Search

Background: Non-directed donors (NDDs), individuals who donate their organs with no intended recipient, in the United States increased 90-fold from 1999 to 2019. There is a paucity of studies investigating the motivations of NDDs. The objective of our study is to identify actionable items to increase NDDs., Methods: A survey of kidney NDDs at CUIMC from 2009 to 2021 was conducted. The survey was conducted via Qualtrics., Results: Seventy individuals met the study criteria. Forty-seven (67.1%) individuals completed the survey. A total of 98% of respondents reported participating in other altruistic activities prior to donation. A total of 70% donors identified as religious, and 57% reported religion/spirituality positively affected the decision to donate. The three most common factors that got respondents interested in NDD included: (1) hearing about an individual in need of a transplant, (2) knowing someone who had donated an organ, and (3) as a next step in altruistic behavior. A total of 85% said that donating a kidney met or exceeded expectations. A total of 44% and 31% of NDDs were interested in being either liver or uterus NDDs, respectively., Conclusions: We identified six potential action items: (1) Identify pools of receptive individuals who participated in other altruistic behaviors and/or identify as religious. (2) Outreach to individuals who came forward as directed donors, but whose intended recipient was successfully transplanted with a kidney from another donor. (3) Promote stories of those who need organ transplants or whose lives have been changed by transplantation. (4) Promote NDDs as resources for potential NDDs. (5) Educate interested kidney NDDs about liver and uterus transplant programs. (6) Decrease financial barriers to donation., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Organ transplantation is the best therapeutic option for children with end-stage organ failure. Pediatric transplantation centers and prioritization of organs for children are being established around the world. However, there is an important discrepancy observed when comparing high-income countries versus low-income and middle-income countries, as programs are active in some, but not in many others. Deceased organ donation is low in many places, which has led to an increase of organ shortage; consequently, there is a need to rely on the use of living donor organs. This is frequently the case for pediatric transplantation. To gather information about the possible reasons underlying these challenges and to propose possible solutions, a brainstorming session took place during the International Symposium on Pediatric Organ Donation and Transplantation in Ankara, Turkey. A description on different topics that were discussed is presented herein.

A significant portion of liver transplantations in many countries is conducted via living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, numerous potential donors are unable to donate to their intended recipients due to factors such as blood type incompatibility or size incompatibility. Despite this, an incompatible donor for one recipient may still be a viable donor for another patient. In recent decades, several transplant centers have introduced liver paired exchange (LPE) programs, facilitating donor exchanges between patients and their incompatible donors, thereby enabling compatible transplants. Initially, LPE programs in Asia primarily involved ABO-i pairs, resulting in 2-way exchanges mainly between blood type A and B recipients and donors. This practice has led to a modest 1% to 2% increase in LDLTs at some centers. Incorporating size incompatibility alongside blood type incompatibility further enhances the efficacy and significance of multiple-pair LPEs. Launched in July 2022, a single-center LPE program established at Inonu University Liver Transplant Institute in Malatya, Türkiye, has conducted thirteen 2-way, nine 3-way, four 4-way, two 5-way, and one 6-way LPEs until February 2024. In 2023 alone, this program facilitated 64 LDLTs, constituting 27.7% of the total 231 LDLTs performed. This paper presents the world's first two 5-way LPEs and the first 6-way LPE., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose as described by the American Journal of Transplantation., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is one of the most effective treatment options for people with end-stage renal disease. Traditionally, LDKT can be either "directed" or "nondirected," based on whether the recipient is specified by the donor. Recently, there has been an increase in conditional and semidirected live kidney donation among strangers, where the donor specifies the characteristics of the recipient whom they wish to donate to. This practice has both gained popularity and sparked controversy in the state of Israel through the nonprofit organization Matnat Chaim. We analyze the ethical implications of this practice by applying traditional principles of medical ethics to conditional LDKT. Although semidirected and conditional LDKT presents some ethical challenges, overall, its practice effectively aligns with core ethical principles. The donors' right to make stipulations respects the donor's autonomy, the practice avoids harm and benefits both donor and recipient, and justice and utility are upheld as the practice specifically benefits marginalized patients and optimizes resource utilization. Finally, we present data from our institution demonstrating how conditional LDKT increased transplantation for all ethnic groups; Jewish recipients of LDKT increased by 151.32% (P = .034) Arab recipients of LDKT increased by 111.11% (P = .036)., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose as described by the American Journal of Transplantation., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Transplantation & American Society of Transplant Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Kidney transplantation is the most successful kidney replacement therapy available, resulting in improved recipient survival and societal cost savings. Yet, nearly 70 years after the first successful kidney transplant, there are still numerous barriers and untapped opportunities that constrain the access to transplant. The literature describing these barriers is extensive, but the practices and processes to solve them are less clear. Solutions must be multidisciplinary and be the product of strong partnerships among patients, their networks, health care providers, and transplant programs. Transparency in the referral, evaluation, and listing process as well as organ selection are paramount to build such partnerships. Providing early culturally congruent and patient-centered education as well as maximizing the use of local resources to facilitate the transplant work up should be prioritized. Every opportunity to facilitate pre-emptive kidney transplantation and living donation must be taken. Promoting the use of telemedicine and kidney paired donation as standards of care can positively impact the work up completion and maximize the chances of a living donor kidney transplant., (© 2024 The Authors. Clinical Transplantation published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Solid-organ transplantation remains the optimal therapeutic option for end-stage organ disease. Altruistic donation represents the ultimate sign of generosity and the most important gift of life. Currently, <10% of the global needs for transplant are fulfilled. Organ shortages result from an inability to provide an adequate organ supply to match demands. The recently observed stagnation in living kidney donations in the United States is related to a drop in all types of organ donations from living related donors, which has been paralleled with a steady and continuous increase in all living unrelated donations. Some forms of living unrelated donation represent a financially driven survival system within which wealthy recipients exploit poor donors. Low rates of altruistic donation are related to cultural barriers, religious obstacles, fear, and consequent distrust in the system. The low rate indicates a state of lack of societal solidarity, a consequence of the state of subconsciousness at the individual and collective levels that humanity is living in. Human domestication, the conditioning process that humans go through since birth and the primary facilitator of this subconscious state, is guarded through familial, social, cultural, religious, political, and mass media organizations, which are all under the influence of the monetary establishment. Acquired beliefs, mainly during the domestication process, influence our perception of the environment, our values, and ultimately our way of life. Unfortunately, this conditioning process is negatively enforced, leading to a stressful state. The powerful subconscious mind places humans in a permanent survival mode, resulting in loss of intelligence, indispensable for well-being and happiness. Altruistic donation requires a close cooperation between all parties involved in the donation process and necessitates a positive reprograming of our subconscious based on sharing, generosity, satisfaction, gratitude, trust, inner peace, and ultimately happiness, well-known constituents of unconditional love, which represents the peak of consciousness.

The first living donor kidney transplant in Syria was performed 44 years ago; by the end of 2022, 6265 renal transplants had been performed in Syria. Kidney, bone marrow, cornea, and stem cells are the only organs or tissues that can be transplanted in Syria. Although 3 heart transplants from deceased donors were performed in the late 1980s, cardiac transplant activities have since discontinued. In 2003, national Syrian legislation was enacted authorizing the use of organs from living unrelated and deceased donors. This important law was preceded by another big stride: the acceptance by the higher Islamic religious authorities in Syria in 2001 of the principle of procurement of organs from deceased donors, provided that consent is given by a first- or second-degree relative. After the law was enacted, kidney transplant rates increased from 7 per million population in 2002 to 17 per million population in 2007. Kidney transplants performed abroad for Syrian patients declined from 25% in 2002 to <2% in 2007. Rates plateaued through 2010, before the political crisis started in 2011. Forty-four years after the first successful kidney transplant in Syria, patients needing an organ transplant rely on living donors only. Moreover, 20 years after the law authorizing use of organs from deceased donors, a program is still not in place in Syria. The war, limited resources, and lack of public awareness about the importance of organ donation and transplant appear to be factors inhibiting initiation of a deceased donor program in Syria. A concerted and ongoing education campaign is needed to increase awareness of organ donation, change negative public attitudes, and gain societal acceptance. Every effort must be made to initiate a deceased donor program to lessen the burden on living donors and to enable national self-sufficiency in organs for transplant.

Background: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) continues to be the primary modality of liver transplantation in Asia, but it accounts for about 5% of all liver transplantations in the US. ABO incompatibility is the primary reason motivated donors are declined. Although kidney paired exchanges are common, liver paired exchange (LPE) is still evolving in the US., Study Design: This is a retrospective review (between January 1, 2019, and July 31, 2021) of our initial experience with LPE., Results: A total of 10 LPEs (20 LDLTs) were performed during the study period. Seven LPEs were initiated by a nondirected O donor. The other 3 pair sets involved 1 ABO compatible and 1 ABO incompatible pair. Transplantations in a pair set were completed within a mean of 4.8 (range 1-14) days of each other. All 20 donors are doing well with no major complications at 12.7 (range 1-20) months. Seventeen of 20 recipients are alive and have good allograft function. One recipient died in the early postoperative period. Two late deaths of patients with functioning allografts were due to COVID-19 (at 8 months) and peritoneal carcinomatosis and gram-negative sepsis (at 9 months)., Conclusions: LPE is feasible in a high-volume LDLT center and is a useful option to increase LDLT by overcoming ABO incompatibility. Nondirected donors can be utilized to initiate an LPE., (Copyright © 2022 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest.

The purpose of this study is to highlight the need and the obligation to combine living donation with deceased one, this later is an incomparable source of organ donation, a plea with a triple objective: 1) analyzing the contribution of living donations in terms of numbers, through two elements: the degree of involvement of our medico-surgical competencies and our regulations governing organ donations. 2) Showing that, even though optimized, living donations will always fall short of the needs of our patients and are only part of the solution. 3) The other part is deceased donors: a source of donation which can not be substituted by that of the living donors, and which concerns patients awaiting a vital organ with no possibility of another substitute treatment. Patients are sentenced to death if not transplanted in a few weeks. In this respect, only professionalism and full staff availability can rid us of prejudices which unjustly and systematically overwhelm our society with regard to this type of life-saving donations. In countries promoting and performing this source of donation, a national priority planning network has been developed. This program ensures reliable results, based on universal standards for ethics, recruitment, training and organization. For health authorities of these same countries, the sharing of these organs with others countries is irrational and unreasonable. As long as these organs remain the only life-saving for this type of seriously ill patients, and this source of grafts will be insufficient to meet the needs of all their patients., Competing Interests: L´auteur ne déclare aucun conflit d´intérêts., (Copyright: Yassin Rekhif et al.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest.

