Search

In a living donor kidney transplantation ( LDKT) dominated transplant programme, kidney paired donation ( KPD) may be a cost-effective and valid alternative strategy to increase LDKT in countries with limited resources where deceased donation kidney transplantation ( DDKT) is in the initial stages. Here, we report our experience of 300 single-centre KPD transplantations to increase LDKT in India. Between January 2000 and July 2016, 3616 LDKT and 561 DDKT were performed at our transplantation centre, 300 (8.3%) using KPD. The reasons for joining KPD among transplanted patients were ABO incompatibility ( n = 222), positive cross-match ( n = 59) and better matching ( n = 19). A total of 124 two-way ( n = 248), 14 three-way ( n = 42), one four-way ( n = 4) and one six-way exchange ( n = 6) yielded 300 KPD transplants. Death-censored graft and patient survival were 96% ( n = 288) and 83.3% ( n = 250), respectively. The mean serum creatinine was 1.3 mg/dl at a follow-up of 3 ± 3 years. We credit the success of our KPD programme to maintaining a registry of incompatible pairs, counselling on KPD, a high-volume LDKT programme and teamwork. KPD is legal, cost effective and rapidly growing for facilitating LDKT with incompatible donors. This study provides large-scale evidence for the expansion of single-centre LDKT via KPD when national programmes do not exist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate whether the outcomes of renal grafts from living related donors older than 60 years are acceptable, in terms of renal function and patient/graft survival. Material and methods: One hundred and forty-seven patients who received kidneys from donor age ≥60 years constituted the study group (group 1). The control group (group 2) consisted of 1310 patients who received renal transplants from donor age <60 years. Outcome measures included graft, patient survival, acute rejection rate and serum creatinine (SCr) in patients/donors. Graft and patient survivals were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The mean age of donors was 62.7 ± 3.39 years in group 1 and 43.45 ± 9.65 years in group 2. Patient survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 95.7%, 89.4% and 82.6% in group 1 and 93.8%, 89.1% and 83.1% in group 2 ( p = 0.785), respectively. Death-censored graft survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 98.5%, 94.8% and 94.8% in group 1 and 96.1%, 92.9% and 89% in group 2 ( p = 0.166), respectively. Biopsy-proven acute rejections were 21% and 16.8% ( p = 0.206) and chronic rejections 5% and 3.4% in group 1 and 2, respectively ( p = 0.542). Recipient SCr (mg/dL) was 1.8 ± 0.31 in group 1 and 1.58 ± 0.37 in group 2. The donor SCr levels at the last follow-up were 1 mg/dL and 0.9 mg/dL in group 1 and 2, respectively. Conclusions: Donor age did not affect patient and graft survival in the 5-year follow-up in our study. Age alone seems not to be an exclusion criterion to living kidney donation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Kidney paired donation (KPD) is a rapidly growing modality for facilitating living donor kidney transplantation (LDKTx) for patients who are incompatible with their healthy, willing and living donor. The impact of donor-recipient age difference on long and short-term graft and patient survivals in LDKTx is still uncertain. Methods: A total of 1502 LDKTx recipients who received regular follow-up in our center from 1999 to 2012 were studied. Donor-recipient age difference was divided into subgroups (donor-recipient 0−10, 11-20, 0-20, 21-30, 31-40, and 21-40 years). Outcome measures included death censored graft, patient survival and acute rejection rate. Results: The 1-, 5-, 10-year patient survival of the donor-recipient age difference ≤20 years group showed no difference compared with the age difference >20 years group (94.5%, 83.2%, 71.9% and 95.2%, 86%, 77.8%, p = 0.053). The 1-, 5-, 10-year graft survival of the donor-recipient age difference ≤20 years group showed no difference compared with the age difference >20 years group (94.6%, 81.6%, 72.1% and 94%, 80%, 72.2%, p = 0.989). The rejection were also similar (17.5% vs. 16.5%, p > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in graft survival and acute rejection rate in all subgroups. Conclusions: Older donors (usually within families) are not associated with worse outcome is reassuring. KPD should not be prohibited due to high donor-recipient age difference, when size of donor pool is small as in single center KPD program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Kidney paired donation (KPD) is feasible for any center that performs living related donor renal transplantation (LRDRTx). Lack of awareness, counseling and participation are important hurdles in KPD patients with incompatible donors. Materials and methods: This is an institutional review board approved study of 10 ESRD patients who consented to participate in the KPD transplantation at our center. All the surgeries were carried out on the same day at the same center on the occasion of World Kidney Day (WKD) (14 March 2013). All recipients had anatomic, functional and immunological similar donors. Results: KPD were performed to avoid blood group incompatibility ( n = 8) or to avoid a positive crossmatch ( n = 2). None of the patients experienced delayed graft function and surgical complications. At 3 month follow-up, median serum creatinine was 1 (range 0.6 to 1.25) mg/dL and two patients developed allograft biopsy-proven acute rejection and responded to antirejection therapy. Due to impact of our awareness activity, 20 more KPD patients are medically fit for transplantation and waiting for permission from the authorization committee before transplantation. Conclusion: This is a report of 10 simultaneous KPD transplantations in a single day in a single centre on WKD raising awareness of KPD. KPD is viable, legal and rapidly growing modality for facilitating LRDRTx for patients who are incompatible with their healthy, willing LRD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Comparison of time on the deceased donor kidney waitlist versus time on the kidney paired donation registry in the Australian program," by Ferrari P and colleagues in the 2012 issue.

