Paired Donation Transplantation Research Articles

Long-Term Outcomes of Kidney Paired Donation Transplantation: A Single Center Retrospective Cohort Study

This study aimed to compare the kidney paired donation (KPD) program recipients with the traditional living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) recipients regarding patient and graft survival. We retrospectively analyzed 141 recipients of the KPD program and 141 classic LDKT recipients that we matched for age and sex as controls between July 2005 and June 2019. We compared the 2 transplant groups for patient and kidney survival using the Kaplan-Maier test. We also performed Cox Regression analysis to examine factors affecting patient survival, including transplant type. The average follow-up period was 96.17 ± 44.22 months. Of the 282 patients, 88 died in the follow-up period. There was no statistically significant difference in graft and patient survival between the KPD and LDKT groups. In the Cox regression model, including the transplant type, only the serum creatinine level measured in the first month after discharge was a significant factor in predicting patient survival. The findings of this study indicate that the KPD program is an effective and reliable method to increase LDKT. Country-wide multicentric studies should confirm the results of this study. In countries where cadaver transplantation is insufficient, efforts should be made to expand the KPD program.

Two Decades of Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation at Ahmedabad, India.

Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Maharashtra, Kerala, Chandigarh, and Karnataka are states in India with active programs for deceased donor kidney transplant. We report our experience of 2 decades of deceased donor kidney transplant at the Institute of Kidney Diseases and Research Center, Dr. H. L. Trivedi Institute of Transplantation Sciences, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India. This single-center retrospective study comprised data from 831 deceased donor kidney transplant recipients between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2018. Mean recipient age was 38 ± 14 years; 564 were male, and 267 were female. Mean donor age was 45.3 ± 17.13 years; 565 were men, and 266 were women. Between January 1, 1997 and March 15, 2020, 5838 kidney transplants were completed, including 4895 living donor kidney transplants, 943 deceased donor kidney transplants, and 440 kidney paired donation transplants. Over the mean follow-up time of 8 ± 5.4 years, patient survival rate was 70% (n = 581) and death-censored graft survival rate was 84% (n = 698). Delayed graft function was shown in 210 patients (25%) and biopsy-proven acute rejection rate in 180 patients (21%). Our experience of favorable outcomes with deceased donor kidney transplants has expanded the donor pool in many ways, including transplant from expanded criteria donors to younger recipients; transplant from older donors to older recipients; donation after cardiac death; successful intercity organ procurement; dual-kidney transplant; en bloc transplant from a pediatric deceased donor; and transplant from brain death deceased donors who died from neurotoxic snakebite, recurrent primary brain tumor, bacterial meningitis, or head injury, or with disseminated intravascular coagulation and deranged renal functions. The pathway to increase organ donation was investigated. Deceased donor kidney transplant can achieve acceptable graft function with patient/graft survival, which may encourage the use of this approach to increase the number of available organs.

Innovations in kidney paired donation transplantation.

To analyze the innovations that have increased the reliability, convenience, and outcomes of kidney paired donation (KPD) that has led to thousands of living donor kidney transplants across the United States. Over the past 10 years, KPD has grown over 200% on an annual basis. Though concerns had existed over cold ischemia time, research has shown that there is no correlation between travel time of a shipped kidney and the transplant outcome. The voucher program has started to continue to expand how to overcome obstacles to donation by solving the issue of a pair chronological incompatibility. KPD is a relatively new field and the innovations it has spawned should continue to improve availability of high-quality living donor organs. The introduction of the family voucher should continue this trend.

Evaluation of Whether Kidney Paired Donations Improve Overall Transplant Center Performance.