In March 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread rapidly nationally, causing widespread emergent changes to the health system. Our goal was to understand the impact of the epidemic on kidney transplantation (KT), at both the national and center levels, accounting statistically for waitlist composition. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we compared data on observed waitlist registrations, waitlist mortality, and living-donor and deceased-donor kidney transplants (LDKT/DDKT) March 15-April 30, 2020 to expected events calculated from preepidemic data January 2016-February 2020. There were few changes before March 15, at which point the number of new listings/DDKT/LDKT dropped to 18%/24%/87% below the expected value (all P < .001). Only 12 centers performed LDKT March 15-31; by April 30, 40 centers had resumed LDKT. The decline in new listings and DDKT was greater among states with higher per capita confirmed COVID-19 cases. The number of waitlist deaths was 2.2-fold higher than expected in the 5 states with highest COVID-19 burden (P < .001). DCD DDKT and regional/national imports declined nationwide but most steeply in states with the highest COVID-19 burden. The COVID-19 epidemic has resulted in substantial changes to KT; we must adapt and learn rapidly to continue to provide safe access to transplantation and limit the growing indirect toll of an already deadly disease., (© 2020 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Summary: "Never let a good crisis go to waste." - Sir Winston Churchill., The value of Canada's Kidney Paired Donation program to the population cannot be overstated. Its greatest challenge as a national program, however, is the geographic separation of recipient and matched donor. Representatives from every transplant program in the country have been working toward increased use of kidney shipping in order to diminish the disincentive of donor travel. With transplantation program and travel restrictions in place to minimize the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the time to make a full transition from donor travel to the shipment of donor kidneys has clearly arrived.

Objective: The program aims to build and develop a high-quality donation system at the hospital and national level. Thirty coordinator posts for the transplantation of kidneys from living donors (LDs) were created. The coordinators' tasks were identified as determining or excluding the possibility of LD donation for kidney transplantation for every potential kidney recipient referred to the waiting list, qualifying potential LDs, supervising health monitoring for LDs and kidney recipients, and education and promotion of transplantation from LDs., Methods: The coordinators' reports and verification of data in the national transplant register from June 1, 2018 to November 30, 2019 were analyzed., Ethics: The study was conducted according to principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Declaration of Istanbul participation was on a voluntary basis., Results: Information on possible LDs was obtained from 707 (43%) of the 1630 potential recipients entered on the waiting list. In 373 cases there was no potential LD; 16 recipients did not give consent for kidney transplantation from a LD; for 318 recipients, 340 potential LDs were identified; 90 potential LDs were rejected at the initial stage for medical reasons; 60 potential donors were rejected at further stages of the qualification process; 3 persons resigned from donation; and 23 recipients were transplanted from deceased donors. Kidneys from 73 LDs were qualified and transplanted. On November 30, 2019, 91 potential donors were awaiting further qualification. As part of the program, 27 potential pairs for paired kidney exchange were reported to Poltransplant (17 pairs with positive HLA crossmatch, 10 with incompatible blood groups)., Conclusions: The creation of posts for coordinators for LD kidney transplantation in centers that qualify for LD kidney transplantation enabled systematic monitoring of donation potential, which led to an increase in the number of LD kidney transplants in 2019. Making full use of donation potential should significantly increase these numbers in the coming years., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The first living-donor kidney transplant in Syria was performed 41 years ago; by 2019, 5407 renal transplants had been performed there. Three heart transplants from deceased donors were performed in the late 1980s; cardiac transplant activities have since discontinued. In 2003, a new, national Syrian legislation was enacted authorizing the use of organs from living unrelated donors and from deceased donors. This important law was preceded by another big stride in this regard: the acceptance by the higher Islamic religious authorities in Syria in 2001 of the principle of procurement of organs from deceased donors, provided that consent is given by a first- or second-degree relative. After the enactment of this law, kidney transplant rates increased from 7 per million population in 2002 to 17 per million population in 2007. Kidney transplants performed abroad for Syrian patients declined from 25% in 2002 to < 2% in 2007. Kidney transplants continued at comparable rates until 2010, before the beginning of the political crisis in 2011. Four decades after the first successful kidney transplant in Syria, however, patients needing an organ transplant must rely on living donors only. Moreover, 17 years after the law authorizing use of organs from deceased donors, a program is still not in place in Syria, and additional improvement of the legal framework is needed. The war, limited resources, and lack of public awareness about the importance of organ donation and transplant appear to be major factors inhibiting initiation of a deceased-donor program in Syria. A concerted and ongoing education campaign is needed to increase awareness of organ donation, change negative public attitudes, and gain societal acceptance. Every effort must be made to initiate a deceased-donor program to lessen the burden on living donors and to enable national self-sufficiency in organs for transplant.

