The use of elderly living donors in renal transplantation

The safety and the results of using living donors above the age of 60 years were studied. In 235 consecutive donors the complications were not different in elderly (n=70) compared to younger donors. Graft survival and function were studied in 232 consecutive 1-HLA-haplotype mismatched grafts. Graft survival at 1 year was equivalent (87% vs. 92%), but after 2–6 years graft survival was inferior in recipients of older grafts (n=62). The recipients of older grafts were 10 years older, and patient death with functioning graft was a more frequent cause of graft loss. Up to 4 years serum creatinine levels were significantly higher, but stable, in recipients of older grafts; at 5 years the difference was not significant. It is concluded that the use of elderly living donors is safe. Taking recipient age into consideration, graft survival is not different in the two groups. Graft function in older grafts is some what inferior, but stable.     

Grandparent donors in paediatric renal transplantation

The outcome of transplantation from grandparent donors in comparison with parental donors in paediatric renal transplantation was evaluated in 53 living related donor (LRD) transplantations performed between January 1996 and August 2003. The donor in 13 cases (25%) was a grandparent (Gpar group), and the remaining donors formed the parent group (Par group). The median age of recipients in the Gpar group was 2.75 (1.7–10.6) years and in the Par group was 12.75 (2.4–22) years (P<0.0001). There was no evidence of a difference in patient and graft survival, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) after transplantation, or the number of biopsy proven episodes of rejection between the groups. Doses of prednisolone in the first year following transplantation were greater in recipients from Gpar donors, but the other immunosuppression doses were similar. The median age of donors in the Gpar group was 56 (50–67) years and in the Par group was 41 (27–58) years (P<0.0001). There was no evidence of a difference between the two donor groups in mean creatinine clearance at last follow-up. There were two major donor complications in the Gpar group and one in the Par group. There was no evidence that the length of stay differed between the two groups in either the donors or recipients. These results support the use of carefully selected healthy grandparents as LRDs in children. This option potentially allows for the use of parent donors for a subsequent transplantation.     

Renal transplantation from extended criteria cadaveric donors: problems and perspectives overview.

The critical shortage of organs available for renal transplantation has led to the consideration of alternative strategies for increasing the donor pool. Recently, the cadaveric kidney donor pool extended to donors who might have been deemed unsuitable in early times, leading to the concept of marginal donors and more recently to the notion of expanded criteria donors. Such organs are eligible for organ donation but, because of extreme age and other clinical characteristics, are expected to produce allograft at risk for diminished post-transplant function. Thus, the challenge is now to reduce the difference between graft outcome from patients grafted with marginal and 'optimal' donors. This implies appropriate transplantation strategies during pre-, peri- and post-transplantation phases including reduction of cold ischemia time, recipient selection, adaptation of immunosuppressive drug regimens, increase in nephron mass by dual kidney transplantation, and improvement in the graft selection process using histological criteria. This review summarizes current definition of a marginal donor and provides some guidance for clinical management of such transplant.     

Calcineurin inhibitor-free immunosuppression in dual kidney transplantation from elderly donors

BACKGROUND: Kidneys from expanded-criteria donors may be particularly susceptible to calcineurin inhibitor (CI)-mediated vasoconstriction and nephrotoxicity. In the early post-transplant phase, using CI may prolong ischemic injury and, in the long term, chronic CI nephrotoxicity is an even greater concern. To avoid the acute and chronic consequences of CI in kidneys from marginal donors, CI-free protocols have been introduced for maintenance immunosuppressive therapy. A CI-free protocol of anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) induction, sirolimus, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and steroids has been adopted at our center in recipients of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) from elderly donors (EDs). METHODS: Dual kidney transplantations performed since April 2003 on CI-free immunosuppression (group 1 = 31) were compared with earlier DKTs in recipients treated with CI-based therapy (group 2 = 25), retrospectively analyzing patient and graft survival, surgical and medical complications, rejection episodes and renal function. RESULTS: No deaths occurred after a mean follow-up of 10.1 +/- 7.6 (group 1) and 48.2 +/- 17.4 months (group 2). Graft loss occurred in one patient in group 1 (bilateral renal vein thrombosis) and in three patients in group 2 (one primary non-function [PNF], one chronic rejection, one Kaposi's sarcoma). The incidence of acute rejection was 19% in group 1 and 16% in group 2. Delayed graft function (DGF) was recorded in 16% and 48%, respectively. Renal function was better in group 1, with a mean S-Cr of 135 +/- 48 vs. 210 +/- 141 micromol/L at one month and 116 +/- 30 vs. 149 +/- 49 micromol/L at six months. CONCLUSIONS: After DKT from EDs, a CI-free immunosuppressive regimen including ATG induction, sirolimus, MMF and steroids affords excellent results, with a lower DGF rate and a better renal function.     