Increasing living-donor kidney transplant procedures via kidney paired donations could help combat organ shortages. We examined whether a higher volume of kidney paired donation transplants would lead to increased center performance. Kidney paired donation, living-donor, and deceased-donor transplant data from 165 centers between 2012 and 2016 were obtained from the UNOS OPTN database. The fixed-effects model was used for panel analysis based on Durbin-Wu-Hausman tests (P < .001). Regression analyses tested associations between total transplant number and kidney paired donation-to-living donor kidney transplant ratio, incorporating up to 2-year lag terms. Regression analyses also tested associations between number of new wait list registrations and kidney paired donation transplant ratio. Mean and median number of kidney paired donor transplants equaled 3.59 and 1.2, respectively. Only 5 centers performed > 20 paired donation transplants annually. Mean and median ratios of paired donation transplants were 0.54 and 0.11. Total transplant number was not associated with paired donation transplant ratio of the same year (b= -.425, P = .662) or with that of 2 prior years (P = .830 and P = .629, respectively). Similarly, new wait list registrations were not correlated with paired donation transplant ratio of the same year (P= .501, P = .851) or that of 2 prior years (P = .792 and P = .816, respectively). When transplant centers were divided into those performing ≥ 10 paired donation trans-plants annually (18 transplant center, n = 90) versus those performing < 10 annually (147 transplant center, n = 735), no significant effects were shown (P > .10). Kidney paired donation transplant does not appear to affect transplant center performance. This may be due to the small volume of these transplants currently performed by centers, thereby limiting overall growth in the number of transplants and new registrations.

P135 Living donor kidney paired donation transplantation: First report from Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Aim Kidney paired donation (KPD) is an effective way to transplant patients with willing but incompatible donors. We report our experience with KPD through development of local Registry for incompatible pairs. Methods 62 recipients & their incompatible donors plus 3 non-directed donors were entered into KPD registry. Incompatibility was due to ABO-incompatibility (ABOi) in 25% & HLA-incompatibility (HLAi) in 75%. Patients with HLAi had cPRA between 60–99%. Antibodies with MFI of ⩾ 3000 by SAB assay were listed as unacceptable antigens. We used balanced, unbalanced & non-directed anonymous donors (NDAD). ABOi donors were accepted if patients had low titer ( ⩽ 16) of Isohemagglutinins. Amenable DSA for desensitization are those weak, single or multiple that yielded negative or weakly positive flow cross match ( Results 23 candidates (37%) were transplanted, enabling pre-emptive transplant in 1 patient. The longest chain was seven -ways domino chain initiated by a NDAD & ended in transplant of deceased donor listed patient with multiple access failure. Additional desensitization was used for 9 patients due to DSA and/ or positive FXM. 1 patient received TPE due to anti ABO antibody titer of 16. We had one case of DGF, AMR occurred in 2 patients & 1 patient had ACR. Graft function was good through follow-up time of 6–18 months but one patient died 8 months post-transplant due to refractory sepsis. Conclusions Although our series is early with 62 patients, transplant rate is excellent compared to other old programs(Netherlands, UK, & Canada) where the transplant rate were 37%, 29%, 44% respectively. This might be attributed to involving NDAD, accepting ABOi & combining desensitization for low level DSA in selected patients. Considering that 75% of the patients were highly sensitized yet received living transplants with excellent results, our experience demonstrates promising short-term outcomes. However, longer follow-up is needed to assess the impact of KPD on organ shortage & the outcome of highly sensitized patients transplanted through KPD program.

Broken Chains and Reneging: A Review of 1748 Kidney Paired Donation Transplants.

Concerns regarding the potential for broken chains and "reneges" within kidney paired donation (KPD) and its effect on chain length have been raised previously. Although these concerns have been tested in simulation studies, real-world data have yet to be evaluated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the actual rate and causes of broken chains within a large KPD program. All patients undergoing renal transplantation through the National Kidney Registry from 2008 through May 2016 were included for analysis. Broken chains and loops were identified. A total of 344 chains and 78 loops were completed during the study period, yielding a total of 1748 transplants. Twenty broken chains and one broken loop were identified. The mean chain length (number of transplants) within broken chains was 4.8 compared with 4.6 of completed chains (p = 0.78). The most common causes of a broken chain were donor medical issues incurred while acting as a bridge donor (n = 8), donors electing not to proceed (n = 6), and kidneys being declined by the recipient surgeon (n = 4). All recipients involved in a broken chain subsequently received a transplant. Based on the results, broken chains are infrequent, are rarely due to lack of donor motivation, and have no significant impact on chain length.

