The long-term quality of life of living kidney donors: a multicenter cohort study

Analysis of sexual dysfunction development among male and female living kidney donors

INTRODUCTION

Living kidney donations (LKDs) face a persistent demand for patients with end-stage renal disease, emphasizing the importance of LKDs' growth and success. Although living kidney donors generally exhibit excellent survival rates, little research has explored the development of long-term sexual dysfunction following LKD.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to analyze differences in 5-year sexual dysfunction outcomes between male and female living kidney donors, utilizing the TriNetX database, a federated network of electronic medical records from multiple U.S. healthcare organizations.

METHODS

A propensity score-matched cohort study compared 45-year sexual dysfunction outcomes in adult male and female living kidney donors from December 2013 to December 2022. Cohorts were matched on age; sex; race and ethnicity; diabetes, cardiovascular, genitourinary, and psychiatric comorbidities; lifestyle-related factors; and medications that may impact normal sexual functioning. Primary outcomes included hazard ratio (HR) for decreased libido, sexual dysfunction (composite of male erectile dysfunction, ejaculatory disorders, vaginismus/dyspareunia, infertility, orgasmic disorders, arousal/desire disorders), and sexually transmitted diseases. Secondary outcomes assessed sex counseling and interpersonal relationship issues with spouses or partners.

RESULTS

The matched cohorts included 2315 patients each (male, female), and the mean age was 42.3 ± 12.5 years. At 5 years, male donors had a significantly higher HR for sexual dysfunction (HR, 3.768; 95% confidence interval, 1.929-7.358). Erectile dysfunction occurred in 1% of male patients, while vaginismus/dyspareunia affected <1% of female patients. Other sexual disorders, decreased libido, sexually transmitted diseases, and incidences of sexual and interspousal counseling were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Male living kidney donors faced a higher risk of developing sexual dysfunction 5 years after donation. While LKD remains a safe and viable alternative, clinicians and donors should be mindful of the potential association with sexual dysfunction postdonation. Further research may enhance support for the well-being of living kidney donors.

Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life in Non-Directed Versus Directed Kidney Donors: Implications for the Promotion of Non-Directed Donation

Living kidney donation has increased significantly, but little is known about the post-donation health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of non-directed donors (NDs) vs. directed donors (DDs). We thus examined the outcomes of 112 living kidney donors (82 NDs, 30 DDs). For the primary outcomes-namely, the mean physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores of the 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) questionnaire-scores were significantly higher for the NDs vs. the DDs (PCS: +2.69, MCS: +4.43). For secondary outcomes, NDs had shorter hospital stays (3.4 vs. 4.4 days), returned to physical activity earlier (45 vs. 60 days), exercised more before and after donation, and continued physical activity post-donation. Regression analyses revealed that donor type and white blood cell count were predictive of the PCS-12 score, and donor type was predictive of the MCS-12 score. Non-directed donation was predictive of a shorter hospital stay (by 0.78 days, p < 0.001) and the odds of having PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores above 50 were almost 10 and 16 times higher for NDs, respectively (p < 0.05). These findings indicate the safety and potential benefits of promoting non-directed donation. However, careful selection processes must be maintained to prevent harm and exploitation.

Delayed graft function in pediatric living donor kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Pediatric recipients of living donor kidneys have a low rate of delayed graft function (DGF). We examined the incidence, risk factors and outcomes of DGF in pediatric patients who received a living donor allograft.

METHODS

The STARfile was queried to examine all pediatric patients transplanted with a living donor kidney between 2000 and 2020. Donor and recipient demographic data were examined, as were survival and outcomes. Recipients were stratified into DGF and no DGF groups. DGF was defined as the need for dialysis within the first week after transplant.

RESULTS

6480 pediatric patients received a living donor (LD) kidney transplant during the study period. 269 (4.2%) developed DGF post-transplant. Donors were similar in age, creatinine, and cold ischemia time. Recipients of kidneys with DGF were similar in age, sensitization status and HLA mismatch. Focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) was the most common diagnosis in recipients with DGF, and allograft thrombosis was the most common cause of graft loss in this group. Small recipients (weight < 15 kg) were found to have a significantly higher rate of DGF. Length of stay doubled in recipients with DGF, and rejection rates were higher post-transplant. Recipients of LD kidneys who developed DGF had significantly worse 1 year allograft survival (67% vs. 98%, p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric living donor kidney transplant recipients who experience DGF have significantly poorer allograft survival. Optimizing the donor and recipient matching to avoid compounding risks may allow for better outcomes.

Perioperative transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulations as part of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for living donors undergoing nephrectomy: A randomized, controlled clinical trial

Objective

Living kidney donors (LKDs) experience perioperative anxiety. We designed the following study to evaluate the anxiolytic effect of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) during the perioperative period in a group of LKDs undergoing laparotomy nephrectomy.

Methods

LKDs were randomly assigned to either the TEAS or control group. Participants in the TEAS group received 30min of intervention (6-15 mA, 2-100 Hz), at Yintang (EX-HN-3), bilateral Taichong (LR3) and Neiguan (PC6) one day before surgery (D₀), before induction of anesthesia (D₁) and one day after surgery (D₂). The participants in the control group received the same placement of electrodes but without electrical stimulation. Venous blood was collected before each intervention. Anxiety levels and recovery profiles were recorded.

Results

LKDs in the TEAS group had lower anxiety level than those in the control group at D₁, D₂ and three days after surgery (D₃). The percentage differences were: 33.3%, 25.0%, and 22.2%; [95% confidence interval (CI), (-55.1%, -11.6%), (-47.4%, -2.6%), and (-42.3%, -2.2%); P = 0.005, P = 0.034, and P = 0.035; respectively]. LKDs who received TEAS had better sleep quality and short-term recovery profiles than those in the control group. The plasma levels of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) and melatonin (MT) in the TEAS group were significantly higher than those in the control group at D₁ and D₂ (5-HT: P = 0.001, and P < 0.001; MT: P = 0.006, and P = 0.001). At the 3-month follow up, fewer LKDs in the TEAS group had incisional pain when compared to the control group (P = 0.032).

Conclusions

Perioperative TEAS decreased perioperative anxiety and facilitated postoperative recovery in the LKDs, and potential decreased the development of chronic pain. Trial Registration: Registered at ChiCTR2000029891, http://www.chictr.org.cn/listbycreater.aspx.

Long-term risk of all-cause mortality in live kidney donors: a matched cohort study

Background

Long-term outcomes of live kidney donors remain controversial, although this information is crucial for selecting potential donors. Thus, this study compared the long-term risk of all-cause mortality between live kidney donors and healthy control.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study including donors from seven tertiary hospitals in South Korea. Persons who underwent voluntary health screening were included as controls. We created a matched control group considering age, sex, era, body mass index, baseline hypertension, diabetes, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and dipstick albuminuria. The study outcome was progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and all-cause mortality as identified in the linked claims database.

