Pre-emptive deceased-donor kidney transplant: A matched cohort study

What are the benefits of preemptive versus non-preemptive kidney transplantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Opting for a preemptive kidney transplant (PKT) can help avoid costs and morbidity associated with dialysis. However, while multiple studies have shown clinical benefits of PKT, other studies have not demonstrated this, leading to controversy in the literature regarding the exact benefits of PKT. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of PKT versus non-preemptive kidney transplantation (nPKT) in adult patients. Multiple databases were searched up to May 4, 2022. Independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion and extracted relevant data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist. Eighty-seven studies including 859,715 adult kidney transplant patients were included the review. The risk of patient death (relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.74 [0.60-0.91]) was significantly lower in PKT versus nPKT patients for living donor (LD) transplants, whereas the risk of overall graft loss was significantly lower in PKT compared to nPKT patients for both LD (0.72 [0.62-0.83]) as well as deceased donor (DD) transplants (0.80 [0.69-0.92]). The evidence suggests that LD PKT patients have a lower risk of patient death and graft loss compared to nPKT patients, and DD PKT patients have a lower risk of graft loss than nPKT patients.

Differences in medication adherence between preemptive and post-dialysis young kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The mechanisms underlying the superior graft survival associated with preemptive kidney transplantation, compared with transplantation following a period of dialysis, are unknown. We aimed to compare medication adherence between preemptively transplanted young kidney transplant recipients and those who received a transplant after an interval of dialysis.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of the Teen Adherence in Kidney transplant Effectiveness of Intervention Trial (TAKE-IT), in which adherence was assessed with electronic monitoring over 15 months among 11-24-year-old transplant recipients. Adherence scores were calculated for each day as 0%, 50%, or 100% (intake of none, half, or all prescribed doses). We used ordinal logistic regression, with generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures within each participant, to estimate the association between preemptive transplantation and adherence. The model was adjusted for sex, age at transplant, time since transplant, primary kidney disease, race, donor source, medication insurer, household income, and adherence intervention.

RESULTS

There were 43 preemptive transplant recipients and 103 who had been treated with dialysis. The median adherence score was 85.1% (IQR 81.3-88.9) for those preemptively transplanted, and 80.0% (IQR 76.7-83.4) for those transplanted after dialysis. Preemptively transplanted recipients had significantly higher odds of adherence than those dialyzed before transplantation (adjusted OR 1.76 95% CI 1.21-2.55; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptively transplanted patients showed significantly better adherence than those treated with dialysis before transplantation. This suggests that the superior outcomes observed among preemptive kidney transplant recipients may reflect selection of patients more likely to adhere to therapy. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.