Preemptive transplantation and long-term outcome in living donor kidney transplantation, single-center experience

Although preemptive transplantation of kidneys from living donors without the previous initiation of dialysis is associated with longer allograft survival in a USRDS cohort, the effect of pretransplantation dialysis on graft outcome is still controversial in Korea. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differential effects on long-term outcomes of living donor kidney transplantation according to initiation of dialysis and its duration or no dialysis. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 494 patients who received a first kidney transplant from a living donor between 1990 and 2006. The mean duration for dialysis was 14.5+/-22.2 months. The 10-year patient survival of 98.0% in the preemptive group was not significantly higher than the dialysis group (91.2%, P>.05). However, 10-year graft survival was higher in the preemptive than the dialysis group (preemptive 94.4%, dialysis 76.5%; P<.05). The differential effect of pretransplant dialysis either by hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis was not significant, although peritoneal dialysis as a pretransplant treatment seemed to be beneficial on long-term graft survival (5-year graft survival; peritoneal 94.8% and hemodialysis 89.2%). The duration of dialysis did not affect graft survival in our study cohort. In conclusion, we suggest that preemptive transplantation should be applied to eligible patients.     

Waiting time on dialysis as the strongest modifiable risk factor for renal transplant outcomes: a paired donor kidney analysis

BACKGROUND: Waiting time on dialysis has been shown to be associated with worse outcomes after living and cadaveric transplantation. To validate and quantify end-stage renal disease (ESRD) time as an independent risk factor for kidney transplantation, we compared the outcome of paired donor kidneys, destined to patients who had ESRD more than 2 years compared to patients who had ESRD less than 6 months. METHODS: We analyzed data available from the U.S. Renal Data System database between 1988 and 1998 by Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models to quantify the effect of ESRD time on paired cadaveric kidneys and on all cadaveric kidneys compared to living-donated kidneys. RESULTS: Five- and 10-year unadjusted graft survival rates were significantly worse in paired kidney recipients who had undergone more than 24 months of dialysis (58% and 29%, respectively) compared to paired kidney recipients who had undergone less than 6 months of dialysis (78% and 63%, respectively; P<0.001 each). Ten-year overall adjusted graft survival for cadaveric transplants was 69% for preemptive transplants versus 39% for transplants after 24 months on dialysis. For living transplants, 10-year overall adjusted graft survival was 75% for preemptive transplants versus 49% for transplants after 24 month on dialysis. CONCLUSIONS: ESRD time is arguably the strongest independent modifiable risk factor for renal transplant outcomes. Part of the advantage of living-donor versus cadaveric-donor transplantation may be explained by waiting time. This effect is dominant enough that a cadaveric renal transplant recipient with an ESRD time less than 6 months has the equivalent graft survival of living donor transplant recipients who wait on dialysis for more than 2 years.     

Immunologic and nonimmunologic factors: different risks for cadaver and living donor transplantation

BACKGROUND: There is a debate about the relative contribution of immunologic (rejection) and nonimmunologic (limited nephron mass) factors in long-term graft survival. METHODS: Using multivariate analysis, we studied the association of the following variables with outcome: delayed graft function (DGF), acute rejection, recipient race (black vs. nonblack), donor age (<50 vs. > or =50), donor race, and donor and recipient gender. Because of the association between DGF and rejection, recipients were grouped as follows: DGF, rejection; DGF, no rejection; no DGF, rejection; no DGF, no rejection. Data were analyzed on 1199 first kidney transplants in adults (752 living donor, 447 cadaver donor) done between January 1, 1985 and December 31, 1996. Two analyses were done: first, all transplants; second, only those with > or =1 year survival. For both, there was no difference in risk factors if death with function was or was not censored. RESULTS: For all cadaver transplant recipients, risk factors were acute rejection, DGF plus rejection, black recipient race, and donor age > or =50. For living donor recipients, only acute rejection was a risk factor. When only 1-year graft survivors were considered, risk factors were the same: for cadaver recipients, risk factors were acute rejection, DGF plus rejection, black recipient race, and donor age > or =50; for living donor recipients the risk factor was rejection. CONCLUSION: We found immunologic factors (rejection with or without DGF) to be significant in both living donor and cadaver donor transplants. Nonim. munologic factors (donor age, recipient race) were significant only in cadaver donor transplants.     