Results

We screened 1,878 kidney donors and 78,115 health screening examinees from 2003 to 2016. After matching, 1,701 persons remained in each group. The median age of the matched study subjects was 44 years, and 46.6% were male. Among the study subjects, 2.7% and 16.6% had underlying diabetes and hypertension, respectively. There were no ESKD events in the matched donor and control groups. There were 24 (1.4%) and 12 mortality cases (0.7%) in the matched donor and control groups, respectively. In the age-sex adjusted model, the risk for all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the donor group than in the control group. However, the significance was not retained after socioeconomic status was included as a covariate (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-3.80).

Conclusion

All-cause mortality was similar in live kidney donors and matched non-donor healthy controls with similar health status and socioeconomic status in the Korean population.

[Safety of the Living Kidney Donor - The German National Register - Development and Structure of a National Register in the Health Service Research]

The German living donor register Safety of the Living Kidney Donor - The German National Register (SOLKID-GNR) collects data of the medical and psychosocial outcome of living kidney donors. For the first time in Germany, a prospective data collection allows a scientifically based long-term analysis of how a living kidney donation influences the psychological and physical health of living kidney donors. This will contribute directly to improve the information and care of living kidney donors.

Living Kidney Donors' Financial Expenses and Mental Health

BACKGROUND

Living kidney donors incur donation-related expenses, but how these expenses impact postdonation mental health is unknown.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, the association between mental health and donor-incurred expenses (both out-of-pocket costs and lost wages) was examined in 821 people who donated a kidney at one of the 12 transplant centers in Canada between 2009 and 2014. Mental health was measured by the RAND Short Form-36 Health Survey along with Beck Anxiety Inventory and Beck Depression Inventory.

RESULTS

A total of 209 donors (25%) reported expenses of >5500 Canadian dollars. Compared with donors who incurred lower expenses, those who incurred higher expenses demonstrated significantly worse mental health-related quality of life 3 months after donation, with a trend towards worse anxiety and depression, after controlling for predonation mental health-related quality of life and other risk factors for psychological distress. Between-group differences for donors with lower and higher expenses on these measures were no longer significant 12 months after donation.

CONCLUSIONS

Living kidney donor transplant programs should ensure that adequate psychosocial support is available to all donors who need it, based on known and unknown risk factors. Efforts to minimize donor-incurred expenses and to better support the mental well-being of donors need to continue. Further research is needed to investigate the effect of donor reimbursement programs, which mitigate donor expenses, on postdonation mental health.

The Evolution of Living Donor Nephrectomy Program at A Hellenic Transplant Center. Laparoscopic vs. Open Donor Nephrectomy: Single-Center Experience

Since its introduction in 1995, laparoscopic nephrectomy has emerged as the preferred surgical approach for living donor nephrectomy. Given the ubiquity of the surgical procedure and the need for favorable outcomes, as it is an elective operation on otherwise healthy individuals, it is imperative to ensure appropriate preoperative risk stratification and anticipate intraoperative challenges. The aim of the present study was to compare peri-and postoperative outcomes of living kidney donors (LD), who had undergone laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN), with a control group of those who had undergone open nephrectomy (ODN). Health-related quality of life (QoL) was also assessed using the validated SF-36 questionnaire. Data from 252 LD from a single transplant center from March 2015 to December 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. In total, 117 donors in the LDN and 135 in the ODN groups were assessed. Demographics, type of transplantation, BMI, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, peri- and postoperative complications, renal function at discharge and QoL were recorded and compared between the two groups using Stata 13.0 software. There was no difference in baseline characteristics, nor in the prevalence of peri-and postoperative complications, with a total complication rate of 16% (mostly minor, Clavien–Dindo grade II) in both groups, while a different pattern of surgical complications was noticed between them. Duration of surgery was significantly longer in the ODN group (median 240 min vs. 160 min in LDN, p < 0.01), warm ischemia time was longer in the LDN group (median 6 min vs.2 min in ODN, p < 0.01) and length of hospital stay shorter in the LDN group (median 3 days vs. 7 days in ODN). Conversion rate from laparoscopic to open surgery was 2.5%. There was a drop in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at discharge of 36 mL/min in the LDN and 32 mL/min in the ODN groups, respectively (p = 0.03). No death, readmission or reoperation were recorded. There was a significant difference in favor of LDN group for each one of the eight items of the questionnaire (SF1–SF8). As for the two summary scores, while the total physical component summary (PCS) score was comparable between the two groups (57.87 in the LDN group and 57.07 in the ODN group), the mental component summary (MCS) score was significantly higher (62.14 vs. 45.22, p < 0.001) in the LDN group. This study provides evidence that minimally invasive surgery can be performed safely, with very good short-term outcomes, providing several benefits for the living kidney donor, thereby contributing to expanding the living donor pool, which is essential, especially in countries with deceased-donor organ shortage.

Evidence of Resilience in Kidney Donors: A New York Statewide Cohort Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Donor nephrectomy (DN) is a procedure performed to provide recipients with a kidney to treat end-stage renal disease. The following analysis evaluated depression diagnosis in DN patients compared to controls.

METHODS

DN patients and matched controls were identified between 2000 and 2009 from the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. Cohorts were tracked for depression incidence. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors of a postoperative depression diagnosis.

RESULTS

The total study cohort included 2108 DN cases and 2108 controls. In both donors and controls, the baseline rate of depression was 0.95% (n = 20). The 5-year incidence of depression diagnosis after exposure increased in both cohorts (donors: 2.5%, n = 53; controls: 7.2%, n = 152; P < .001). The 5-year relative risk for developing depression was 2.65 (CI 1.59-4.42, P = .0002) in donors and 7.60 (CI 4.79-12.07, P < .001) in controls. On multivariable regression, being a donor was associated with reduced risk of developing postoperative depression (OR = 0.322, CI 0.233-0.445, P < .001), and the greatest risk factor for postoperative depression was a prior depressive diagnosis (OR = 7.811, CI 3.814-15.997, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis shows that the strongest risk factor for depression was a prior diagnosis of depression. However, willingness to undergo donor nephrectomy is associated with less subsequent depression than the control population, suggesting that kidney donors may be a more resilient cohort.