There is a shortage of donor livers from deceased persons, which means there is a relatively high mortality rate among patients on the national liver-transplant waiting list in the Netherlands. This justifies expanding the current programme for liver transplants from living donors. The new law on donor organs law came into effect on 1 July 2020. The expectation is that this will lead to a greater supply of post-mortem donor livers. New methods for organ preservation could also lead to an increase in the number of available donor livers. An increase in the supply of donor livers could lead to changes in donor policy. These changes should take into consideration that a liver transplant from a living donor can take place earlier in the course of the disease and that the quality of the donor liver is better, which means that outcomes for the recipient are also better.

Since 2011, the Syrian conflict has destroyed much of the country's infrastructure. The deteriorating humanitarian situation has involved health workers and facilities. In 2010, before the war, 385 kidney transplants were performed in Syria. This number declined to 154 in 2013 (60% less) before increasing to 251 transplants in 2018, which is still 35% less than the number of transplants performed before the war. In addition, the number of operational kidney transplant centers has decreased from 8 in 2010, distributed over 3 cities, to only 4 in 2013, all located in Damascus, which increased to 6 centers in 2019. Interestingly, with regard to type of living donor, the percentage of unrelated kidney donors has decreased by 20% for unclear reasons. Another alarming statistic is that more than 50% of kidney transplant physicians and surgeons are no longer practicing transplant medicine in their centers, either because they have left the country or because their centers had become nonoperational. Since the war, free and timely provision of immunosuppressive drugs for all patients in all provinces has been a leading challenge for health authorities and transplant patients. This difficulty has led to adverse medical consequences for patients. A project to initiate liver transplant came to a halt because of complex reasons but mainly because foreign trainers could not visit Syria. Although the autologous bone marrow transplant program had slowed until recently, it has become more active, involving both autologous and allogeneic transplants. The deceased-donor program is still not available in Syria; the war has just reinforced the many reasons that prevented the start of this program before the conflict. The commitment of transplant teams despite these large challenges continues to be extraordinary. The Syrian conflict has affected all aspects of organ transplant, paralyzing new projects and negatively affecting existing programs.