Outcomes of renal transplantation for recipients with lupus nephritis: analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database

Prior analyses of transplant outcomes in lupus transplant recipients have not consisted of multivariate analyses in the modern immunosuppressive era. Here, we compared patient and graft outcomes in lupus and non-lupus recipients transplanted between 1996 to 2000 using the United Network of Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement Transplant Network database. We evaluated the impact of recipient and donor demographic factors, time on dialysis and the initial immunosuppression regimen on rejection rates and transplant outcomes. Univariate analysis showed similar graft but better patient survival rates for primary lupus and non-lupus transplant recipients (5-year patient survival rates for lupus cohort 85.2% for deceased donor transplants and 92.1% for living donor transplants as opposed to 82.1% and 89.8% respectively for the non-lupus cohort; P=0.05 and 0.03) but similar patient survival rates for deceased donor retransplant patients. After controlling for confounding factors, no differences in patient or graft survival were seen between the two groups. No difference in acute rejection rates were observed in deceased donor transplants, but there was a small but significant increase in the risk of acute rejection in living donor lupus transplant recipients (hazard ratio=1.19, P=0.05). Risk of graft failure was lower for deceased donor recipients receiving MMF (five-year graft loss rate=29.6% for MMF vs. 40.2% for those not receiving MMF, P<0.0001), but no differences were seen among living donor recipients. Outcomes were similar regardless of type of calcineurin inhibitor, induction therapy, and time on dialysis. We conclude that lupus transplant recipients have outcomes generally equivalent to non-lupus transplant recipients.     

The treatment of end-stage renal disease at the Johannesburg Hospital: a 17-year experience. Part II. The role of transplantation

Experience with 525 kidney transplants performed at the Johannesburg Hospital from 1966 to 1982 is reviewed. The 1-year graft survival rates for HLA-identical related living donor (RLD) transplants, haplo-identical RLD transplants, and first and subsequent transplants from cadaver donors (CDs) are 95%, 72%, 59% and 52% respectively. One-year patient survival figures for all RLD and all CD transplants are 93% and 78% respectively. There is a slower but steady attrition in both graft and patient survival over the next 10-15 years which is the same for all patients irrespective of donor source. Infection and myocardial infarction remain the major causes of mortality and morbidity. Mortality in the 1st year after transplantation has been reduced dramatically in the last 5 years of the programme. This has coincided with the introduction of a policy of routine pretransplant blood transfusion and a less aggressive approach to the treatment of severe and recurrent rejection episodes. However, the incidence of irreversible graft rejection in the 1st year has remained the same. These results, although gratifying in a broad context, leave no room for complacency. The induction of a state of specific tolerance towards the grafted organ remains the ultimate goal in clinical transplantation.     

Outcome of pediatric renal transplantation in Labfi Nejad Hospital, Tehran, Iran

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for children with end-stage renal disease. In Iran, a kidney transplantation program was started in the Labfi Nejad Hospital, Tehran in 1985. From 1985 to 2003, 278 children (mean age 11.6 years, 59.7% males) received their first renal transplant. All transplants were donations from live donors (12.5% live-related donors); 30.8% of patients were preemptively transplanted. The overall 1-year patient survival rate was 92% and the 5-year survival rate 74%. The median graft survival time was 7.2 years. The rate of graft survival was 88.8% at 1 year, 77% at 3 years, 67% at 5 years, 50% at 7 years, and 43% at 10 years after transplantation. The survival rate of patients and transplants improved significantly with time (p<0.05). In patients transplanted before 1997, the 5-year graft survival was 50% and 82% in patients transplanted after 1997. At the same time intervals, the frequency of acute rejection episodes was 66.6 versus 40.8% and of chronic rejection 50.5 versus 28.7%. The outcome in children below the age of 6 years was poor. Graft survival was negatively correlated with the frequency and an early time point of acute rejection episodes. The modus of transplantation (preemptive or postdialysis) did not influence the results. In conclusion, patient and graft survival in transplanted children significantly improved with time, thus reflecting greater medical and surgical experience, new immunosuppressive drugs, and better compliance.     

ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation using both A2 and non-A2 living donors

BACKGROUND: Given the scarcity of cadaveric organs, efforts are intensifying to increase the availability of living donors. The current study assessed the feasibility of using ABO-incompatible living-donor kidneys to expand the donor pool. METHODS: The authors performed 18 ABO-incompatible living-donor kidney transplants between May 1999 and April 2001. Ten patients received living-donor kidneys from A2 and eight patients received kidneys from non-A2 blood group donors. Immunosuppression consisted of Thymoglobulin antibody induction, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone. Eight non-A2 and two A2 kidney recipients also received a pretransplant conditioning regimen of four plasmapheresis treatments followed by intravenous immunoglobulin and splenectomy at the time of transplantation. Antidonor blood group antibody titer was measured at baseline, pretransplant, at 1- to 3-month and 1-year follow-up, and at the time of diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection. RESULTS: No hyperacute rejection episodes occurred. One-year graft and patient survival rates in the 18 ABO-incompatible recipients were only slightly lower than those of 81 patients who received ABO-compatible kidney transplants during the same period (89% vs. 96% and 94% vs. 99%, respectively). Glomerular filtration rate and serum creatinine levels did not differ between the groups. Antibody-mediated rejection occurred in 28% of ABO-incompatible recipients, and was reversible with plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, and increasing immunosuppression in all patients except one. CONCLUSIONS: ABO-incompatible living donor kidney transplants can achieve an acceptable 1-year graft survival rate using an immunosuppressive regimen consisting of Thymoglobulin induction, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone combined with pretransplant plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, and splenectomy.     

Effect of donor/recipient body weight mismatch on patient and graft outcome in living-donor kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS: There have been conflicting reports showing that kidneys from small donors may be at risk for graft loss if they are transplanted into large recipients. The aim of this work was to examine the donor/recipient body weight ratio (D/RBWR) on patient and graft outcome. METHODS: During the period from January 1990 to January 2002, 856 kidney transplants were performed. Of these, 776 kidney transplant recipients were selected after exclusion of pediatric, second transplant patients and those with a body mass index of 35. All patients achieved a minimum follow-up of 1-year. According to D/RBWR, patients were divided into 3 groups: low (0.9), medium (0.91-1.2) and high (1.2). Data were collected on graft function, acute and chronic rejection, post-transplant complications, and 1- and 5-year graft and patient survival. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant increase in the incidence of chronic rejection, post-transplant hypertension and diabetes mellitus in the low group. The incidence and frequency of acute rejection episodes were nearly the same in the 3 groups. Graft function, estimated by serum creatinine at 1 year, was significantly lower in the low group. The 5-year graft and patient survival was 71, 80, 88 and 81, 85 and 92%, in the low, medium and high groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that a low D/RBWR may contribute to inferior long-term renal allograft survival. The hyperfiltration hypothesis due to low nephron mass in the low D/RBWR group may explain these findings.     

Cadaveric kidney transplantation in children < or =20 kg in weight: long-term single-center experience

BACKGROUND: We report long-term follow-up data on cadaveric kidney transplantation in children < or =20 kg in weight. METHODS: Between January 1990 and October 2003, we performed 19 cadaveric renal transplants in 19 children < or =20 kg in weight. Mean age at transplantation was 4.7 years (range 18 months to 9 years). Mean weight at transplantation was 14.4 kg (range 9 to 20 kg). Nine patients had preemptive kidney transplantation, whereas 10 were maintained on renal replacement therapy before the transplant operation. RESULTS: Actuarial 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival rates were 89.5%, 89.5%, 89.5%, and 82%, respectively. Actuarial 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year graft survival rates were 79%, 73%, 73%, 65%, respectively. Three patients died. Eight grafts failed. Cause of graft failure was death with a functioning graft in 3 patients, chronic rejection in 1, acute cellular rejection in 1, vascular rejection in 1, hemolytic-uremic syndrome in 1, and unknown in 1. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate the success of cadaveric kidney transplantation in the very small child with results comparable to living related donor transplantation.     

