Background. Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best therapy for patients with chronic renal failure. Its advantages, compared with cadaveric transplantation, include the possibility of avoiding dialysis, the likelihood of best outcome, and donor pool expansion. Careful assessment of potential donors is important to minimize the risks and ensure success. However, the proportion of donors disqualified has been poorly investigated. The aim of this work is to describe our experience and present the main reasons for missed donation.Methods. This was a single-center, retrospective study of all potential donors and recipients evaluated for LDKT between January 2008 and December 2017.Results. During the period of study, 81 donor-recipient pairs were evaluated. Of these, 45.7% were disqualified and 37 LDKTs were carried out. LDKT was the first choice in 68% of cases and preemptive in 20%; 60% of transplants were among family members. Sex distribution revealed a prevalence of females in the donor group (69%) and males in the recipient group (70%). The mean living donor age was 53 +/- 9.5 years; the mean recipient age was lower in recipients listed in the living transplant program than those listed for cadaver transplantation (45.8 +/- 13.4 vs 54.2 +/- 11.08; P<.0001). Reasons for denial included hypertension (18.9%), deceased donor transplant performed during the study period (16.2%), urologic pathology (13.5%), incompatibility (13.5%), withdrawal of consent by donor or recipient (13.5%), psychological unsuitability (8.1%), donor cancer (5.4%), and reduced renal clearance (2.7%).Conclusion. LDKT is considered an option especially for younger recipients. Of the potential kidney living donors, 45.7% were disqualified during the evaluation, with medical reasons being the primary cause.

Living Kidney Donation Is Recipient Age Sensitive and Has a High Rate of Donor Organ Disqualifications

Esposito P.;
2019-01-01

Abstract

Background. Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best therapy for patients with chronic renal failure. Its advantages, compared with cadaveric transplantation, include the possibility of avoiding dialysis, the likelihood of best outcome, and donor pool expansion. Careful assessment of potential donors is important to minimize the risks and ensure success. However, the proportion of donors disqualified has been poorly investigated. The aim of this work is to describe our experience and present the main reasons for missed donation.Methods. This was a single-center, retrospective study of all potential donors and recipients evaluated for LDKT between January 2008 and December 2017.Results. During the period of study, 81 donor-recipient pairs were evaluated. Of these, 45.7% were disqualified and 37 LDKTs were carried out. LDKT was the first choice in 68% of cases and preemptive in 20%; 60% of transplants were among family members. Sex distribution revealed a prevalence of females in the donor group (69%) and males in the recipient group (70%). The mean living donor age was 53 +/- 9.5 years; the mean recipient age was lower in recipients listed in the living transplant program than those listed for cadaver transplantation (45.8 +/- 13.4 vs 54.2 +/- 11.08; P<.0001). Reasons for denial included hypertension (18.9%), deceased donor transplant performed during the study period (16.2%), urologic pathology (13.5%), incompatibility (13.5%), withdrawal of consent by donor or recipient (13.5%), psychological unsuitability (8.1%), donor cancer (5.4%), and reduced renal clearance (2.7%).Conclusion. LDKT is considered an option especially for younger recipients. Of the potential kidney living donors, 45.7% were disqualified during the evaluation, with medical reasons being the primary cause.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
high-rate1-s2.0-S0041134518308601-main.pdf

accesso chiuso

Tipologia: Documento in versione editoriale
Dimensione 224.87 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
224.87 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11567/990857
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact