Search

There has been a decline in living kidney donation over the last two decades. Donors from low-income families or racial/ethnic minorities face greater disproportionate geographic, financial, and logistical barriers to completing lengthy and complex evaluations. This has contributed to the decreased proportion of these subgroups. The authors view telemedicine as a potential solution to this problem.Since the initial decline of donors in 2005, biologically related donors have experienced a lack of growth across race/ethnicity. Conversely, unrelated donors have emerged as the majority of donors in recent years across race/ethnicity, except for unrelated black donors. Disparities in access to living kidney donation persist. Telemedicine using live-video visits can overcome barriers to access transplant centers and facilitate care coordination. In a U.S. survey, nephrologists, surgeons, coordinators, social workers, and psychologists/psychologists across transplant centers are favorably disposed to use telemedicine for donor evaluation/follow-up beyond the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. However, with the waning of relaxed telemedicine regulations under the Public Health Emergency, providers perceive payor policy and out-of-state licensing as major factors hindering telemedicine growth prospects.Permanent federal and state policies that support telemedicine services for living kidney donation can enhance access to transplant centers and help overcome barriers to donor evaluation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Despite improvement in short-term renal allograft survival in recent years, renal transplant recipients (RTR) have poorer long-term allograft outcomes. Allograft function slowly declines with periods of stable function similar to natural progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in non-transplant population. Nearly all RTR transitions to failing renal allograft (FRG) period and require transition to dialysis. Conservative CKD management before transition to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is an increasingly important topic; however, there is limited data in RTR regarding how to delay dialysis initiation with conservative management. RECENT FINDINGS: Since immunological and non-immunological factors unique to RTR contribute to decline in allograft function, therapies to slow progression of FRG should take both sets of factors into account. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) either incremental dialysis or re-kidney transplantation should be explored. This required taking benefits and risks of continuing immunosuppressive medications into account when allograft nephrectomy may be necessary. SUMMARY: FRG may benefit from various interventions to slow progression of worsening allograft function. Until there are stronger evidence to guide interventions to preserve renal function, extrapolating evidence from non-transplant patients and clinical judgement are necessary. The goal is to provide individualized care for conservative management of RTR with FRG.

The novel corona virus (SARS-CoV2) has been demonstrated to cause acute kidney injury due to direct cellular toxicity as well as due to a variety of autoimmune glomerular diseases. The concept of a surge of infected patients resulting in an overwhelming number of critical patients has been a central concern in healthcare planning during the COVID-19 era.One crucial question remains as to how to manage patients with end stage renal disease and acute kidney injury in case of a massive surge of critically ill infected patients. Some publications address practical and ingenious solutions for just such a surge of need for renal replacement therapy. We present a plan for using a blood pump, readily available dialysis filter, and a prefilter and postfilter replacement fluid set up. This is in conjunction with multiple intravenous pumps to develop a simple hemofiltration apparatus.The current set up may be a readily available option for use in critical situations where the need for renal replacement therapy outstrips the capacity of traditional hemodialysis services in a hospital or region.

Atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS) is a diagnosis that has captured the interest of specialists across multiple fields. The hallmark features of aHUS are microangiopathic hemolysis and thrombocytopenia, which creates a diagnostic dilemma because of the occurrence of these findings in a wide variety of clinical disorders.In most of the instances, aHUS is a diagnosis of exclusion after ruling out causes such as Shigella toxin, acquired or genetic a disintegrin and metalloproteinase thrombospondin motif 13 deficiency (thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura), and vitamin B12 deficiency. In the purest sense, aHUS is a genetic condition that is activated (or unmasked) by an environmental exposure. However, it is now evident that complement activation is a feature of many diseases. Variants in complement regulatory genes predispose to microangiopathic hemolysis in many rheumatologic, oncologic, and drug-induced vascular, obstetric, peritransplant, and infectious syndromes.Many 'hemolysis syndromes' overlap clinically with aHUS, and we review the literature on the treatment of these conditions with complement inhibition. New reports on the treatment of C3 glomerulopathy, Shiga toxin-related classic hemolytic uremic syndrome, and medication-related thrombotic microangiopathy will be reviewed as well.