Outcome after transplantation of young patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a report of the North American pediatric renal transplant cooperative study

BACKGROUND: The risk of progressing to end-stage renal disease in children with lupus glomerulonephritis is 18% to 50%. Published reports of transplantation secondary to end-stage renal failure in adult patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) demonstrate equivalent patient and graft survival. The purpose of this analysis is to compare patient and graft outcomes of pediatric SLE renal transplant recipients with an age-, race-, and gender-matched control group. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the North American Pediatric Renal Transplant Cooperative Study (NAPRTCS) database identified 100 renal transplants performed in 94 young SLE patients. A control group of 470 children having received 501 renal transplants was identified. RESULTS: The SLE cohort was primarily female (82%), non-Caucasian (61%), adolescents and differed from the control group in being less likely to be preemptively transplanted, in receiving longer pretransplant dialysis, and in being likely to have received more than five pretransplant transfusions. After transplantation, there were no differences seen in patient survival at 3 years (89% vs. 95%, SLE vs. control) or in overall graft failure rates (31% vs. 29%, SLE vs. control). There was a trend toward poorer graft survival in non-white SLE patients receiving living donor grafts compared with white SLE patients. An increased graft failure rate was seen among those SLE cadaveric transplant recipients receiving peritoneal dialysis before transplant compared with controls and compared with SLE patients receiving hemodialysis. No differences were seen in rates of acute tubular necrosis or overall acute rejection incidence, although there was a significant increase in the percentage of living donor SLE patients who experienced greater than four rejection episodes. There were nonsignificant trends toward increased graft loss due to patient death with a functioning graft as well as increased mortality secondary to infection in the SLE patients. CONCLUSIONS: The results of renal transplantation in young SLE patients are comparable to those seen in an age-, race- and gender-matched control group. The similar patient and graft survival is seen despite the SLE patients having an underlying disease with multiorgan involvement and despite receiving immunosuppression for potentially prolonged periods before transplantation. No outcome differences were seen except for an unexplained increase in the incidence of recurrent rejections (> or =4) in the living donor SLE patients as well as increased graft failure rate in those patients receiving cadaveric renal transplants after a period of peritoneal dialysis. The nonsignificant trends toward increased graft failures in non-white SLE patients receiving living donor grafts, increased graft loss secondary to death with a functioning graft, as well as the increased mortality due to infection deserve recognition and further study.     

The influence of acute rejection on long-term renal allograft survival: a comparison of living and cadaveric donor transplantation

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether recipients of living donor grafts who suffer an acute rejection progress to graft loss because of chronic rejection at a slower rate than recipients of cadaveric grafts. METHODS: A retrospective review was made of 296 renal transplantations performed at Mount Sinai Hospital. Only grafts functioning for at least 3 months were included in this analysis. Demographic variables of donor and recipient age, race, sex, and serum creatinine at 3 months after transplantation were compared between groups. RESULTS: Among the acute rejection-free cohort, the estimated 5-year graft survival was 90% for those receiving transplants from living relatives and 88% for those receiving cadaveric transplants (P=0.76). However, in grafts with early acute rejection, the 5-year survival was 40% for cadaveric recipients compared with 73% for living related graft recipients (P<0.014). Using the proportional hazards model, cadaveric donor source, older donor age, African American recipient race, and elevated 3-month serum creatinine were independent predictors of long-term graft loss caused by chronic rejection. The severity of acute rejection and recipient age had no impact on the risk of graft loss because of chronic rejection. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that the benefit of living related transplantation results from the fact that a living related graft progresses from acute to chronic rejection at a slower rate than a cadaveric graft. Furthermore, a cadaveric graft that is free of acute rejection 3 months after transplantation has an equal likelihood of functioning at 5 years as that of a graft from a living related donor.     

Waiting time and outcome of kidney transplantation in adolescents

BACKGROUND: The major cause of late graft failure in adolescent kidney transplant recipients is thought to be nonadherence with medications. Delaying transplantation in adolescents may lead to improved adherence but at the cost of longer time on dialysis. To determine if waiting time on dialysis is a risk factor for graft survival in adolescents, we compared the outcomes of kidney transplants according to age and time on dialysis. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry on 2,739 primary kidney transplants performed between 1980 and 2004 in recipients less than 30 years old. Outcomes according to age at transplantation and waiting time were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazard tests. RESULTS: Overall five- and 10-year graft survival rates were significantly worse in adolescents (65% and 50%, respectively) compared to recipients aged two to 10 years (74% and 58%) and 20 to 29 years (72% and 57%). Waiting time on dialysis was an independent risk factor for failure of living donor grafts in adolescents (hazard ratio 0.53, P = 0.03). Five- and 10-year graft survival of preemptive grafts in adolescents were 82% and 70%, respectively, which were similar to survival rates of preemptive grafts in other age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced graft survival rates in adolescent recipients are not seen after preemptive transplants. Preemptive grafts are associated with a 50% reduction in the risk of graft failure. Delaying transplantation in adolescents may expose them to increased risk of poorer outcomes.     