Psychosocial risk factors for impaired health-related quality of life in living kidney donors: results from the ELIPSY prospective study

Living kidney donors' follow-up is usually focused on the assessment of the surgical and medical outcomes. Whilst the psychosocial follow-up is advocated in literature. It is still not entirely clear which exact psychosocial factors are related to a poor psychosocial outcome of donors. The aim of our study is to prospectively assess the donors' psychosocial risks factors to impaired health-related quality of life at 1-year post-donation and link their psychosocial profile before donation with their respective outcomes. The influence of the recipient's medical outcomes on their donor's psychosocial outcome was also examined. Sixty donors completed a battery of standardized psychometric instruments (quality of life, mental health, coping strategies, personality, socio-economic status), and ad hoc items regarding the donation process (e.g., motivations for donation, decision-making, risk assessment, and donor-recipient relationship). Donors' 1-year psychosocial follow-up was favorable and comparable with the general population. So far, cluster-analysis identified a subgroup of donors (28%) with a post-donation reduction of their health-related quality of life. This subgroup expressed comparatively to the rest, the need for more pre-donation information regarding surgery risks, and elevated fear of losing the recipient and commitment to stop their suffering.

Hand-Assisted Retroperitoneoscopic Donor Nephrectomy Compared to Anterior Approach Open Donor Nephrectomy: Improved Long-Term Physical Component Score in Health-Related Quality of Life in Living Kidney Donors

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life (HRQL), fatigue, anxiety, and depression are crucial for the living kidney donor (LKD). Follow-up data for HRQL of LKDs comparing surgical techniques, especially regarding hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP), are sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of abdominal wall trauma minimized by HARP in comparison to open anterior approach donor nephrectomy (AA) on HRQL and additional psychosocial aspects of LKDs during the long-term follow-up.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study comparing psychosocial aspects of LKD between HARP and AA.

RESULTS

This study included 100 LKDs (68 HARP, 28 AA, and 4 were excluded secondary to incomplete data). The time to follow-up was 22.6 ± 11.7 (HARP) vs 58.7 ± 13.9 (AA) months (P < .005). Complications ≥3a° due to Clavien-Dindo classification was 0% in both groups. There were higher scores in all physical aspects for HARP donors vs AA donors at that time (physical function: 89.8 ± 14.6 vs 80.0 ± 19.9, P = .008, and the physical component score: 53.9 ± 7.6 vs 48.6 ± 8.5, P = .006). One year later (follow-up time + 12 months), HRQL for HARP donors was still higher. Mental items showed no significant differences. HARP donors showed better physical scores compared to the age-matched nondonor population (AA donors had lower scores). Neither the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory-20 (MFI-20) or the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) showed any differences between the 2 groups. Fatigue scores were higher for HARP and for AA compared to the age-matched population.

CONCLUSIONS

LKDs undergoing HARP showed better physical performance as part of HRQL in the long-term follow-up.

Canadian Society of Transplantation and Canadian Society of Nephrology Commentary on the 2017 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors

Purpose of review:

To review an international guideline on the evaluation and care of living kidney donors and provide a commentary on the applicability of the recommendations to the Canadian donor population.

Sources of information:

We reviewed the 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors and compared this guideline to the Canadian 2014 Kidney Paired Donation (KPD) Protocol for Participating Donors.

Methods:

A working group was formed consisting of members from the Canadian Society of Transplantation and the Canadian Society of Nephrology. Members were selected to have representation from across Canada and in various subspecialties related to living kidney donation, including nephrology, surgery, transplantation, pediatrics, and ethics.

Key findings:

Many of the KDIGO Guideline recommendations align with the KPD Protocol recommendations. Canadian researchers have contributed to much of the evidence on donor evaluation and outcomes used to support the KDIGO Guideline recommendations.

Limitations:

Certain outcomes and risk assessment tools have yet to be validated in the Canadian donor population.

Implications:

Living kidney donors should be counseled on the risks of postdonation outcomes given recent evidence, understanding the limitations of the literature with respect to its generalizability to the Canadian donor population.

Psychosocial consequences of living kidney donation: a prospective multicentre study on health-related quality of life, donor-recipient relationships and regret

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have indicated decreased health-related quality of life (HRQoL) shortly after kidney donation, returning to baseline in the longer term. However, a subgroup of donors experiences persistent HRQoL problems. To identify which HRQoL aspects are impacted most by the donation and to identify at-risk donors, more specific insight into psychosocial donation consequences is needed.

METHODS

The current study examined the HRQoL course, donor-perceived consequences of donation for donors, recipients and donor-recipient relationships, and regret up to 12 months post-donation in donors from seven Dutch transplantation centres. Kidney donor candidates (n = 588) completed self-report questionnaires early in the screening procedure, of which 361 (61%) donated their kidney.

RESULTS

Data for 230 donors (64%) with complete assessments before donation and 6 and 12 months post-donation were analysed. Results indicated that donor physical HRQoL was comparable at all time points, except for an increase in fatigue that lasted up to 12 months post-donation. Mental HRQoL decreased at 6 months post-donation, but returned to baseline at 12 months. Donors reported large improvements in recipient's functioning and a smaller influence of the recipient's kidney disease or transplantation on the donor's life over time. A subgroup experienced negative donation consequences with 14% experiencing regret 12 months post-donation. Predictors of regret were more negative health perceptions and worse social functioning 6 months post-donation. The strongest baseline predictors of higher fatigue levels after donation were more pre-donation fatigue, worse general physical functioning and a younger age.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research should examine predictors of HRQoL after donation to improve screening and to provide potential interventions in at-risk donors.

Post-donation satisfaction in kidney transplantation: a survey of living donors in Japan

Background

No studies using a valid, standardized method to measure post-donation satisfaction levels among living kidney donors (LKDs) have been published.

Methods

Donor satisfaction levels were measured using the Japanese version of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8), a validated, self-report questionnaire. To identify factors related to post-donation satisfaction levels, we compared donors’ sociodemographic and psychological characteristics and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), using the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), as well as recipients’ clinical characteristics and SF-36 scores between donors with and without low satisfaction. In addition, donors’ perceptions of the donation results and transplant procedure were assessed using measures that we developed.

Results

The mean (standard deviation [SD]) CSQ-8 score for the 195 participants was 26.9 (3.4). Twenty-nine (14.9%) respondents with total scores < 1 SD below the mean CSQ-8 score were placed into the low satisfaction group. Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that lower perceptions of receiving adequate information prior to transplantation (odds ratio [OR] = 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.079–0.379; p < 0.001), lower optimism according to the Life Orientation Test (OR = 1.24; 95% CI = 1.045–1.470; p = 0.014), and increased serum creatinine levels in the paired recipient (OR = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.250–1.011; p = 0.054) independently increased the odds of having less satisfaction with donation.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that careful pre-donation education and more detailed informed consent may be needed, especially in LKDs with low constitutional optimism.

