Article

Risks and Outcomes of Living Donation

School of Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, United States
Advances in chronic kidney disease (Impact Factor: 2.42). 07/2012; 19(4):220-8. DOI: 10.1053/j.ackd.2011.09.005
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Living donors supply approximately 40% of renal allografts in the United States. Based on current data, perioperative mortality after donor nephrectomy is approximately 3 per 10,000 cases, and major and minor perioperative complications affect approximately 3% to 6% and 22% of donors, respectively. Donor nephrectomy does not appear to increase long-term mortality compared with controls, nor does it appear to increase ESRD risk among white donors. Within the donor population, the likelihood of postdonation chronic renal failure and medical comorbidities such as hypertension and diabetes appears to be relatively higher among some donor subgroups, such as African Americans and obese donors, but the impact of uninephrectomy on the lifetime risks of adverse events expected without nephrectomy in these subgroups has not yet been defined. As national follow-up of living donors in the United States is limited in scope, duration, and completeness, additional methods for quantifying risk among diverse living donors are needed. In addition to improved national collection of follow-up data, possible sources of information on donor outcomes may include focused studies with carefully defined control groups, and database integration projects that link national donor registration records to other data sources. Given the growth and evolving characteristics of the living donor population, as well as changes in surgical techniques, tracking of short- and long-term risks after living kidney donation is vital to support truly informed consent and to maintain public trust in living donation. The transplant community must persist in their efforts to accurately assess risk across demographically diverse living kidney donors.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
67 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Living kidney donors (LKDs) may feel more anxious about kidney failure now that they have only one kidney and the security of a second kidney is gone. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to develop and empirically validate a self-report scale for assessing fear of kidney failure in former LKDs. Participants were 364 former LKDs within the past 10 years at five U.S. transplant centers and 219 healthy non-donor controls recruited through Mechanical Turk who completed several questionnaires. Analyses revealed a unidimensional factor structure, excellent internal consistency (α = 0.88), and good convergent validity for the Fear of Kidney Failure questionnaire. Only 13% of former donors reported moderate to high fear of kidney failure. Non-white race (OR=2.9, P=0.01), genetic relationship with the recipient (OR=2.46, P=0.04), and low satisfaction with the donation experience (OR=0.49, P=0.002) were significant predictors of higher fear of kidney failure. We conclude that while mild anxiety about kidney failure is common, high anxiety about future renal failure among former LKDs is uncommon. The Fear of Kidney Failure questionnaire is reliable, valid, and easy to use in the clinical setting. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    Transplant International 03/2014; 27(6). DOI:10.1111/tri.12299 · 3.16 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Living donor kidney transplantation which involves performing a major surgical procedure on a healthy person solely to benefit another person has always involved dealing with difficult ethical issues. Beneficence, non-maleficence, donor autonomy, altruistic donor motivation, coercion-free donation, fully informed consent and avoidance of medical paternalism have been the dominant ethical principles governing this field ever since the first successful living donor kidney transplant in 1954. The increasing reliance on living donors due to the rapidly growing disparity between the number of patients awaiting transplantation and the availability of deceased donor kidneys has brought with it a variety of new ethical issues of even greater complexity. Issues such as confidentiality of donor and recipient medical information, the appropriateness of the invented medical excuse to avoid donation and the approach to misattributed paternity discovered during work-up for living donor transplantation have made the information to be disclosed prior to obtaining donor’s consent much more extensive. In this article, we review the current thinking and guidelines (which have evolved considerably over the past several decades) regarding these ethical issues using five illustrative case vignettes based on donors personally evaluated by us over the past 35 years.
    Transplantation Reviews 07/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.trre.2014.04.001 · 2.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To report the 6-month results of the first clinical uterus transplantation (UTx) trial. This type of transplantation may become a treatment of absolute uterine-factor infertility (AUFI). Prospective observational study. University hospital. Nine AUFI women and their live uterine donors, the majority being mothers. Live-donor UTx and low-dose induction immunosuppression. Data from preoperative investigations, surgery and follow-up for 6 months. Durations of donor and recipient surgery ranged from 10 to 13 hours and from 4 to 6 hours, respectively. No immediate perioperative complications occurred in any of the recipients. After 6 months, seven uteri remained viable with regular menses. Mild rejection episodes occurred in four of these patients. These rejection episodes were effectively reversed by corticosteroid boluses. The two graft losses were because of acute bilateral thrombotic uterine artery occlusions and persistent intrauterine infection. The results demonstrate the feasibility of live-donor UTx with a low-dose immunosuppressive protocol. NCT01844362.
    Fertility and sterility 02/2014; 101(5):1228-1236. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.02.024 · 4.30 Impact Factor