Outcomes of transplants from patients with small renal tumours,live unrelated donors and dialysis wait‐listed patients

We report the outcomes of renal transplant patients (n = 43) who received grafts from donors (n = 41) with small (<3 cm) renal tumours removed before transplantation covering the period from May 1996 to September 2007. Patient and graft survival were compared with the outcomes of conventional live unrelated transplants (LURTs) (n = 120) and to patient survival on the transplant waiting list for those who did not receive a kidney during this period (n = 153). Patient survival at 1, 3 and 5 years were 92%, 88% and 88% for recipients of tumourectomized kidneys (TKs), 99%, 97% and 97% for LURTs, and 98%, 92% and 74% for dialysis patients waiting for a deceased donor kidney (log rank score 10.4, P = 0.005). One patient experienced a local tumour recurrence at 9 years following transplantation. This patient declined intervention and is currently under active surveillance. Transplantation of tumourectomized kidneys from patients with small, localized, incidentally detected renal tumours results in similar outcomes to conventional LURTs and confers a significant survival advantage for patients who would otherwise be unable to receive a transplant.     

Evaluation and selection of potential live kidney donors

PURPOSE: Renal transplantation is an optimal therapy for patients with end stage kidney disease. A thorough evaluation of potential donors is necessary to provide the best functional outcome for recipients and ensure no or minimal morbidity for donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1992 and 2001, 1661 ABO compatible potential living donors were evaluated clinically as well as by laboratory and imaging studies. RESULTS: Of 1661 potential donors 814 (49%) were excluded. The reasons for elimination were general medical reasons in 34.4% of cases, nephrological disorders in 25.6%, urological diseases in 11.7% and immunological causes in 16.2%. Exclusion on an ethical basis accounted for 12.2% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although kidneys from living donors provide the best functional outcome, 50% of potential candidates must be excluded.     

Clinical issues in renal transplantation in the elderly

Kidney transplantation is the best renal replacement therapy option and is superior to dialysis in elderly end‐stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Furthermore, the outcome of transplantation in the elderly is comparable to younger patients in terms of allograft survival. The exact nature of this phenomenon is not completely clear. As the elderly population continues to grow, it becomes more important to identify specific issues associated with kidney transplantation. In particular, elderly transplant recipients might have a lower chance of acute rejection as their immune systems seem to be less reactive. This might predispose elderly recipients to greater risk of post‐transplant infectious complications or malignancies. Furthermore, due to differences in pharmacokinetics, elderly recipients might require lower doses of immunosuppressive medication. As the main cause of graft failure in the elderly is death with a functioning graft and also considering the scarcity of donor organs, it might make sense to recommend transplanting elderly recipients with extended criteria donor kidneys. This approach would balance shorter patient survival compared to younger recipients. In conclusion, old age should not preclude ESRD patients from kidney transplantation. However, specific differences that have to do with immunosuppression and other aspects of managing elderly transplant recipients should be considered.     

Older donors and kidney transplantation

Reluctance to use kidneys from older donors (>50 years of age) is based on reports of inferior results. We reviewed our experience with 45 kidneys transplanted from older donors. Primary nonfunction, immediate graft function, and 1-, 2- and 3-year graft survival rates were similar to those obtained with kidneys transplanted from donors aged between 20 and 40 years. Renal function at 1 year (as measured by serum creatinine) was poorer in kidneys from older donors. No beneficial effect with respect to graft survival was noted with cyclosporin therapy compared to conventional immunosuppression; however, the numbers are small. We conclude that kidneys from older donors are a valuable source for transplantation.     