Multicenter investigation of the reliability and validity of the live donor assessment tool as an enhancement to the psychosocial evaluation of living donors

The live donor assessment tool (LDAT) is the first psychosocial assessment tool developed to standardize live donor psychosocial evaluations. A multicenter study was conducted to explore reliability and validity of the LDAT and determine its ability to enhance the psychosocial evaluation beyond its center of origin. Four transplant programs participated, each with their own team of evaluators and unique demographics. Liver and kidney living donors (LDs) undergoing both standard psychosocial evaluation and LDAT from June 2015 to September 2016 were studied. LDAT interrater reliability, associations between LDAT scores and psychosocial evaluation outcome, and psychosocial outcomes postdonation were tested. 386 LD evaluations were compared and had a mean LDAT score of 67.34 ± 7.57. In 140 LDs with two LDATs by different observers, the interrater scores correlated (r = 0.63). LDAT scores at each center and overall stratified to the conventional grouping of psychosocial risk level. LDAT scores of 131 subjects who proceeded with donation were expectedly lower in LDs requiring postdonation counseling (t = -2.78, P = .01). The LDAT had good reliability between raters and predicted outcome of the psychosocial evaluation across centers. It can be used to standardize language among clinicians to communicate psychosocial risk of LD candidates and assist teams when anticipating postdonation psychosocial needs.

Risks of Living Kidney Donation: Current State of Knowledge on Outcomes Important to Donors

In the past decade, there have been increasing efforts to better define and quantify the short- and long-term risks of living kidney donation. Recent studies have expanded upon the previous literature by focusing on outcomes that are important to potential and previous donors, applying unique databases and/or registries to follow large cohorts of donors for longer periods of time, and comparing outcomes with healthy nondonor controls to estimate attributable risks of donation. Leading outcomes important to living kidney donors include kidney health, surgical risks, and psychosocial effects of donation. Recent data support that living donors may experience a small increased risk of severe CKD and ESKD compared with healthy nondonors. For most donors, the 15-year risk of kidney failure is <1%, but for certain populations, such as young, black men, this risk may be higher. New risk prediction tools that combine the effects of demographic and health factors, and innovations in genetic risk markers are improving kidney risk stratification. Minor perioperative complications occur in 10%-20% of donor nephrectomy cases, but major complications occur in <3%, and the risk of perioperative death is <0.03%. Generally, living kidney donors have similar or improved psychosocial outcomes, such as quality of life, after donation compared with before donation and compared with nondonors. Although the donation process should be financially neutral, living kidney donors may experience out-of-pocket expenses and lost wages that may or may not be completely covered through regional or national reimbursement programs, and may face difficulties arranging subsequent life and health insurance. Living kidney donors should be fully informed of the perioperative and long-term risks before making their decision to donate. Follow-up care allows for preventative care measures to mitigate risk and ongoing surveillance and reporting of donor outcomes to inform prior and future living kidney donors.

Estimating the Net Utility Gains Among Donors and Recipients of Adult Living Donor Kidney Transplant

OBJECTIVES

Living donor kidney transplant relieves the disease burden of patients with end-stage renal disease but may shorten donor life expectancy; however, their quality of life (QOL) is preserved. Nevertheless, the magnitude of the net gain of this procedure is unknown. We evaluated the QOL of both donors and recipients concurrently and calculated the net utility gain.

METHODS

We recruited 210 subjects who visited the kidney transplantation clinic of a university hospital. Subjects were asked to complete the 5-level EQ-5D-based questionnaire, and patient characteristics were extracted from their medical records. We performed multivariate tobit models analysis to evaluate the QOL change caused by transplant surgery and subsequently ran computational simulations to determine the net utility gains of donors and recipients. We also performed sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

After excluding 16 answers with missing data, we analyzed 203 answers in total. After the transplant surgery, recipients gained 0.07 in utility value while donors lost 0.04. In the net utility analysis, we found that the quality-adjusted life years gained ranged from 7.2 to 7.8 in the most favorable case observed in the combination of middle-aged recipients and elderly donors. Assuming no utility discount, the most favorable combination was that with older donors and younger recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicated that the QOL improvement in recipients was larger than the loss among donors. When calculating the net utilities, a combination of middle-aged recipients and elderly donors yielded the largest net utility, but this was likely derived from assumption in the discount of QOL.

Withdrawal of the Decision to Donate Kidney by Living Related Donors: A Single-center Study in Japan

BACKGROUND

In Japan, 90% of kidney transplantations involve living related donors. A third-party interview is conducted during latter stages of preparation for transplantation to ensure the donor's voluntary decision-making. In this study, we investigated the factors responsible for withdrawal of decision for kidney donation by related living donors after third-party interview.

METHODS

Related living donor candidates were divided into 2 groups based on their final decision: those who finally donated the kidney (FDG; n = 435); and those who withdrew their decision after third-party interview (WG; n = 11). The psychosocial and medical variables were compared and the reasons for withdrawal were investigated.

RESULTS

Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that none of the variables were significantly related to WG. Six categories of reasons for withdrawal were identified: "avoiding pregnancy risk"; "selecting alternative treatment"; "avoiding physical burden for donor"; "recipients' intemperance"; "need to take more time for decision-making"; and "psychological pressure."

CONCLUSION

A certain number of donor candidates withdrew their decision for different reasons, even in the latter stages of the transplant preparation. Careful verification of the donor candidates' individual situation and provision of adequate information and time are important to protect the donor's right to refuse.

Helping More Patients Receive a Living Donor Kidney Transplant

The best treatment option for many patients with kidney failure is a kidney transplant from a living donor. Countries that successfully increase their rate of living kidney donation will decrease their reliance on dialysis, the most expensive and high-risk form of kidney replacement therapy. Outlined here are some barriers that prevent some patients from pursuing living kidney donation and current knowledge on some potential solutions to these barriers. Also described are strategies to promote living kidney donation in a defensible system of practice. Safely increasing the rate of living kidney donation will require better programs and policies to improve the experiences of living donors and their recipients, to safeguard the practice for years to come.

Understanding the sex disparity in living kidney donation

Living donors are the preferred source of organs for kidney transplantation, which is the treatment modality of choice for end-stage kidney disease. Health care systems widely promote living kidney donation. However, women are consistently overrepresented among living donors. The reasons behind the sex-based disparity in living kidney donation remain poorly understood. Compared to women, men possess a greater amount of kidney function, and the higher deceased donation rate among men reflects their higher overall kidney quality. A plausible medical explanation for the sex-based disparity in living kidney donation includes an uncompromising emphasis on preserving donor health, with less emphasis placed on organ quality, which is the main criterion in deceased donor selection. On the other hand, consent to deceased donation is also greater in women, indicating their greater desire to donate even though fewer women actually become deceased donors. Therefore, nonmedical reasons for the sex disparity in living donation must be sought. Increased empathic distress or emotional memory; a greater sense of responsibility, urgency, and impulsiveness with increased reaction to empathy; a different body image; and a different social status may all contribute to greater living kidney donation in women. Economic inequity may be the singular explanation when personal worth links to economic worth. To better understand the sex disparity in living kidney donation, we need better data on the reasons behind both nondonation and donor rejection after evaluation in clinical practice. Nondirected living kidney donation provides unique opportunities to minimize factors such as emotional distress, empathy, and impulsiveness. More liberal acceptance criteria for donors with isolated medical abnormalities and testing legitimate donor reimbursement strategies based on actual income levels rather than a fixed amount can assist in both ascertaining the reasons behind the sex disparity in living kidney donation and increasing overall living kidney donation rates.