Effect of blood transfusions on renal transplantation: study of 191 consecutive first transplants from living related donors

One hundred ninety-one consecutive living related transplants performed from 1969 to the end of 1978 have been analyzed for the effect of pretransplant blood transfusions. Superior graft survival was observed in transfused patients transplanted with a one HLA haplotype-disparate kidney, whereas no effect of blood transfusions could be observed on the survival of HLA-identical transplants. The frequency of first rejection episodes was significantly reduced in transfused compared to nontransfused one haplotype-mismatched transplants, while no influence of blood transfusions was seen in patients with HLA-identical transplants. The survival of patients was, however, not influenced by previous transfusions. Pretransplant hemodialysis improved graft survival and patient survival; the difference was, however, only significant at 2 years in the one haplotype-mismatched group. When analyzed separately, both blood transfusions and hemodialysis had a beneficial effect on graft survival in one haplotype-mismatched transplants.     

Outcomes of Simultaneous Heart–Kidney Transplant in the US: A Retrospective Analysis Using OPTN/UNOS Data

Simultaneous heart–kidney transplantation (SHK) remains uncommon in the US. We examined outcomes of SHK compared to heart transplant alone (HTA) and deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT).
Data from OPTN/UNOS heart and kidney data bases were used to identify 16 710 HTA, 263 SHK transplants and 68 833 DDK transplants between 1998 and 2007. Outcomes included patient survival (PS), acute cardiac and renal rejection and renal graft survival (rGS).
The adjusted risk of death was 44% lower with SHK compared to HTA. Over half of SHK were performed in cases where pretransplant dialysis was not initiated. In these cases, there was no significant difference in the risk of death between SHK and HTA (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.67–1.50).
Recipients of SHK had worse 1-year rGS and PS and had a higher relative risk of overall renal graft loss compared to DDKT recipients. One-year rates of cardiac (14.5%) and renal (6.5%) rejection were lower in SHK compared to HTA and DDKT, respectively.
Recipients of SHK had a lower adjusted risk of death compared to HTA recipients, particularly in patients who required pretransplant dialysis. These data suggest that SHK should be considered in heart transplant candidates with renal failure requiring dialysis, whereas the utility of SHK in cases of renal failure not requiring dialysis warrants further study.     

Risk factors on graft survival of living donor kidney transplantation

Living donors have always been the basic resources of transplantation in our country, where cadaveric harvesting is still hampered for various reasons. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare graft survival rates between living unrelated donor (LURD) and living related donor (LRD), to assess the potential risk factors for the graft survival, and to discuss the role of LURD. METHOD: From October 1991 to February 2003, 77 living donor renal transplants were performed: 41 were LURD and 36 were LRD transplants. The analyzed variables were donor relationship, recipient age and sex, donor age and sex, HLA-DR mismatching, nonspecific blood transfusion history of donor, acute rejection episodes, repeated rejection episode (more than 3 times), delayed graft function, recurred primary disease, and immunosuppressive regimen. Graft survival rate was assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method and the significance of possible variables with the Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Eleven recipients lost their grafts (6 from LURD and 5 from LRD), most of them are due to chronic rejection (n = 7). Overall 3-, 5- and 10-year graft survival in live donors were 92.8%, 86.6%, and 76.9%, respectively. Graft survival at 3, 5, and 10 years being 91.9%, 88.5%, and 74.7% for the LURD versus 94%, 84%, and 78.8% for LRD transplants (P > .05). Acute rejection episodes, especially more than 3 times (risk ratio [RR] = 11.1) and preoperative multiple transfusion history (RR = 4.2) were significant factors on graft survival in our series. CONCLUSION: Acute rejection episodes markedly decreased the long-term graft survival in live donor renal transplants. The use of LURD transplants provides graft survival comparable with LRD transplants and proper management to acute rejection is essential for long-term graft survival.     

