Managing the Costs of Routine Follow-up Care After Living Kidney Donation: a Review and Survey of Contemporary Experience, Practices, and Challenges

Evaluating Risk in Kidney Living Donors

Kidney donation is a safe procedure for carefully screened donors. The growing shortage of organs and improved survival rates among recipients of living donor transplants have broadened the criteria for acceptable living donors, including older individuals and those with pre-existing health conditions. Consequently, ensuring both the short- and long-term safety of living donors is of paramount importance. The primary objectives are to prevent the need for kidney replacement therapy, major cardiovascular events, or premature death. Lifelong monitoring of living donors is essential to facilitate early treatment for preventable illnesses. To this end, annual follow-up is generally recommended, which should minimally include an assessment of blood pressure, body mass index, kidney function, albuminuria, lifestyle factors, and general wellbeing. However, the management of these risk factors and treatment targets in this population remain inadequately defined. Recommendations for genetic counseling in cases of living-related donation also remain inconsistent. The aim of this mini-review is to address the challenges in evaluating the evidence on the long-term consequences of kidney donation, particularly concerning the risk of developing end-stage kidney disease, cardiovascular mortality, gestational complications, and hypertension. This article aligns with the ESOT call for action to promote living kidney donation and EKITA's mission.

Identifying the Views and Needs of Family Physicians on Providing Care to Living Kidney Donors: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Optimizing the long-term care and follow-up of living kidney donors (LKDs) has been challenging, and prior LKDs have reported suboptimal healthcare experiences. Long-term care of LKDs is largely undertaken by primary care practitioners such as family physicians (FPs). We conducted a cross-sectional survey of Canadian FPs (n = 151). In our sample, 21.9% of participants reported that ≥1 patient had expressed interest in becoming a LKD, and 39.9% provided care to prior LKDs. While 55.5% knew how to find information on living kidney donation, 75.5% reported that information was not available in their practice. Only a minority had formal training in living kidney donation (<5%), and self-reported knowledge was low (median = 3 [scale 1 = not strong to 10 = very strong]). Knowledge improved significantly with educational activities, resources, experience, and practice needs. Attitudes toward living kidney donation were generally favorable with 71.5% stating that FPs should be involved in post-donation care. Clinical care guidelines (78.8%) were the most desired resource, followed by clear communication and reliable contact at transplant centers. Our findings inform the transplant community of an avenue to optimize LKD care by better-supporting FPs, who provide care to LKDs. This may enhance data collection on LKD outcomes and potentially increase donation rates.

Supporting Financial Neutrality in Donation of Organs, Cells, and Tissues

The avoidance of financial gain in the human body is an international ethical standard that underpins efforts to promote equity in donation and transplantation and to avoid the exploitation of vulnerable populations. The avoidance of financial loss due to donation of organs, tissues, and cells is also now recognized as an ethical imperative that fosters equity in donation and transplantation and supports the well-being of donors and their families. Nevertheless, there has been little progress in achieving financial neutrality in donations in most countries. We present here the findings of an international ethics working group convened in preparation for the 2023 Global Summit on Convergence in Transplantation, held in Santander, Spain, which was tasked with formulating recommendations for action to promote financial neutrality in donation. In particular, we discuss the potential difficulty of distinguishing interventions that address donation-related costs from those that may act as a financial incentive for donation, which may inhibit efforts to cover costs. We also outline some practical strategies to assist governments in designing, implementing, and evaluating policies and programs to support progress toward financial neutrality in donation.

Transition of Care of Stable Kidney Transplant Patients to Referring Nephrologists: A Survey of U.S. Transplant Program Staff

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We conducted a national survey to assess the opinions and experiences of transplant center staff related to processes of care graduation.

METHODS

Following IRB approval, medical staff at U.S. adult kidney transplant programs were surveyed using the Qualtrics survey platform (4/5/2022-10/05/2022). Respondents were invited via email and listservs of professional societies. If > 1 survey was submitted for a program, a selection hierarchy was utilized (e.g., prioritizing nephrologists' responses).

RESULTS

Respondents provided data from 46.7% of active programs (N = 92), representing 67% of the national kidney transplant volume. Most respondents (70%) were nephrologists. Full graduation to referring nephrologists was reported by 39% of transplant programs, with an additional 48% reporting partial graduation with ongoing co-management. Rationales for graduation were multifactorial, most commonly including patient travel distance (64%), maintenance of referral base (58%), continuity of care (58%), and center and/or patient burden (54%). Common reasons cited by programs for postgraduation return of care to the transplant center included worsening renal function (82%), malignancy (66%), opportunistic infection (63%), limited local nephrologist availability (60%), and pregnancy planning (57%). Additional coordinators and clinic staff were cited as needed to make transplant center perpetual care feasible by 78% of programs, with 71% stating that more clinicians are needed, while half thought more physical space or telemedicine are required.

CONCLUSIONS

Graduation of kidney transplant patients is common, with half of programs using a joint-care approach and another third reporting full return of care to the referring nephrologist. Expanded opportunities related to transplant care for the broad nephrology community are essential.

Indications, Techniques, and Barriers for Pancreas Transplant Biopsy: A Consensus Perspective From a Survey of US Centers

BACKGROUND

Pancreas transplant biopsy practices for the diagnosis of rejection or other pathologies are not well described.

METHODS

We conducted a survey of staff at US pancreas transplant programs (March 22, 2022, to August 22, 2022) to assess current program practices and perceptions about the utility and challenges in the performance and interpretation of pancreas allograft biopsies.

RESULTS

Respondents represented 65% (76/117) of active adult pancreas transplant programs, capturing 66% of recent pancreas transplant volume in the United States. Participants were most often nephrologists (52%), followed by surgeons (46%), and other staff (4%). Pancreas allograft biopsies were performed mostly by interventional radiologists (74%), followed by surgeons (11%), nephrologists (8%), and gastroenterologists (1%). Limitations in the radiologist's or biopsy performer's comfort level or expertise to safely perform a biopsy, or to obtain sufficient/adequate samples were the two most common challenges with pancreas transplant biopsies. Pancreas transplant biopsies were read by local pathologists at a majority (86%) of centers. Challenges reported with pancreas biopsy interpretation included poor reliability, lack of reporting of C4d staining, lack of reporting of rejection grading, and inconclusive interpretation of the biopsy. Staff at a third of responding programs (34%) stated that they rarely or never perform pancreas allograft biopsies and treat presumed rejection empirically.

CONCLUSIONS

This national survey identified significant variation in clinical practices related to pancreas allograft biopsies and potential barriers to pancreas transplant utilization across the United States. Consideration of strategies to improve program experience with percutaneous pancreas biopsy and to support optimal management of pancreas allograft rejection informed by histology is warranted.