Impact of single centre kidney paired donation transplantation to increase donor pool in India: a cohort study.

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

Cold ischemia time up to 16 hours has little impact on living donor kidney transplant outcomes in the era of kidney paired donation

In living donor transplantation, cold ischemia time is a concern in transplants involving kidney paired donation. The impact of cold ischemia time over eight hours is unknown. Here we examined the association of cold ischemia time with delayed graft function and allograft loss among 48,498 living recipients in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients registry. The incidence of delayed graft function was low but significantly higher among patients with longer cold ischemia times (0-2.0 hours: 3.3%; 2.1-4.0 hours: 3.9%; 4.1-8.0 hours: 4.3%; 8.1-16.0 hours: 5.5%). In multivariate analyses, only those with cold ischemia times of 8.1-16.0 hours had increased odds of delayed graft function (odds ratio 1.47; 95% confidence interval 1.05-2.05) compared to patients with times of 0-2.0 hours. In multivariate time-to-event analyses, cold ischemia times of 16 hours or less were not associated with allograft loss from any cause including death or death-censored graft loss with hazard ratios for cold ischemia times between 8.0-16.0 hours of 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.74-1.26) and 1.09 (0.81-1.48) compared to patients with times of 0-2.0 hours). The results were consistent in paired and non-kidney paired donation transplants and in those with living donors over 50 years of age. In subgroup analysis restricted to kidney paired donation recipients, there was no difference in the risk of delayed graft function with an odds ratio of 1.40 (0.88, 2.40) or all-cause graft loss with a hazard ratio of 0.89 (0.62, 1.30) in transplant recipients who received kidneys that were shipped versus not shipped. Thus, a cold ischemia time up to 16 hours has limited impact on living donor outcomes. These findings may help expand living donor transplantation through kidney paired donation.

Past, present and future of kidney paired donation transplantation in India.

One third of healthy willing living kidney donors are rejected due to ABO blood group incompatibility and donor specific antibody. This increases pre-transplant dialysis duration leading to increased morbidity and mortality on the kidney transplantation waiting list. Over the last decade kidney paired donation is most rapidly increased source of living kidney donors. In a kidney transplantation program dominated by living donor kidney transplantation, kidney paired donation is a legal and valid alternative strategy to increase living donor kidney transplantation. This is more useful in countries with limited resources where ABO incompatible kidney transplantation or desensitization protocol is not feasible because of costs/infectious complications and deceased donor kidney transplantation is in initial stages. The matching allocation, ABO blood type imbalance, reciprocity, simultaneity, geography were the limitation for the expansion of kidney paired donation. Here we describe different successful ways to increase living donor kidney transplantation through kidney paired donation. Compatible pairs, domino chain, combination of kidney paired donation with desensitization or ABO incompatible transplantation, international kidney paired donation, non-simultaneous, extended, altruistic donor chain and list exchange are different ways to expand the donor pool. In absence of national kidney paired donation program, a dedicated kidney paired donation team will increase access to living donor kidney transplantation in individual centres with team work. Use of social networking sites to expand donor pool, HLA based national kidney paired donation program will increase quality and quantity of kidney paired donation transplantation. Transplant centres should remove the barriers to a broader implementation of multicentre, national kidney paired donation program to further optimize potential of kidney paired donation to increase transplantation of O group and sensitized patients. This review assists in the development of similar programs in other developing countries.

Outcomes of kidney paired donation transplants in relation to shipping and cold ischaemia time.

To assess the impact of shipping distance and cold ischaemia time (CIT) of shipped organs in a kidney paired donation (KPD) programme, we evaluated the outcomes of the initial 100 kidney transplants performed in the Australian KPD programme. In a 44-month period, 12 centres were involved in fifteen 2-way, twenty 3-way, one 4-way and one 6-way exchanges. Sixteen kidneys were transplanted at the same hospital (CIT 2.6 ± 0.6 h) and 84 required transport to the recipient hospital (CIT 6.8 ± 2.8 h). A spontaneous fall in serum creatinine by at least 10% within 24 h was observed in 85% of recipients, with no difference between nonshipped and shipped kidneys. There were two cases of transient delayed graft function requiring dialysis and patient and graft survival at 1 year were 99% and 97%, respectively. There was no difference in recipients of nonshipped compared with shipped kidneys with regard to serum creatinine at 1 month (mean difference (MD) 7.3 μmol/l, 95% CI -20.2 to 34.8, P = 0.59), 1-year graft survival (MD 3.9%, 95% CI -5.4 to 13.2, P = 0.41) or patient survival (MD -2.4%, 95% CI -10.0 to 5.2, P = 0.54). Despite prolonged CIT for interstate exchanges, the programme's decision to ship donor kidneys rather than the donor appears to be safe.

Renal replacement therapy in India: Promising future with kidney paired donation transplantation

Abstract The prevalence of CKD is increasing worldwide. There is tremendous imbalance in organ supply and demand worldwide. India is having mainly living donor (up to 90%) kidney transplantation program. Majority (up to 45%) of the living donors, although healthy and willing, are rejected due to ABO incompatibility. Deceased donation contributes to

The First 1000 Kidney Paired Donation Transplants through the National Kidney Registry: Graft Function and Survival Outcomes.

The First 1000 Kidney Paired Donation Transplants through the National Kidney Registry: Graft Function and Survival Outcomes.

The First 1000 Kidney Paired Donation Transplants through the National Kidney Registry: Characteristics of Donors and Recipients.

The First 1000 Kidney Paired Donation Transplants through the National Kidney Registry: Characteristics of Donors and Recipients.

Successful three-way kidney paired donation transplantation: The first Indian report

Providing transplantation opportunities for patients with incompatible live donors through kidney paired donation (KPD) is an important strategy for easing the crisis in organ availability. KPD is can overcome the barriers when the only living potential donors are deemed unsuitable owing to an incompatibility of blood type, of human leukocyte antigen cross-match, or both. In KPD, the incompatibility problems with two donor recipient pairs can be solved by exchanging donors. In the absence of well-organized deceased donor program, or transplantation with desensitization protocol and ABO incompatible transplantation, living donor KPD promises hope to the growing number of patients suffering from end-stage renal disease in India. We report our first successful three-way KPD transplantation from India. In an era of organ shortage, this approach is relevant to encourage wider participation from KPD donors and transplant centers to prevent commercial transplantation.

Kidney paired donation in the presence of donor-specific antibodies

Incompatible donor/recipient pairs with broadly sensitized recipients have difficulty finding a crossmatch-compatible match, despite a large kidney paired donation pool. One approach to this problem is to combine kidney paired donation with lower-risk crossmatch-incompatible transplantation with intravenous immunoglobulin. Whether this strategy is non-inferior compared with transplantation of sensitized patients without donor-specific antibody (DSA) is unknown. Here we used a protocol including a virtual crossmatch to identify acceptable crossmatch-incompatible donors and the administration of intravenous immunoglobulin to transplant 12 HLA-sensitized patients (median calculated panel reactive antibody 98%) with allografts from our kidney paired donation program. This group constituted the DSA(+) kidney paired donation group. We compared rates of rejection and survival between the DSA(+) kidney paired donation group with a similar group of 10 highly sensitized patients (median calculated panel reactive antibody 85%) that underwent DSA(-) kidney paired donation transplantation without intravenous immunoglobulin. At median follow-up of 22 months, the DSA(+) kidney paired donation group had patient and graft survival of 100%. Three patients in the DSA(+) kidney paired donation group experienced antibody-mediated rejection. Patient and graft survival in the DSA(-) kidney paired donation recipients was 100% at median follow-up of 18 months. No rejection occurred in the DSA(-) kidney paired donation group. Thus, our study provides a clinical framework through which kidney paired donation can be performed with acceptable outcomes across a crossmatch-incompatible transplant.

Ten kidney paired donation transplantation on World Kidney Day 2013: raising awareness and time to take action to increase donor pool

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

What's New in the Transplant OR?

Advancements in transplantation offer promising treatment options for a variety of diseases. Organ donation, an essential part of organ transplantation, may be performed at hospitals even if the facility is not a transplant center; therefore, perioperative nurses should be aware of developments in transplantation and the implications for patient care at their facilities. Considerations for organ transplant protocols include the type of documentation required, the elements of the transplant OR time out, and the use of intraoperative anti-rejection medications. Considerations for organ donation protocols include issues specific to a deceased donor, a living donor, or a donation after cardiac death. Newer developments in the transplant OR include laparoscopic kidney donation and transplantation, kidney paired donation transplantation, other living donor procedures, and transplantation procedures using robotic technology.

Outcome of kidney paired donation transplantation to increase donor pool and to prevent commercial transplantation: a single-center experience from a developing country

Economic constraints in operating an effective maintenance dialysis program leaves renal transplantation as the only viable option for end-stage renal disease patients in India. Kidney paired donation (KPD) is a rapidly growing modality for facilitating living donor (LD) transplantation for patients who are incompatible with their healthy, willing LD. The aim of our study was to report a single-center feasibilities and outcomes of KPD transplantation between 2000 and 2012. We performed KPD transplants in 70 recipients to avoid blood group incompatibility (n = 56) or to avoid a positive crossmatch (n = 14). Over a mean follow-up of 2.72 ± 2.96 years, one-, five- and ten-year patient survival were 94.6, 81, 81 %, and death-censored graft survival was 96.4, 90.2, 90.2 %, respectively. Ten percent of patients were lost, mainly due to infections (n = 4). There was 14.2 % biopsy-proven acute rejection, and 5.7 % interstitial fibrosis with tubular atrophy eventually leading to graft loss. The incidences of acute rejection, patient/graft survival rates were acceptable in our KPD program and, therefore, we believe it should be encouraged. These findings are valuable for encouraging participation of KPD pairs and transplant centers in national KPD program. It should be promoted in centers with low-deceased donor transplantation. Our study findings are relevant in the context of Indian government amending the Transplantation of Human Organs Act to encourage national KPD program. To our knowledge, it is largest single-center report from India.

Single-Center Kidney Paired Donation: The Methodist San Antonio Experience

Many potential kidney transplant recipients are unable to receive a live donor transplant due to crossmatch or blood type incompatibility. Kidney paired donation increases access to live donor transplantation but has been significantly underutilized. We established a kidney paired donation program including consented incompatible donor/recipient pairs as well as compatible pairs with older non-human leukocyte antigen identical donors. Over a 3-year period, a total of 134 paired donor transplants were performed, including 117 incompatible pairs and 17 compatible pairs. All transplants were done with negative flow cytometry crossmatches and five were done with desensitization combined with paired donation. Kidney paired donation transplants included two-way and three-way exchanges as well as three chains initiated by nondirected donors. Of the sensitized recipients transplanted by paired donation, 44% had calculated panel reactive antibody levels greater than 80%. Transplantation of females and prior transplant recipients was significantly higher with paired donation. Only three episodes of rejection occurred and no transplants were lost due to rejection. These data highlight the potential of kidney paired donation and suggest that all transplant centers should be actively engaged in paired donation to increase access to live donor transplantation.

Call to Develop a Standard Acquisition Charge Model for Kidney Paired Donation

We propose a Medicare Demonstration Project to develop a standard acquisition charge for kidney paired donation. A new payment strategy is required because Medicare and commercial insurance companies may not directly pay living donor costs intended to lead to transplantation of a beneficiary of a different insurance provider. Until the 1970s, when organ procurement organizations were empowered to serve as financial intermediaries to pay the upfront recovery expenses for deceased donor kidneys before knowing the identity of the recipient, there existed similar limitations in the recovery and placement of deceased donor organs. Analogous to the recovery of deceased donor kidneys, kidney paired donation requires the evaluation of living donors before identifying their recipient. Tissue typing, crossmatching and transportation of living donors or their kidneys represent additional financial barriers. Finally, the administrative expenses of the organizations that identify and coordinate kidney paired donation transplantation require reimbursement akin to that necessary for organ procurement organizations. To expand access to kidney paired donation for more patients, we propose a model to reimburse paired donation expenses analogous to the proven strategy used for over 30 years to pay for deceased donor solid organ transplantation in America.