Background: Stem cell therapy (SCT) is used for immunosuppression minimization in renal transplantation (RT). We carried out a prospective study to evaluate the benefits of co-infusion of donor adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSC) + hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) in living donor RT (LDRT) under non-myeloablative conditioning. Methods: In a demographically balanced three-armed LDRT trial with 95 patients in each arm, group-1 received portal co-infusion of AD-MSC + HSC, group-2 received HSC and group-3 received no SCT. Lymphoid irradiation and anti-thyroglobulin were used for conditioning. Results: SCT was safe. At 1 and 5 years post-transplant, patient survival was 100% and 94.7% in group-1, 100% and 95.7% in group-2, and 94.7% and 84% in group-3, death-censored graft survival was 100% and 94.6% in group-1, 100% and 91.3% in group-2, and 98.9% and 94.4% in group-3 with mean serum creatinine (mg/dL) of 1.38 and 1.39 in group-1, 1.48 and 1.51 in group-2, and 1.29 and 1.42 and in group-3. Rejection episodes and immunosuppression requirement were lesser in SCT groups versus controls with best results noted in group-1. Conclusion: Coinfusion of donor AD-MSC +HSC in portal circulation pre-transplant under non-myeloablative conditioning is safe and effective for immunosuppression minimization in LDRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In India, there are a large number of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients waiting for renal transplantation (RT). Organ retrieval from brain dead deceased donor (DD) is getting increased attention as the waiting list for organ recipients far exceeds the organ donor pool. In our country, despite a large population, the number of brain dead donors undergoing organ donation is very less. DDRT is the possible solution to bridge the disparity between organ supply and demand. In India, the potential for DDRT is huge due to the high number of fatal road traffic accidents and this pool is yet to be tapped. Patients and methods: We report DDRT outcome in 294 patients (age: 36.5 ± 14.1 years; male:female, 200:94) between 2005 and 2012. All patients received single-dose rabbit-anti-thymocyte globulin for induction and steroids, calcineurin inhibitor, and mycophenolate mofetil/azathioprine for maintenance immunosuppression. Results: Our retrospective study in 294 DDRT shows a fairly successful outcome. Over a mean follow-up of 3.93 years, patient and graft survival rates were 81.7% and 92.6%, respectively, with a median serum creatinine of 1.5 mg/dL. 20.7% had biopsy-proven acute rejection. Conclusion: Given the widespread organ shortage, DDRT has a potential to expand the donor pool and shorten the waiting list for RT, encouraging the use of this approach even in low-income countries. Aggressive donor management, increasing public awareness about the concept of organ donation, good communication between clinician and the family members, and a well-trained team of transplant coordinators can help in improving the number of organ donations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite heightened international interest in performing living donor kidney paired donation (KPD) transplantation after the publication of a research protocol by Ross and colleagues in 1997, only a few hundred have been performed worldwide. The major obstacle is that many individuals in end-stage renal disease are of blood type O and can only receive an organ from a donor of blood type O, whereas blood type O donors are 'universal donors' and will be able to donate directly with an intended recipient of any blood type unless there is a positive crossmatch. To overcome this, patients with compatible but non-HLA identical donors over 45 years of age should be approached for inclusion in KPD program especially O blood group donors. Inclusion of all these additional pairs into the algorithm greatly increases chances of possible matches for O blood group recipients. We report successful three-way KPD transplantation resulting in transplantation of O blood group patient using compatible O blood group donor from India. None of the patients had delayed graft function or rejection and all had stable graft function on discharge without any medical and surgical complications. We need to allocate O blood group kidneys from compatible donors to overcome the barrier of HLA, non-HLA antibodies and other donor related factors to improve transplant quality and long term outcomes. This will increase transplantation of O blood group patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kute VB, Trivedi HL, Vanikar AV, Shah PR, Gumber MR, Patel HV, Munjappa BC, Modi PR, Gera DN. Long-term outcome of deceased donor renal transplantation in pediatric recipients: A single-center experience from a developing country Abstract: RTx is best treatment for children with ESRD. Data scarcity on DDRTx outcome in children prompted us to review our experience. This study was undertaken to evaluate patient/graft survival, function vis-a-vis SCr, rejection episodes, and mortality in DDRTx performed in 37 children between 1998 and 2011. The most common recipient diseases leading to ESRD were congenital anomalies of kidney and urinary tract (48.6%) and chronic glomerulonephritis (18.9%). Mean recipient age was 13.8 ± 3.1 yr; 67.5% (n = 25) were men. Mean donor age was 38.8 ± 18.6 yr; 48.5% (n = 18) were men. Mean dialysis duration pre-transplantation was 15.5 ± 3.5 months. All recipients received r-ATG, and triple immunosuppression. Over a mean follow-up of 3.93 ± 3.5 yr, patient and graft survival rates were 72.9% (n = 27) and 83.7% (n = 31), respectively, with a mean SCr of 1.1 mg/dL; 21.6% (n = 8) of patients had acute rejection episodes; 24.3% (n = 9) of patients had DGF. A total of 27% (n = 10) patients died, mainly owing to infections (n = 6) and cardiovascular disease (n = 3). DDRTx is a viable option for children and achieves acceptable graft function with patient/graft survival over long-term follow-up, encouraging use of this approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]