Anxiety, depression, and regret of donation in living kidney donors

Background

Previous studies have reported a wide range of prevalence of post-donation anxiety, depression, and regret in living kidney donors (LKDs). It is also unclear what risk factors are associated with these outcomes.

Methods

We screened 825 LKDs for anxiety and depression using 2-item GAD-2 and PHQ-2 scales and asked about regret.

Results

Overall, 5.5% screened positive for anxiety, 4.2% for depression, and 2.1% reported regretting their donation. While there was moderate correlation between positive anxiety and depression screens (r = 0.52), there was no correlation between regret and positive screens (r < 0.1 for both). A positive anxiety screen was more likely in LKDs with a positive depression screen (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 13.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.78–27.74, p < 0.001). Similarly, a positive depression screen was more likely in LKDs with a positive anxiety screen (aRR 19.50, 95% CI 6.94–54.81, p < 0.001), as well as in those whose recipients experienced graft loss (aRR 5.38, 95% CI 1.29–22.32, p = 0.02). Regret was more likely in LKDs with a positive anxiety screen (aRR 5.68, 95% CI 1.20–26.90, p = 0.03). This was a single center cross-sectional study which may limit generalizability and examination of causal effects. Also, due to the low prevalence of adverse psychosocial outcomes, we may lack power to detect some associations between donor characteristics and anxiety, depression, or regret.

Conclusions

Although there is a low prevalence of anxiety, depression, and regret of donation among LKDs, these are interrelated conditions and a positive screen for one condition should prompt evaluation for other conditions.

Multivariate Analysis of Health-related Quality of Life in Donors After Live Kidney Donation

BACKGROUND

Live-kidney donation has a low mortality rate. Evidence suggests that live-kidney donors experience a quality of life (QoL) comparable to or even superior to that of the general population. There is limited information on factors associated with a decrease in QoL in particular for baseline factors, which would improve information to the donor, donor selection, and convalescence.

METHODS

QoL data on 501 live donors included in three prospective studies between 2001 and 2010 were used. The 36-item short form health survey (SF-36) was used to measure QoL up to 1 year after the procedure. Longitudinal effects on both the mental (MCS) and physical component scales (PCS) were analyzed with multilevel linear regression analyses. Baseline variables were age, gender, body mass index (BMI), pain, operation type, and comorbidity. Other covariates were loss of the graft, glomerular filtration rate, and recipient complications.

RESULTS

After 1 year we observed a small decrease in PCS (effect size = -0.24), whereas the MCS increased (effect size = 0.32). Both PCS and MCS were still well above the norm of the general Dutch population. Factors associated with a change in PCS were BMI (Cohen's d = -0.17 for 5 BMI points) and age (d = -0.13 for each 10 years older).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, QoL after live-donor nephrectomy is excellent. A lowered PCS is related to age and body weight. Expectations towards a decreased postoperative QoL at 1 year are unjustified. However, one should keep in mind that older and obese donors may develop a reduced physical QoL after live-kidney donation.

Positive and Negative Affects in Living Kidney Donors

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify the factors influencing the positive and negative affects and the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of living kidney donors.

METHODS

With the use of a cross-sectional study design and a structured questionnaire, information on the basic characteristics, positive affect, negative affect, and HRQOL of 41 living kidney donors were compared.

RESULTS

The negative affect in living kidney donors was similar to that of the general population, but the positive affect was slightly lower. The physical HRQOL of living kidney donors was slightly higher than that of the general population, and the mental HRQOL was similar. Female donors showed a greater positive affect than male donors. The donors who were siblings of the recipients showed a more negative affect. Donors without chronic disease and with good perceived physical health showed improved positive affect, negative affect, and mental HRQOL. Furthermore, living kidney donors with better positive and negative affects showed improved physical and mental HRQOLs.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical health providers should evaluate and determine the positive affect, negative affect, and quality of life of living kidney donors, especially in men, siblings of the recipients, those with chronic disease, and those with poorer perceived physical health. Moreover, psychosocial interventions should be provided to improve these factors.

Validation of Living Donor Nephrectomy Codes

Background:

Use of administrative data for outcomes assessment in living kidney donors is increasing given the rarity of complications and challenges with loss to follow-up.

Objective:

To assess the validity of living donor nephrectomy in health care administrative databases compared with the reference standard of manual chart review.

Design:

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting:

5 major transplant centers in Ontario, Canada.

Patients:

Living kidney donors between 2003 and 2010.

Measurements:

Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV).

Methods:

Using administrative databases, we conducted a retrospective study to determine the validity of diagnostic and procedural codes for living donor nephrectomies. The reference standard was living donor nephrectomies identified through the province’s tissue and organ procurement agency, with verification by manual chart review. Operating characteristics (sensitivity and PPV) of various algorithms using diagnostic, procedural, and physician billing codes were calculated.

Results:

During the study period, there were a total of 1199 living donor nephrectomies. Overall, the best algorithm for identifying living kidney donors was the presence of 1 diagnostic code for kidney donor (ICD-10 Z52.4) and 1 procedural code for kidney procurement/excision (1PC58, 1PC89, 1PC91). Compared with the reference standard, this algorithm had a sensitivity of 97% and a PPV of 90%. The diagnostic and procedural codes performed better than the physician billing codes (sensitivity 60%, PPV 78%).

Limitations:

The donor chart review and validation study was performed in Ontario and may not be generalizable to other regions.

Conclusions:

An algorithm consisting of 1 diagnostic and 1 procedural code can be reliably used to conduct health services research that requires the accurate determination of living kidney donors at the population level.

Partnership Satisfaction in Living Kidney Donors

Due to organ shortage, living kidney donation is gaining increasing importance. Medical progress enables a successful transplantation between unrelated individuals, even individuals with AB0-incompatibilities. Spouses are the largest group of living kidney donors. The aim of this study was to assess partnership status and partnership satisfaction in living kidney donors. In the cross-sectional study we investigated 361 living kidney donors. The time since donation ranged between 1 and 38 years. The partnership satisfaction was assessed with the German version of the Quality of Marriage Index. We compared the donor sample with a representative German population sample (n = 1995). In addition, we compared donors who have donated to their partner (spouse donors) to those who have donated to someone else (non-spouse donors). In comparison to the population sample significantly more kidney donors were living in a relationship (82 vs. 60%). Most donors reported an unchanged (76.6%) or improved (20.5%) relationship to the recipient since transplantation. A significantly higher partnership satisfaction could be found in the donor sample compared to the population sample which was mainly due to a higher partnership satisfaction of the spouse donors compared to the non-spouse donors. High partnership satisfaction in living kidney donors might be an indicator for a successful selection process before transplantation. Alternatively, kidney donation might have a stabilizing or even positive impact on the partnership. Due to the design of our study causative interpretations cannot be made. Therefore, prospective studies are required to assess partnership satisfaction before and after living kidney donation.