Kidney paired donation (KPD) and the new kidney allocation system (KAS) in the United States have led to improved transplantation rates for highly sensitized candidates. We aimed to assess the potential need for other approaches to improve the transplantation rate of highly sensitized candidates such as desensitization. Using the UNOS STAR file, we analyzed transplant rates in a prevalent active waiting-list cohort as of June 1, 2016, followed for 1 year. The overall transplantation rate was 18.9% (11 129/58769). However, only 9.7% (213/2204) of candidates with a calculated panel reactive antibody ≥99.9% received a transplant, and highly sensitized candidates were less likely to receive a living donor transplant. Among candidates with a CPRA ≥ 99.5% (ie. 100%), only 2.5% of transplants were from living donors (13 total, 7 from KPD). Nearly 4 years after KAS (6/30/2018), 1791 actively wait-listed candidates had a CPRA of ≥99.9% and 34.6% (620/1791) of these had ≥5 years of waiting time. Thus, despite KPD and KAS, many sensitized candidates have not been transplanted even with prolonged waiting time. We conclude that candidates with a CPRA ≥ 99.9% and sensitized candidates with an incompatible living donor and prolonged waiting time may benefit from desensitization to improve their ability to receive a transplant., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Donor-derived human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmissions in transplantation have led to policies mandating assessment of donor behavioral history, and disclosure of donor increased risk (IR) status to recipients. Organ Procurement Transplantation Network (OPTN) policy safeguards were promulgated in the context of deceased donation, with its narrow time window for organ utilization and uncertainty about donor history. These policies have been applied to living donation without substantive data on risk of disease transmission in living donor transplantation. Unlike for deceased donors, the OPTN does not collect data on living donor IR status. Given the feasibility of thorough living donor evaluation via already-mandated lab tests and clinical assessments, living donor IR assessment and associated disclosures may have limited benefit in improving recipient informed consent. Applying the current IR policy to living donors may also introduce unintended consequences to donors and recipients, causing donors psychological harm, delays in donation to avoid IR status disclosure, and potential withdrawal from donation. We suggest strategies that reduce risk of harm to donor candidates while maintaining policy compliance, and review additional approaches for evaluating risk of disease transmission in living donor candidates. Data on the risk of disease transmission by living donors are needed to inform policy modification., (© 2019 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Background: A nondirected altruistic living kidney donor is a person who wants to donate a kidney to anyone in need. In 2010, the Spanish National Transplant Organization developed a national protocol to make the assessment of every potential nondirected living kidney donor. The aim of this study was to describe the potential donor pool and its characteristics and the overall effect of the program., Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed using data from the Spanish National Registry of Transplant Activity, and the Nondirected Donors National Database, between 2010 and 2017. Data related to sociodemographic characteristics, main motivations toward donation, and causes of dismissal were collected from all potential donors. The assessment of each candidate was carried out in a step-by-step process based on the national protocol., Results: Two hundred seventy-two people contacted us, showing interest in the nondirected kidney donation, only 203 people underwent the early triage, and 16 of them successfully completed the assessment proces s, representing 8% of the total. The main motivation toward anonymous donation (n = 161) was: social awareness (22%) and to improve the quality of life of other people (9%). One hundred eighty-two candidates did not proceed, due to medical and psychological contraindications (42%) or donor refusal after specific information about the donation process (33%). The number of utilized nondirected altruistic living donors was 13 out of 203 (6%) of the candidates who began the early triage. Twelve transplant chains and a direct donation were performed, which made 38 kidney transplants possible (2.9 transplants per nondirected donor)., Conclusions: We have to continue working to optimize our program. Our next steps will be to review the evaluation process, to detect areas for improvement, to understand why we lost many possible donors, and to ascertain if any of the reasons could be avoided., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Iranian model of kidney transplantation is an example of a regulated living unrelated renal donation. In this paper, we collected and analyzed a unique dataset of 436 paired kidney donors and recipients, including their characteristics and the realized price of a kidney in Mashhad. As opposed to the global picture of kidney donation, we find that women are less likely to donate and more likely to receive a kidney. Moreover, the average price of a kidney amounts less than 2 years of work with the minimum level of wage., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Transplant centers now accept living donors with well-controlled hypertension. Little is known whether hypertension in living donors affects recipient's kidney function. We aimed to examine potential differences in kidneys from hypertensive donors compared to normotensive donors with respect to renal function over 36 months and histologic findings at transplantation (T0) and 12 months after transplantation (T1). Retrospective single-center analysis of 174 living donor-recipient pairs (age > 18; transplantation date 1/2008-3/2016). Hypertension in donors was defined as being on antihypertensive medication. All biopsies were assessed by the same blinded, experienced renal pathologist. Biopsies were scored for glomerulosclerosis, IFTA, and arteriosclerosis. Regression models were used to examine the relationship of donor hypertension with renal function and histologic changes. Hypertensive donors were significantly older than normotensive donors. Chronic changes such as tubular atrophy and atherosclerosis were more evident in kidneys from hypertensive donors at T0 as well as T1. Donor hypertension was independently associated with histologic changes at T0 and T1 but not with renal function over the follow period. Despite more pronounced histologic changes in kidneys from hypertensive living donors, these grafts exhibited a similar functional outcome. However, they subsequently might be at a greater risk and warrant thorough follow-up care., (© 2019 The Authors. Clinical Transplantation published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The role of the calcium channel blocker (verapamil) in kidney transplant is controversial. Verapamil has been hypothesized to mitigate ischemia reperfusion injury (IRI) to the allograft. Herein, we evaluated the effect of intra-operative verapamil administration in a large cohort of kidney transplants. Total 684 transplants were performed during 2007-2017. Of these, 348 (50.9%) transplants received verapamil (2.5 mg) Ver (+), and 336 (49.1%) did not, Ver (-). Based on the donor type, the study was divided into three groups; living donor (LD) (N = 270), neurological determination of death (NDD) (N = 394), and donation after cardiac death (DCD) (N = 20). Ver (-) subgroup had more diabetic recipients as compared to Ver (+) subgroup in LD and NDD groups (P < 0.05). No significant difference was found for delayed graft function in any of the group (P > 0.05). Cold ischemia time and dialysis requirement were significantly higher in Ver (+) LD and NDD groups, respectively. Except for DCD group, there was no significant difference in eGFR (mL/min) immediately and 6 months after kidney transplant in any of the groups. Furthermore, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to account for potential confounders, but verapamil administration did not improve graft function in any of the groups (P > 0.05) after transplant., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Live and deceased kidney donation by the numerous patients with advanced, progressive systemic neurological diseases, and other chronic neurological conditions (eg, high C-spine injury) remains largely unexplored. In a review of our current clinical practice, we identified multiple regulatory and clinical barriers. For live donation, mandatory reporting of postdonation donor deaths within 2 years constitutes a strong programmatic disincentive. We propose that the United Network for Organ Sharing should provide explicit regulatory guidance and reassurance for programs wishing to offer live donation to patients at higher risk of death during the reporting period. Under the proposal, live donor deaths within 30 days would still be regarded as donation-related, but later deaths would be related to the underlying disease. For deceased donation, donation after circulatory death (DCD) immediately following self-directed withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment ("conscious DCD") is not universally covered by existing DCD agreements with donor hospitals. Organ procurement organizations should thus systematically strive to revise these agreements. Obtaining adequate first-person consent from these communicatively severely impaired patients may be challenging. Optimized preservation and allocation protocols may maximize utilization of these DCD kidneys. Robust public debate and action by all stakeholders is necessary to lower existing barriers and maximize donation opportunities for patients with chronic neurological conditions., (© 2018 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