Living related kidney donors over 60 years old

The lack of available cadaveric organs for transplantation has resulted in an increased number of kidney transplants from living donors. During a period of 6 years, 149 kidney transplantations were performed from living related donors in our institute, 33.5% of whom were older than 60 years of age. In this study we examined the survival of patients and grafts as well as the graft function in 50 patients with transplants from donors over 60 years (mean age 65 years) as compared with those of 99 patients with transplants from donors younger than 60 years (mean age 47 years). There were no significant differences in the course of donor nephrectomy, postoperative complications, or remnant kidney function. However, delayed graft function occurred more frequently in recipients of transplants from older donors. Improvement in graft function was also slower in recipients of kidneys from older donors, with significant differences in serum creatinine levels observed during the first 12 months after transplantation. More frequent acute complications and more progressive chronic graft failure, irrespective of the causes, occurred during the 1st post-transplant year in recipients with grafts from older donors. Five-year patient survival (77% vs 92%) and kidney graft survival differed significantly for the same period with worse results for patients receiving grafts from older donors. It may be concluded that kidney grafts from donors older than 60 years — and especially those older than 70 years — may be used for living related kidney transplantation, but with precautions.     

Hand assisted retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy in elderly donors

PURPOSE: We assessed the influence of HARDN on residual donor kidney and allograft function, invasiveness and morbidity in elderly living donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 89 living donors underwent nephrectomy before September 2004 at our institution. The 18 donors who were 65 years or older included 4 of 27 with ODN and 14 of 62 with HARDN. RESULTS: In older (65 years or older) donors mean operative time, mean blood loss and warm ischemia time in the HARDN group did not differ from those in the ODN group. None of the donors had major complications. Older donors with HARDN had a tendency toward a shorter hospital stay than those with ODN. Postoperative serum creatinine in older donors with HARDN was higher than that in younger donors with HARDN, while there was no difference in postoperative serum creatinine between older donors with HARDN and those with ODN. The frequency of allograft losses tended to be higher in older than in younger kidneys (4 of 18 vs 5 of 71, p = 0.054). However, most allograft losses did not seem to be related to surgical technique. CONCLUSIONS: Although further studies, especially with long-term followup, are necessary, HARDN is suggested to be safe and minimally invasive surgery even in elderly donors and to be comparable to open surgery in terms of morbidity, the residual donor kidney and allograft function.     

Kidney transplantation from related and unrelated living donors in a single German centre.

BACKGROUND: Organ transplantation began in 1954 with living related donation (LRD). Because of organ shortage from cadavers, unrelated kidney donation (LURD) has been proposed and shown to have good results despite complete HLA mismatching. This study aims to look at differences and similarities comparing LRD and LURD performed in our centre since the implementation of the German transplant law in 1997. METHODS: Between January 1997 and July 2001, 62 out of 112 potential living donors and their recipients were accepted. Immunosuppression consisted of triple therapy (steroids, cyclosporin, mycophenolate) in patients with three or fewer mismatches, or quadruple therapy including mono- or polyclonal antibody treatment in patients with four or more mismatches or cytotoxic antibodies. LRD and LURD groups were compared for number and type of rejections, complications and kidney function at the end of observation (median 15.5 months, range 1-50 months). RESULTS: Out of 112 pairs presenting, transplantation was performed in only 62 cases (55.4%). Reasons to deny transplantation were medical problems of the potential donors in 19, psychological problems in 13, recipient problems in seven and other reasons in 11 pairs. In 38 cases LRD transplantation and in 24 cases LURD transplantation was carried out. Recipient age was significantly lower in the LRD group (37.7+/-12.1 years) compared with the LURD group (53.6+/-7.8 years). Mean donor age was 49.7+/-9.2 years in the LRD group and 50.3+/-9.1 years in the LURD group (ns). The number of mismatches was lower in LRD (2.1+/-1) than in LURD (4.4+/-0.9) (P=0.001) transplantation. The acute rejection rate was similar in both groups (52.2 vs 54.2%). OKT3 and tacrolimus rescue therapy for more severe rejections was more often applied in the LRD group but the difference did not reach the level of significance. There were more infectious complications in LURD transplantation (66.7 vs 36.4%, P=0.036) and a trend towards more surgical complications in LRD transplantation (28.9 vs 8.3%, P=0.062). One graft was lost due to transplant artery thrombosis and one recipient died 4 months after transplantation subsequent to cerebral ischaemia. Both patients belonged to the LRD group. Creatinine values at the end of observation time were 1.76+/-0.6 mg/dl in the LRD group and 1.62+/-0.5 mg/dl in the LURD group (ns). CONCLUSION: Although kidney transplantation from unrelated donors was performed with a lower HLA match and although the recipients were older, the results are equivalent to living related transplantation. Therefore, kidney transplantation from emotionally related living donors represents a valuable option for patients with end-stage renal disease. Careful selection of donors and recipients is a prerequisite of success.     