[Outcome of living kidney donors for transplantation]

Nowadays, several treatments exist to treat terminal chronic renal failure. Best results for the recipients are obtained with kidney transplantation concerning mortality and quality of life. Transplantation is also the cheaper option for society. Living kidney donation raises the issue of the becoming of the donor, an absolutely healthy subject who gets to a surgical procedure. The becoming of living kidney donors has been compared with the one of controls subjects in several studies. The evaluations focused on the complications of nephrectomy in the short and long-term: kidney failure, hypertension, proteinuria, possibility of pregnancy, quality of life, and mortality. The first results did not show any risk linked to kidney donation, compared to general population. However, since 2013, kidney donors were found at higher risk for kidney failure and even for mortality, compared with controls selected like donor candidates. The risk of kidney donation is nevertheless acceptable and minimal, on the condition of rigorous selection of candidates and regular follow-up.

The ELPAT living organ donor Psychosocial Assessment Tool (EPAT): from 'what' to 'how' of psychosocial screening - a pilot study

Thorough psychosocial screening of donor candidates is required in order to minimize potential negative consequences and to strive for optimal safety within living donation programmes. We aimed to develop an evidence-based tool to standardize the psychosocial screening process. Key concepts of psychosocial screening were used to structure our tool: motivation and decision-making, personal resources, psychopathology, social resources, ethical and legal factors and information and risk processing. We (i) discussed how each item per concept could be measured, (ii) reviewed and rated available validated tools, (iii) where necessary developed new items, (iv) assessed content validity and (v) pilot-tested the new items. The resulting ELPAT living organ donor Psychosocial Assessment Tool (EPAT) consists of a selection of validated questionnaires (28 items in total), a semi-structured interview (43 questions) and a Red Flag Checklist. We outline optimal procedures and conditions for implementing this tool. The EPAT and user manual are available from the authors. Use of this tool will standardize the psychosocial screening procedure ensuring that no psychosocial issues are overlooked and ensure that comparable selection criteria are used and facilitate generation of comparable psychosocial data on living donor candidates.

KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors

The 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors is intended to assist medical professionals who evaluate living kidney donor candidates and provide care before, during and after donation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies that included critical appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations. However, many recommendations, for which there was no evidence or no systematic search for evidence was undertaken by the Evidence Review Team, were issued as ungraded expert opinion recommendations. The guideline work group concluded that a comprehensive approach to risk assessment should replace decisions based on assessments of single risk factors in isolation. Original data analyses were undertaken to produce a "proof-in-concept" risk-prediction model for kidney failure to support a framework for quantitative risk assessment in the donor candidate evaluation and defensible shared decision making. This framework is grounded in the simultaneous consideration of each candidate's profile of demographic and health characteristics. The processes and framework for the donor candidate evaluation are presented, along with recommendations for optimal care before, during, and after donation. Limitations of the evidence are discussed, especially regarding the lack of definitive prospective studies and clinical outcome trials. Suggestions for future research, including the need for continued refinement of long-term risk prediction and novel approaches to estimating donation-attributable risks, are also provided.In citing this document, the following format should be used: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Living Kidney Donor Work Group. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors. Transplantation. 2017;101(Suppl 8S):S1-S109.

Risk-Factor Profile of Living Kidney Donors: The Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Living Kidney Donor Registry 2004-2012

BACKGROUND

Recent literature suggests that living kidney donation may be associated with an excess risk of end-stage kidney disease and death. Efforts to maximize access to transplantation may result in acceptance of donors who do not fit within current guidelines, potentially placing them at risk of adverse long-term outcomes.

METHODS

We studied the risk profile of Australian and New Zealand living kidney donors using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Living Kidney Donor Registry over 2004 to 2012. We compared their predonation profile against national guidelines for donor acceptance.

RESULTS

The analysis included 2,932 donors (mean age 48.8 ± 11.2 years, range 18-81), 58% female and 87% Caucasian. Forty (1%) had measured glomerular filtration rate less than 80 mL/min; 32 (1%) had proteinuria >300 mg/day; 589 (20%) were hypertensive; 495 (18%) obese; 9 (0.3%) were diabetic while a further 55 (2%) had impaired glucose tolerance; and 218 (7%) were current smokers. Overall 767 donors (26%) had at least one relative contraindication to donation and 268 (9%) had at least one absolute contraindication according to national guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Divergence of current clinical practice from national guidelines has occurred. In the context of recent evidence demonstrating elevated long-term donor risk, rigorous follow-up and reporting of outcomes are now mandated to ensure safety and document any change in risk associated with such a divergence.

Psychosocial Outcomes 3 to 10 Years After Donation in the Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Studies of liver donors' psychosocial outcomes focus on the short term and rely largely on quality-of-life measures not specific to donation. We sought to examine long-term donation effects on 3 psychosocial domains: perceived physical, emotional, and socioeconomic outcomes.

METHODS

Individuals donating 3 to 10 years previously at 9 centers were eligible for telephone surveys. Survey responses were examined descriptively. Cluster analysis was used to identify distinct donor groups based on response profiles across psychosocial domains. Potential predictors of response profiles were evaluated with regression analysis.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventeen donors (66%) participated (M = 5.8 years postdonation, SD = 1.9). Fifteen percent to 48% of donors endorsed current donation-related physical health problems and concerns, and 7%-60% reported socioeconomic concerns (eg, insurance difficulties, financial expenditures). However, on average, donors experienced high psychological growth, and 90% felt positively about donation. Cluster analysis revealed 5 donor groups. One group showed high psychological benefit, with little endorsement of physical or socioeconomic concerns (15% of donors). Four groups showed less favorable profiles, with varying combinations of difficulties. The largest such group showed high endorsement of physical concerns and financial expenditures, and only modest psychological benefit (31% of donors). Men and nonHispanic whites were most likely to have unfavorable response profiles (Ps < 0.01). Compared with donors aged 19 to 30 years, older donors were less likely to have unfavorable profiles; these differences were significant for donors in the >40 to 50 year age group (Ps < 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Even many years postdonation, donors report adverse physical and socioeconomic effects, but positive emotional effects as well. Identification of response profiles and predictors may improve targeting of postdonation surveillance and care.

Opportunities for Engaging Patients in Kidney Research

Purpose:

The purpose of this review is to provide a summary of the rationale for engaging patients in research as well as to review the established and envisioned advantages and strategies for patient-researcher partnerships. The authors of this article, which include a patient and 4 researchers in kidney disease, discuss the expected benefits and opportunities for patient engagement in their respective research programs. The 4 research programs span the spectrum of kidney disease and focus on enhancing bone health, increasing living donor kidney transplants, improving medication adherence, and preventing kidney transplant rejection.