Improved patient and primary renal allograft survival in uremic diabetic recipients

From January 1968 to December 1981, 470 uremic diabetic patients received primary renal allografts at the University of Minnesota. Until 1979, the patient and graft survival rates were less good in diabetic than in nondiabetic recipients. Since 1979, the results in diabetics have been at least equal to those achieved in nondiabetic patients. Two-year actuarial patient and graft survival rates in diabetic renal allograft recipients were, respectively, 71 and 66% from 1968 to 1976 (n = 156), 78 and 64% from 1976 to 1979 (n = 187), and 88 and 82% from 1979 to 1981 (n = 127). Improved survival rates were seen in all donor source and recipient age categories. For comparison, the 2-year patient and graft survival rates in nondiabetic renal allograft recipients who received transplants between 1979 and 1981 (n = 162) were 92 and 79%. Changes associated with improved survival rates included performance of pretransplant splenectomy on all patients except those receiving grafts from HLA-identical siblings, deliberate transfusions of blood from greater than or equal to 5 random donors at least 1 month before transplantation, intensive insulin therapy for diabetic management post-transplant, and less vigorous treatment of repetitive rejection episodes. The current results show that diabetic recipients are no longer at higher risk than nondiabetics for graft or patient loss, at least during the first 2 years after transplantation.     

Whole liver versus split liver versus living donor in the adult recipient: an analysis of outcomes by graft type

BACKGROUND: We studied patient and graft survival rates in adult liver transplant recipients, analyzing outcomes based on donor source (deceased donor [DD] vs. living donor [LD]) and graft type (whole liver vs. partial liver). METHODS: A retrospective database analysis of all adult liver transpants performed at our center over a 7-year period of time. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2005, 384 liver transplants were performed in adult recipients, either as a whole liver from a deceased donor (DD-WL, n=284), split liver from a DD (DD-SL, n=31), or a partial transplant from a living donor (LD, n=69). DD-SL transplants were performed with a full right or left lobe graft, while LD transplants used the right lobe. Demographic differences in the three groups were most noticeable for lower model for end-stage liver disease scores in LD recipients (P<0.001) and younger donor age in DD-SL recipients (P<0.001). Superior graft survival results were seen in LD recipients versus either DD-WL recipients or DD-SL recipients (P=0.02 and P=0.05, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed hepatitis C (HR=1.53, P=0.05) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HR=1.74, P=0.03) to be significant risk factors for patient survival. Hepatitis C (HR=1.61, P=0.03) and donor age more than 50 (HR=1.64, P=0.04) were significant risk factors for graft survival. However, neither graft type nor donor source were significant independent risk factors for patient or graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggests that the status of the recipient is probably a more important determinant of outcome than graft type or donor source.     

A decade of experience with renal transplantation in African-Americans

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the strategies instituted by the authors' center to decrease the time to transplantation and increase the rate of transplantation for African-Americans, consisting of a formal education program concerning the benefits of living organ donation that is oriented to minorities; a laparoscopic living donation program; use of hepatitis C-positive donors in documented positive recipients; and encouraging vaccination for hepatitis B, allowing the use of hepatitis B core Ab-positive donors.SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA The national shortage of suitable kidney donor organs has disproportional and adverse effects on African-Americans for several reasons. Type II diabetes mellitus and hypertension, major etiologic factors for end-stage renal disease, are more prevalent in African-Americans than in the general population. Once kidney failure has developed, African-Americans are disadvantaged for the following reasons: this patient cohort has longer median waiting times on the renal transplant list; African-Americans have higher rates of acute rejection, which affects long-term allograft survival; and once they are transplanted, the long-term graft survival rates are lower in this population than in other groups.METHODS From March 1990 to November 2001 the authors' center performed 2,167 renal transplants; 944 were in African-Americans (663 primary cadaver renal transplants and 253 primary Living donor renal transplants). The retransplants consisted of 83 cadaver transplants and 17 living donor transplants. Outcome measures of this retrospective analysis included median waiting time, graft and patient survival rates, and the rate of living donation in African-Americans and comparable non-African-Americans. Where applicable, data are compared to United Network for Organ Sharing national statistics. Statistical analysis employed appropriate SPSS applications.RESULTS One- and 5-year patient survival rates for living donor kidneys were 97.1% and 91.3% for non-African-Americans and 96.8% and 90.4% for African-Americans. One- and 5-year graft survival rates were 95.1% and 89.1% for non-African-Americans and 93.1% and 82.9% for African-Americans. One- and 4-year patient survival rates for cadaver donor kidneys were 91.4% and 78.7% for non-African-Americans and 92.4% and 80.2% for African-Americans. One- and 5-year graft survival rates for cadaver kidneys were 84.6% and 73.7% for non-African-Americans and 84.6% and 68.9% for African-Americans. One- and 5-year graft and patient survival rates were identical for recipients of hepatitis C virus-positive and anti-HBc positive donors, with the exception of a trend to late graft loss in the African-American hepatitis C virus group due to higher rates of noncompliance, an effect that disappears with censoring of graft loss from that cause. The cadaveric renal transplant median waiting time for non-African-Americans was 391 days compared to 734 days nationally; the waiting time for African-Americans was 647 days compared to 1,335 days nationally. When looking at all patients, living and cadaver donor, the median waiting times are 220 days for non-African-Americans and 462 days for African-Americans.CONCLUSIONS Programs specifically oriented to improve volunteerism in African-Americans have led to a marked improvement in overall waiting time and in rates of living donation in this patient group. The median waiting times to cadaveric renal transplantation were also significantly shorter in the authors' center, especially for African-American patients, by taking advantage of the higher rates of hepatitis C infection and encouraging hepatitis B vaccination. These policies can markedly improve end-stage renal disease care for African-Americans by halving the overall waiting time while still achieving comparable graft and patient survival rates.     

