGAL levels were associated with donor AKI (P = 0.014), and donor urinary NGAL and L-FABP were predictive for RGF, with area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUROC) of 0.758 and 0.704 for NGAL and L-FABP, respectively. The best-fit model including donor urinary NGAL, L-FABP, and serum creatinine conveyed a better predictive value for RGF than donor serum creatinine alone (P = 0.02). In addition, we generated a scoring method to predict RGF based on donor urinary NGAL, L-FABP, and serum creatinine levels. Diagnostic performance of the RGF prediction score (AUROC 0.808) was significantly better than that of the DGF calculator (AUROC 0.627) and the kidney donor profile index (AUROC 0.606). Donor urinary L-FABP levels were also predictive of 1-year graft function (P = 0.005). Collectively, these findings suggest donor urinary NGAL and L-FABP to be useful biomarkers for RGF, and support the use of a new scoring system based on donor biomarkers to facilitate decision-making in acceptance and allocation of deceased donor kidneys and contribute to maximal organ utilization.

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.