Sources of Information:

The sources of information for this review include published studies on the topics of patient engagement and the 4 research programs of the new investigators.

Key Findings:

(1) Patient, health care provider, and researcher partnerships can contribute useful insights capable of enhancing research in kidney disease. (2) Regardless of the research program, there are various strategies and opportunities for engagement of patients with lived experience across the various stages of research in kidney disease. (3) Envisioned advantages of patient-researcher partnerships include: targeting patient-identified research priorities, integrating patients’ experiential knowledge, improving study design and feasibility through patient-researcher input, facilitating dissemination of research findings to other patients, effectively responding to patient concerns about studies, and inspiring researchers to conduct their research.

Limitations:

The limitations of the current review include the relative scarcity of literature on patient engagement within the field of kidney disease.

Implications:

The findings of the current review suggest that it will be important for future studies to identify optimal strategies for patient engagement in setting research priorities, study design, participant recruitment, execution of research projects, and knowledge dissemination and translation.

Death of recipients after kidney living donation triples donors' risk of dropping out from follow-up: a retrospective study

Although kidney transplantation from the donation of a living donor is a safe treatment for end-stage renal disease, inferences about safety of living kidney donors might be biased by an informative censoring caused by the noninclusion of a substantial percentage of donors lost to follow-up. With the aim of assessing the presence of a potential informative censoring in living kidney donation outcomes of Catalan donors for a period of 12 years, 573 donors followed and lost to follow-up were compared. Losses of follow-up over time were also assessed by univariate and multivariate survival analysis, along with Cox regression. Younger and older ages, and the death of their recipient differentiated those donors who were lost to follow-up over time. The risk of dropping out from follow-up was more than twofold for the youngest and oldest donors, and almost threefold for those donors whose recipient died. Results of studies on postdonation outcomes of Catalan living kidney donors might have overlooked older and younger cases, and, remarkably, a percentage of donors whose recipient died. If these donors showed a higher incidence of psychological problems, conclusions about living donors' safety might be compromised thus emphasizing the necessity of sustained surveillance of donors and prompt identification of these cases.

Long-term experiences of Norwegian live kidney donors: qualitative in-depth interviews

OBJECTIVE

Live kidney donation is generally viewed as a welcome treatment option for severe kidney disease. However, there is a disparity in the body of research on donor experiences and postdonation outcome, and lack of knowledge on long-term consequences described by the donors. This study was conducted to provide insight into donors' subjective meanings and interpretation of their experiences ∼10 years after donation.

DESIGN

Qualitative explorative in-depth interviews. The sampling strategy employed maximum variation. Setting Oslo University Hospital is the national centre for organ transplantation and donation in Norway, and there are 26 local nephrology centres.

PARTICIPANTS

16 donors representing all parts of Norway who donated a kidney in 2001-2004 participated in the study. The interviews were analysed using an interpretative approach.

RESULTS

The analysis resulted in 4 main themes; the recipient outcome justified long-term experiences, family dynamics-tension still under the surface, ambivalence-healthy versus the need for regular follow-up, and life must go on. These themes reflect the complexity of live kidney donation, which fluctuated from positive experiences such as pride and feeling privileged to adverse experiences such as altered family relationships or reduced health.

CONCLUSIONS

Live kidney donors seemed to possess resilient qualities that enabled them to address the long-term consequences of donation. The challenge is to provide more uniform information about long-term consequences. In future research, resilient qualities could be a topic to explore in live donation.

Nephrectomy-induced reduced renal function and the health-related quality of life of living kidney donors

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the health impact of nephrectomy on living kidney donors (LKDs) by comparing the health-related quality of life (HrQOL) scores measured by Short Form-36 (SF36) between those with and without postdonation renal function impairment (PRFI).

METHODS

Eighty-two LKDs (47 females, mean age=50.2±11.2 years) were prospectively recruited to participate in a SF-36 HrQOL survey. Chart review, individual baseline, and postoperative renal function (eGFR) was determined using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula. PRFI was defined as eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73 m² or proteinuria. Mean SF-36 domain scores were compared between those with and without PRFI.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 5.7 years, the prevalence of postdonation comorbidities was 29.3% (n=24) PRFI, 25.6% (n=21) hypertension, 6.1% (n=5) diabetes, and 3.7% (n=3) heart disease, and no LKDs developed end-stage renal disease. Mean eGFR before and after donor nephrectomy was 95.5±23.4 and 71.0±17.3 mL/min/1.73 m² (P<.01). Mean SF-36 scores of LKDs were not significantly different between those with and without PRFI in all the domains (all P>.05). Similarly, the proportion of LKDs with PRFI did not differ significantly between the patients with SF-36 domain scores above and below the published reference values.

CONCLUSION

Nephrectomy-induced PRFI may not have a significant impact on the HrQOL of the LKD population with a low proportion of other major comorbidities such as diabetes and ischemic heart disease.

Factors Determining Physical and Mental Quality of Life of Living Kidney Donors in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Living-donor kidney transplantation has a positive influence on recipients' life expectancy and improves quality of life for patients with end-stage renal disease compared with dialysis patients. Evaluation of the physical and mental quality of life for donors can promote positive perceptions about donation and help potential donors in their decision-making process. The aim of this study was to explore the predictive factors of quality of life for living kidney donors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional and descriptive design was used, and the study was conducted from January to July 2013. The donors were a convenience sample of 34 participants who had undergone kidney transplant surgery >1 year earlier.

RESULTS

The results showed that kidney donors had a low to moderate physical and mental quality of life. Multiple regression analysis revealed that financial concerns and anxiety explained 27.8% of the total variance of quality of life in the physical component. Anxiety and paid work explained 61.4% of the total variance of quality of life in the mental component.

CONCLUSIONS

After renal transplantation, living kidney donors experienced low to moderate quality of life. Because donors are family members (siblings, sons or daughters, spouses, or parents), monthly family income is a significant issue that influences both the decision to donate and quality of life after transplantation. Our findings suggest that pre-transplantation assessment must include social workers as part of the health care team to evaluate the impact of a donor's financial status on post-transplantation quality of life.