Increased rejection in living unrelated versus living related kidney transplants does not affect short-term function and survival

BACKGROUND: At our institution, increased kidney donation from unrelated donors accounts for a steady rise in live donor kidney transplantation rates. We compared outcomes of living related (LRT) versus living unrelated kidney transplants (LURT) and analyzed the effect of early rejection upon graft survival. METHODS: A retrospective analysis on 428 adult living donor kidney transplants was performed. Graft function and survival were compared between LRT and LURT and risk factors for 1-year rejection were defined by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Between 1/1/97 and 12/31/01, 308 LRT and 120 LURT were performed at the University of California San Francisco. Donor age and number of mismatches were significantly higher in the LURT group. Patient and graft survival were similar in both groups. After a median follow-up of 26 months, graft survival was 94.8% (LRT) versus 93.3% (LURT). Five-year serum creatinine levels were comparable in both populations. One-year rejection was higher in the LURT group (30% vs. 18.5%; P<0.01). Rejection was influenced by the number of human leukocyte antigen mismatches. Other independent risk factors for early rejection were poor initial graft function, donor age greater than 55 years, and recipient body mass index greater than 30. Patients with poor initial graft function and early rejection had a statistically greater incidence of subtherapeutic tacrolimus trough levels on postoperative day 7. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a higher incidence of early rejection, LURT show similar function and survival compared with LRT. In high-risk patients receiving living unrelated renal transplants, consideration should be given to intensify initial immunosuppression to prevent early rejection episodes.     

Association of elevated pretransplant sCD30 levels with graft loss in 206 patients treated with modern immunosuppressive therapies after renal transplantation

BACKGROUND: Recent reports suggest that high pretransplant serum levels of soluble CD30 (sCD30) are a risk factor for rejections after kidney transplantation. The aim of our study was to elucidate the predictive value of pretransplant sCD30 levels for kidney transplantation outcome in a single-center patient cohort that has been treated with modern immunosuppressive therapies after transplantation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed sCD30 in multiple pretransplant sera from 206 patients, of whom 174 were transplanted with a cadaveric kidney and 32 patients received an allograft from a living donor. Renal function after transplantation was estimated by measuring serum creatinine and by rejection diagnosis. RESULTS: We could demonstrate a statistically significant association between increased pretransplant sCD30 values and graft failures (P=0.005). Receiver operating curve analysis revealed a cutoff value of 124 U/mL pretransplant sCD30. A multivariate analysis confirmed pretransplant sCD30 values >124 U/mL (P=0.011) and rejection episodes (P<0.0001) as independent risk factors for graft loss. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a strong correlation between pretransplant sCD30 levels and the incidence of graft failure, but we could not confirm that the development of rejection episodes is correlated with pretransplant sCD30 values.