Outcome of renal transplantation from older living donors compared to younger living donor in developing country

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.     

Renal transplantation with aged donors

Research indicates that aged heart-beating cadaveric donors cause greater risk factors in kidney transplantation. The influence of age on the outcome of non-heart-beating (NHB) cadaveric renal transplantations has not yet been clarified. From July 1986 to May 1999, 63 patients who received cadaveric renal transplantation at Osaka City University Hospital and Osaka City General Hospital were divided into two groups according to their age. Renal function and graft-survival rates of the two groups were compared. The mean values of nadir donor serum creatinine were significantly worse (P < 0.05) in the aged donor group. In the aged donor group the percentage of immediately functioning grafts was lower and the percentage of non-functioning grafts was higher. During the first 10 years post-transplant, graft survival in the aged donor group was significantly lower than that in the younger donor group. We conclude that cadaveric renal transplantation from NHB aged donors can be to the detriment of renal function and graft survival rates compared to transplantation from younger donors.     

Development of cadaver renal transplantation in India

SUMMARY: We have established a successful cadaver transplant programme in Chennai that could serve as a model for any developing country. A survey of public opinion showed that the higher the educational level, the more willing was the subject to donate. This was because of greater awareness of the possibility of successful transplantation, and indicated the need for education of the public on this aspect. the first step is to enact suitable legislation. Families of potential donors might hesitate to consent to donation if they doubt the legality of the procedure. In India, the doctor commands respect and is more likely to be able to obtain consent than a coordinator. the patient is permitted to stay on dialysis at any convenient city, so long as he or she can reach Chennai within 24h of being called. to improve the yield, we accept kidneys from donors in acute renal failure, if we know renal function was normal at the time of entry to the hospital. We also accept non-heart beating donors. Marginal kidneys are accepted and both kidneys are transplanted to one recipient. the success with all these procedures is as good as with the others. We were able to perform 88 renal transplants in 4.5 years with a 1 year graft survival of 72%, and a 4 year survival of 63%. Ten donors were in acute renal failure and the 1 year graft survival was 70%. Nine dual transplants were performed with 75% 1 year graft survival.     

亲属活体供肾者术后心理状态调查和分析

目的 分析与研究亲属活体供肾者术前一般情况和术后心理状态.方法 应用自编个人资料问卷、社会支持评定量表、SF-36量表、Beck抑郁自评量表和Zung焦虑自评量表(SAS)对56名活体供肾者术后6个月至4年时的心理状态进行调查分析.结果 供者以女性、农村中低收入、低学历者居多,所有供者自愿捐肾.供者术后客观和主观支持良好,支持利用度稍差.供者术后躯体健康质量稍差,精神健康较好,无抑郁和焦虑状态.结论 亲属活体供.肾者术后的心理状态较好,但临床工作者仍应适时采取心理干预,加强健康教育,同时社会应加强宣教,术后应给予供者良好的社会支持.     