In the United States, kidney donation from international (noncitizen/nonresident) living kidney donors (LKDs) is permitted; however, given the heterogeneity of healthcare systems, concerns remain regarding the international LKD practice and recipient outcomes. We studied a US cohort of 102 315 LKD transplants from 2000-2016, including 2088 international LKDs, as reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. International LKDs were more tightly clustered among a small number of centers than domestic LKDs (Gini coefficient 0.76 vs 0.58, P < .001). Compared with domestic LKDs, international LKDs were more often young, male, Hispanic or Asian, and biologically related to their recipient (P < .001). Policy-compliant donor follow-up was substantially lower for international LKDs at 6, 12, and 24 months postnephrectomy (2015 cohort: 45%, 33%, 36% vs 76%, 71%, 70% for domestic LKDs, P < .001). Among international LKDs, Hispanic (aOR =  0.23 0.36 0.56 , P < .001) and biologically related (aOR =  0.39 0.59 0.89 , P < .01) donors were more compliant in donor follow-up than white and unrelated donors. Recipients of international living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) had similar graft failure (aHR =  0.78 0.89 1.02 , P = .1) but lower mortality (aHR =  0.53 0.62 0.72 , P < .001) compared with the recipients of domestic LDKT after adjusting for recipient, transplant, and donor factors. International LKDs may provide an alternative opportunity for living donation. However, efforts to improve international LKD follow-up and engagement are warranted., (© 2019 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Purpose of Review: With an increasing demand for donor organs, strategies to increase the number of available donor organs have become more focused. Compensating donors for donation is one strategy proposed to increase the availability of organs for transplant. This has been implemented in several systems internationally, but debate continues in the United States with respect to appropriate strategies. The National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) currently prohibits the transfer of any human organ 'for valuable consideration' for transplantation, but allows for the removal of financial disincentives., Recent Findings: Several proposals currently exist for compensating patients for living donation. Recent data have focused on studying and creating mechanisms for reimbursement of costs incurred as part of the donation process, which is related to the removal of disincentives to living donation. Others have advocated for the provision of actual incentives to patients for the act of donating, in an attempt to further expand living donation. The current debate focuses on what measures can reasonably be taken to increase donation, and whether additional incentives will encourage more donation or reduce the motivation for altruistic donation., Summary: Currently, the transplant community broadly supports the removal of disincentives for living donors, including reimbursement of expenses for travel, housing and lost wages incurred during evaluation, surgery and after care. Others have advocated for financial incentives to further increase the number of donor organs available for transplant. Although the removal of disincentives is currently allowed under the existing legal structure of NOTA, providing financial incentives for living donation would require further evaluation of the economics, law, ethics and public readiness for a significant policy shift.

Background: As transplant centers start leveraging Twitter for information dissemination and public engagement, it is important to understand current living solid organ donation-related Twitter use., Methods: We identified public Twitter profiles available in 01/2017 that referenced living organ donation and analyzed the use of donation-related Twitter handles, names, or profile information. Tweets were manually abstracted and qualitatively analyzed for common themes. Social media influence of those tweeting about living donation was evaluated using Klout score., Results: We identified 93 donors, 61 professionals, 12 hospitals, and 19 organizations that met eligibility criteria. Social media influence was similar across these groups (P = 0.4). Donors (16%) and organizations (23%) were more likely than professionals (7%) or hospitals (0%) to include transplant-related educational information in their profiles (P = 0.007). Living donation-related tweets were most commonly donation stories (33%), news reports (20%), reports about new transplant research (15%), and sharing transplant candidates' searches for donors (14%)., Conclusions: This exploratory study of living donors and transplant professionals, hospitals, and organizations on Twitter provides insight into how the social media platform may be used to communicate about and disseminate information about living donation., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: The level of awareness of living organ donation demonstrated by citizens may affect the rate of organ transplantation in their area of residence. The objective of this study was to assess the attitudes toward living organ donation and willingness to be a living organ donor among Chinese citizens., Methods: The study population consisted of 2250 citizens in Beijing, Shanghai, and Wuhan. Data were collected using a questionnaire developed by the researchers based on the existing literature and expert opinions. The questionnaire included questions designed to assess demographics, attitudes, and willingness. The data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software., Results: Overall, 2198 citizens completed the questionnaire, of whom 845 (38.4%) supported living organ donation; however, only 213 (9.6%) participants were supportive of their family members donating living organs. A total of 424 (19.3%) citizens were willing to be living organ donors. Of the respondents, 1173 (53.4%) were neutral toward living organ donation and 1463 (66.6%) were undecided about their willingness to donate. In addition, willingness was positively correlated with age, education level, income, marital status, and having descendants (P < .05). Those who had relatives or friends who had undergone organ transplantation were significantly more likely to be donors than those who did not (P < .05)., Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that Chinese citizens lack an understanding of living organ transplantation, indicating that more work needs to be done to inform the public about organ transplantation in China., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Brain death is a rare situation after living-donor liver transplantation. However, the recipient who suffers from brain death and has functional liver graft is a potential liver donor. We report the 1st case of successful reuse of extended right living-donor liver graft after brain death of the first recipient. The first recipient, who had acute liver failure caused by hepatitis A virus, experienced brain death on the 2nd day after the transplantation. The allograft had a favorable regeneration and functional recovery. On the 7th day, the allograft was procured with a patent hepatic artery, bile duct, portal vein, and reconstructed outflow (right hepatic vein and middle hepatic vein) and successfully implanted into the second recipient. The second recipient has experienced a long-term survival without any complications., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transplant societies continue to actively concentrate on increasing rates of living kidney donation (LKD) to bridge the gap between individuals awaiting transplantation and the number of kidneys available. A widely discussed strategy to increase living donation rates is the provision of incentives and removal of disincentives. Though opinions of the public regarding this strategy have been studied, the opinions of health care providers, including younger professionals, are less clear. We studied the opinions of medical students and other health care providers on strategies to increase LKD to determine if opinions were different among those < 25 or ≥ 25 years of age., Methods: A simple cross-sectional survey was conducted at an academic medical center. Participants included medical students and employees in Internal Medicine, General Surgery, and the Organ Transplantation Center. Pearson's χ 2 and Fisher's exact test were conducted on the responses regarding disincentives and incentives to determine whether opinions differed based on age., Results: Six hundred and twenty-four participants completed the survey. There was no statistical difference in opinions between groups on reimbursing transportation costs, loss of wages, or childcare costs, but those aged ≥ 25 were more agreeable with covering food/lodging costs compared to those < 25 (96.5% vs 90.7%, P = .009). Respondents < 25 years old were more willing to donate a kidney for a financial incentive (P = .0002) accepting a median amount of $25,000., Conclusions: Health care personnel broadly support removing financial disincentives for living kidney donation, and those ≥ 25 were more in favor of covering food/lodging costs compared to those < 25. Those < 25 years old were more likely to accept financial incentives towards donating their kidney compared to those ≥ 25 years., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The practice of kidney paired donation (KPD) is expanding annually, offering the opportunity for live donor kidney transplant to more patients. We sought to identify if voluntary KPD networks such as the National Kidney Registry (NKR) were selecting or attracting a narrower group of donors or recipients compared with national registries. For this purpose, we merged data from the NKR database with the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database, from February 14, 2008, to February 14, 2017, encompassing the first 9 years of the NKR. Compared with all United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) live donor transplant patients (49 610), all UNOS living unrelated transplant patients (23 319), and all other KPD transplant patients (4236), the demographic and clinical characteristics of NKR transplant patients (2037) appear similar to contemporary national trends. In particular, among the NKR patients, there were a significantly (P < .001) greater number of retransplants (25.6% vs 11.5%), hyperimmunized recipients (22.7% vs 4.3% were cPRA >80%), female recipients (45.9% vs 37.6%), black recipients (18.2% vs 13%), and those on public insurance (49.7% vs 41.8%) compared with controls. These results support the need for greater sharing and larger pool sizes, perhaps enhanced by the entry of compatible pairs and even chains initiated by deceased donors, to unlock more opportunities for those harder-to-match pairs., (© 2018 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Ethical debates continue to shape organ transplant policies, particularly for kidneys. Facing organ shortages, governments have created incentives targeting prospective living-anonymous donors - socially and biologically unrelated to the recipient. However, these policies may transform altruistic exchanges of tissues into trades of commodities. We use Adam Smith's concept of sympathy to outline a new approach to transplantation ethics. This is accomplished using a case study analysis of six countries with established living-anonymous kidney donation practices - Iran, Israel, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. An ethical test was also developed from ethnographies of donors and Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments. The case study analysis considered the role of religious and historic norms, media campaigns, adherence to the 2008 Declaration of Istanbul guidelines for each case, and how each factor related to Smith's sympathy, categorizing the countries into four tiers of altruism. Iran occupied the least altruistic tier, followed by the Netherlands, the UK and the US, and Saudi Arabia and Israel. The ethical test identified a similar ranking. Our findings suggest that a highly-selected cohort of states with established living-anonymous kidney donation programs may already utilize a Smithian approach for recruiting donors, and that socially-valued government incentives can preserve altruism. The ethical test could become a useful instrument to assess the altruism of emerging incentive policies., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Vascularized composite allograft (VCA) transplantation is a developing area in the field of transplantation., Methods: This study used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) VCA waiting list and transplant data from July 3, 2014 through February 28, 2018, to characterize the OPTN VCA waiting list in terms of composition, removal patterns, waiting time, resulting transplants, and trends over time., Results: Between implementation of the OPTN VCA waiting list on July 3, 2014 and February 28, 2018, 54 candidates-53.7% were male, 79.6% were white, and 70.4% aged 18 to 44 years-were added to the OPTN VCA waiting list. Of these, 22 received deceased donor VCA transplants (6 bilateral upper limb, 4 unilateral upper limb, 5 craniofacial, 1 scalp, 1 abdominal wall, 1 penile, and 4 uterine), and 6 received living donor uterine transplants. Registrations increased in 2016 after uterine and penile transplants were introduced in the United States, resulting in a large shift in the composition of the VCA waiting list. Waiting times for VCA candidates vary greatly, with some VCA candidates receiving deceased donor transplants quickly and others waiting more than 3 years before transplantation., Conclusions: The field of VCA transplantation and the composition of the OPTN VCA waiting list are evolving rapidly. Additional research is needed to understand these changes and investigate whether differences in need or differences in access have resulted in the variation seen on the VCA waiting list.