Long-term followup of elderly donors in a live related renal transplant program

PURPOSE: It is a concern that elderly donors may have increased risks in the perioperative period due to age related changes in various organ systems. Nephrosclerosis, atherosclerosis and low glomerular filtration rate may portend a poor graft outcome. We performed a study to determine function and outcome of kidneys from elderly donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of our live related transplant program from November 1989 to December 1998 revealed that 112 donors were older than 55 years (range 55 to 81). Of the recipients of these kidneys from elderly donors 98 had a followup of more than 2 years (group 1), and they were compared to a cohort of 87 patients whose kidney donors were younger than 45 years (group 2). Allograft function was evaluated by serum creatinine and differential glomerular filtration rate was determined by (99m)technetium diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid renal scan. All donors were followed regularly. RESULTS: Mean donor age plus or minus standard deviation was 57.4 +/- 4.3 and 31.4 +/- 7.6 years in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Mean followup plus or minus standard deviation was 42.44 +/- 20.46 months in group 1 and 40.04 +/- 27.28 months in group 2. The 1-year graft survival rate was 91.84% and 88. 51%, and the 5-year graft survival rate was 72.72% and 75.13% in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Serum creatinine was 1.5 +/- 0.65 and 1.7 +/- 1.52 mg./dl. in group 1 and 1.4 +/- 0.55 and 1.5 +/- 1.41 mg. /dl. in group 2 at 1 year and last followup, respectively. Glomerular filtration rate was 37.2 +/- 11.2 and 37.3 +/- 10.7 ml. per minute in group 1 and it was 45.3 +/- 8.6 and 47.7 +/- 11.3 ml. per minute in group 2 at 1 year and last followup, respectively. Acute rejection rate was significantly higher in group 1 (42%) compared to group 2 (19%). Both groups were comparable in terms of infectious episodes, antihypertensive requirement and incidence of acute tubular necrosis. There was no added morbidity for elderly compared to younger donors. CONCLUSIONS: In view of acute donor shortage and if properly screened, elderly kidneys can be used without increasing the risk to donor or compromising graft outcome.     

Changes in plasma B-type natriuretic peptide after allograft renal transplantation

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the dynamic changes in plasma B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) after allograft renal transplantation. METHODS: Plasma BNP was measured in 17 patients before and after unilateral allograft renal transplantation (study group) and in 17 age- and sex-matched healthy individuals (control group). RESULTS: Average BNP level in the study group was significantly higher than in the control group before renal transplantation (P < 0.001). After transplantation, blood pressure was reduced and left ventricular ejection fraction was increased (P < 0.01). There was also a substantial reduction in plasma BNP and blood creatinine following the surgery (P < 0.001). Graft dysfunction accompanied by significant rebound in plasma BNP levels was detected in four patients within 2 weeks of the surgery. CONCLUSION: Plasma BNP levels are elevated in patients with chronic renal failure. Allograft renal transplantation significantly reduces BNP. Sudden increases in plasma BNP after the transplantation are associated with allograft dysfunction. Together with other biomarkers, plasma BNP may be used to predict the changes in renal function after transplantation.     

Renal transplantation in the elderly: a long-term, single-centre experience.

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal failure increases with advancing age and renal transplantation should be considered in end-stage renal failure patients older than 60 years. However, there is a paucity of data on long-term patient and graft survival in this population. METHODS: From October 1983 to March 1999, 310 renal transplantations were performed at Geneva University Hospital in 283 patients, of which 49 were done in 48 patients older than 60 years (mean age 65.6+/-4.1 years). The following data were analysed at 1, 5, and 10 years, and compared between the patients >60 years and <60 years old: actuarial patient and graft survival, serum creatinine, causes of graft loss, and patient death. RESULTS: Patient survival at 10 years was 81% for patients <60 years and 44% for patients >60 years. Graft survival at 10 years was 59% for patients <60 years and 32% for patients >60 years. Graft survival at 10 years censored for death with functioning graft was 65% for patients <60 years and 81% for patients >60 years. Main causes of mortality in the older patients were related to cardiovascular events (47%), neoplasia (41%), and sepsis (18%). Overall, recipient and donor age were not predictive factors for graft survival, as shown by multiple logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: Renal transplantation should be considered in patients older than 60 years, since graft survival is excellent in this population. Although these patients have a shorter life expectancy, they benefit from renal transplantation similarly to younger kidney transplant recipients.