Kidney transplantation is the gold standard for end-stage renal disease. All over the world there are several challenges preventing sufficient organ donation to meet the growing needs of patients on the waiting list. One major challenge which is common to most countries is the shortage of organs from willing living donors. Many countries, especially, the developed countries, have devised several models of expanding their donor pools to meet the growing needs of patients on the waiting list. Nigeria, a developing country has very low kidney transplantation rate even though some progress have been made in making the procedure feasible in about a dozen hospitals in Nigeria. One very major challenge has been the shortage of donor organ supply. This paper intends to proffer suggestions on how to expand the organ donor pool in Nigeria., Competing Interests: None declared.

Kidney exchange programs, which allow a potential living donor whose kidney is incompatible with his or her intended recipient to donate a kidney to another patient in return for a kidney that is compatible for their intended recipient, usually aims to maximize the number of possible kidney exchanges or the total utility of the program. However, the fairness of these exchanges is an issue that has often been ignored. In this paper, as a way to overcome the problems arising in previous studies, we take fairness to be the degree to which individual patient-donor pairs feel satisfied, rather than the extent to which the exchange increases social benefits. A kidney exchange has to occur on the basis of the value of the kidneys themselves because the process is similar to bartering. If the matched kidneys are not of the level expected by the patient-donor pairs involved, the match may break and the kidney exchange transplantation may fail. This study attempts to classify possible scenarios for such failures and incorporate these into a stochastic programming framework. We apply a two-stage stochastic programming method using total utility in the first stage and the sum of the penalties for failure in the second stage when an exceptional event occurs. Computational results are provided to demonstrate the improvement of the proposed model compared to that of previous deterministic models.

While offspring-to-parent living donor kidney transplantations may represent an ideal donor-recipient combination to optimize long-term transplantation outcomes, the sex-specific long-term success of these transplantations remains unclear. We hypothesize that allograft and recipient survivals in offspring-to-parent living donor kidney transplantation differ between men and women due to donor-specific alloimmunization during pregnancy. We retrospectively analyzed long-term allograft and patient survival among men and women who received an offspring living donor kidney compared with those who received other haplotype-matched living donor kidneys. Based on multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling of Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data from 2001 to 2015, we found that both men and women who received offspring living donor kidneys had significantly increased mortality compared with recipients who received nonoffspring living donor kidneys. While male recipients of any living donor kidney had greater risk of mortality and allograft failure than female recipients, there was no significant difference in all-cause allograft failure or mortality in male versus female recipients of offspring living donor kidney transplantations. Our analysis demonstrated no significant interaction between recipient sex and donor offspring status. We conclude that nonoffspring living donors should be considered whenever feasible for both men and women with multiple donor options., (© 2017 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Background: The 2014 Consensus Conference on Best Practices in Living Kidney Donations recognized live donor kidney transplantation as the best treatment for late-stage kidney disease, yielding superior graft and patient survival, improved quality of life, fewer requirements for dialysis and increased cost-effectiveness compared to deceased donor kidney transplantation. Yet in spite of the excellent results of living kidney donation, the annual number of living kidney donors is declining in many countries, including the United States. In Israel, a non-profit organization, Matnat Chaim ("Gift of Life" in Hebrew), a faith-based initiative, has emerged as a major force for arranging living donor kidney transplantation mainly by facilitating altruistic living unrelated donor transplantation., Methods: A retrospective review of the records of live kidney donations facilitated by the Matnat Chaim organization and referred to Israel transplant centers, since the organization's inception in 2009, was performed and compared to published data from the Israel Ministry of Health., Results: Matnat Chaim has facilitated 494 live kidney donations since its founding in February 2009 until the end of 2017. Of the 124 live kidney transplants performed in 2016, 111 (90%) were shown to be altruistic and unrelated. This large number of donations was associated with a doubling of the total number of kidney transplantations, performed in Israel (data published by the Israel Ministry of Health)., Conclusions: The success of an Israel community organization in the promotion of kidney transplantation may serve as a model for other religious and non-religious communities worldwide.

The kidney exchange programs bring new insights in the field of organ transplantation. They make the previously not allowed surgery of incompatible patient-donor pairs easier to be performed on a large scale. Mathematically, the kidney exchange is an optimization problem for the number of possible exchanges among the incompatible pairs in a given pool. Also, the optimization modeling should consider the expected quality-adjusted life of transplant candidates and the shortage of computational and operational hospital resources. In this article, we introduce a bio-inspired stochastic-based Ant Lion Optimization, ALO, algorithm to the kidney exchange space to maximize the number of feasible cycles and chains among the pool pairs. Ant Lion Optimizer-based program achieves comparable kidney exchange results to the deterministic-based approaches like integer programming. Also, ALO outperforms other stochastic-based methods such as Genetic Algorithm in terms of the efficient usage of computational resources and the quantity of resulting exchanges. Ant Lion Optimization algorithm can be adopted easily for on-line exchanges and the integration of weights for hard-to-match patients, which will improve the future decisions of kidney exchange programs. A reference implementation for ALO algorithm for kidney exchanges is written in MATLAB and is GPL licensed. It is available as free open-source software from: https://github.com/SaraEl-Metwally/ALO&#95;algorithm&#95;for&#95;Kidney&#95;Exchanges.