Distinguishing internal property from external property in kidney transplantation

What determines the ownership of human body parts? In this paper, I argue that this question can be informed by an exploration of the cognitive distinction between property external to the human body such as houses, cars or land, and internal property such as organs that are located within anatomical body confines. Each type of property has distinct brain representations and possibly different effects on the sense of self. This distinction may help explain the divergence in post-donation outcomes seen in different kidney donor populations. Poor outcomes in some types of kidney donors may be due not only to a failure in their proper selection by standard medical testing or post-donation care but may also be a manifestation of differing effects on sense of self resulting from transfer of their internal property. Because a kidney is internal property, a hypothesis worth exploring is that those who experience good outcomes post-donation experience dopaminergic activation and a feeling of reward, while those experiencing bad outcomes are instead overcoming cortisol or adrenergic-based stress or fear responses without a corresponding feeling of reward, disrupting of their sense of self. Discussions about the rules for internal property transfer must be based not only on values and laws designed to govern external property but also on cognitive science-based facts, values and judgments that discussions of external property do not presently accommodate. Any future system of rules for governing organ distribution requires a framework different from that of external property to prevent harm to living kidney donors.

Financial Neutrality for Living Organ Donors: Reasoning, Rationale, Definitions, and Implementation Strategies

In the United States, live organ donation can be a costly and burdensome undertaking for donors. While most donation-related medical expenses are covered, many donors still face lost wages, travel expenses, incidentals, and potential for future insurability problems. Despite widespread consensus that live donors (LD) should not be responsible for the costs associated with donation, little has changed to alleviate financial burdens for LDs in the last decade. To achieve this goal, the transplant community must actively pursue strategies and policies to eliminate unreimbursed out-of-pocket costs to LDs. Costs should be more appropriately distributed across all stakeholders; this will also make live donation possible for people who, in the current system, cannot afford to proceed. We propose the goal of LD "financial neutrality," offer an operational definition to include the coverage/reimbursement of all medical, travel, and lodging costs, along with lost wages, related to the act of donating an organ, and guidance for consideration of medical care coverage, and wage and other expense reimbursement. The intent of this report is to provide a foundation to inform discussion within the transplant community and to advance initiatives for policy and resource allocation.

Living Kidney Donors Who Develop Kidney Failure: Excerpts of Their Thoughts

BACKGROUND

Psychosocial data about living kidney donors have been collected for almost 5 decades now. To date, however, no study has provided any psychosocial follow-up of donors who developed a serious health problem such as end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

METHODS

Donors who developed ESRD were invited to participate in a qualitative interview if they met one or both of the inclusion criteria: (1) developed ESRD within 10 years of donating and/or (2) lacked health insurance at the time of donation. We contacted 38 individuals who met these criteria, and 22 participated (58%). Two were subsequently excluded from analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty qualitative interviews were analyzed. Five findings are described: (1) donors describe the decision-making process as spontaneous and fast; (2) donors describe lack of appreciation for the need for post-donation self-care; (3) donors do not regret donating despite the adverse outcome; (4) donors advise future donors to have in place emotional and physical support post donation; and (5) donors appreciate the opportunity to tell their story from being a living donor to living with ESRD, which virtually all perceive as 2 separate unrelated events.

CONCLUSIONS

Most donors are positive about their donation decision and experience and would donate again, despite developing ESRD themselves. They propose some important changes to the decision-making and informed-consent processes. Our data are reassuring regarding lack of donor regret, but highlight the need for living donor transplant programs to ensure that living donors understand their long-term risks and receive appropriate life-long follow-up care to minimize these risks.

LOng-term follow-up after liVE kidney donation (LOVE) study: a longitudinal comparison study protocol

Background

The benefits of live donor kidney transplantation must be balanced against the potential harm to the donor. Well-designed prospective studies are needed to study the long-term consequences of kidney donation.

Methods

The “LOng-term follow-up after liVE kidney donation” (LOVE) study is a single center longitudinal cohort study on long-term consequences after living kidney donation. We will study individuals who have donated a kidney from 1981 through 2010 in the Erasmus University Medical Center in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. In this time period, 1092 individuals donated a kidney and contact information is available for all individuals. Each participating donor will be matched (1:4) to non-donors derived from the population-based cohort studies of the Rotterdam Study and the Study of Health in Pomerania. Matching will be based on baseline age, gender, BMI, ethnicity, kidney function, blood pressure, pre-existing co-morbidity, smoking, the use of alcohol and highest education degree. Follow-up data is collected on kidney function, kidney-related comorbidity, mortality, quality of life and psychological outcomes in all participants.

Discussion

This study will provide evidence on the long-term consequences of live kidney donation for the donor compared to matched non-donors and evaluate the current donor eligibility criteria.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register NTR3795.

Long-term, self-reported health outcomes in kidney donors

Background

The wide use of healthy persons as kidney donors calls for awareness of risks associated with donation. Live kidney donation may impair quality of life (QOL) and result in fatigue. Long-term data on these issues are generally lacking in the donor population. Thus we aimed to investigate long-term self-reported health outcomes in a nationwide donor cohort.

Methods

We assessed self-reported QOL, fatigue and psychosocial issues after donation in 217 donors representing 63 % of those who donated 8–12 years ago. QOL was measured using the generic Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), fatigue using the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) and psychosocial issues using donor specific questions. For each of the 8 domains of SF-36 and the 5 domains of MFI, we performed generalized linear regression.

Results

Donors scored high on QOL with mean scores between 63.9 and 91.4 (scale 1–100) for the 8 subscales. Recognition from family and friends was associated with higher QOL scores in four domains. There were no significant gender differences. Fatigue scores were generally low. Females generally scored higher than males on all five dimensions of fatigue, although significantly only on two. Recipient still alive was associated with lower scores on mental fatigue. Regretting donors scored higher than average on all domains of fatigue. Recipient death, worries about own health and worsened relationship with the recipient influenced willingness to donate in retrospect. Donor age did not affect long-term health outcomes.

Conclusions

Eight till 12 years after donation QOL scores were generally high and improved with recogniton from family and friends. Fatigue was independent of donor age and more pronounced in females and in those who regretted donation.

Anxiety and concerns in Spanish living kidney donor candidates

OBJECTIVES

Donating a kidney while alive is an experience associated with important benefits for donors and recipients. In view of the inexistence of Spanish investigations, we aimed: (a) to compare the anxiety and concerns of Spanish living kidney donor candidates relating to themselves as a function of gender and their level of concern about potential kidney recipients, and (b) to analyze whether the results regarding anxiety symptoms were clinically significant compared with a representative sample of the general Spanish population.

METHODS

We selected 67 donor candidates whom we evaluated using the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the Scale of Concerns Regarding Living Kidney Donation.

RESULTS

(1) The donor candidates who were more concerned about the recipients, in comparison with those who were less concerned, showed more state-anxiety and more concerns about themselves as donors, (2) the subgroup of more concerned females exhibited greater anxiety symptoms and concern about the consequences that nephrectomy could have on themselves, and (3) for all donor candidates, regardless of gender or level of concern about the recipient, the anxiety levels were not clinically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Anxiety in donor candidates is similar to or lower than the normative levels.

Emotional and Financial Experiences of Kidney Donors over the Past 50 Years: The RELIVE Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Most kidney donors view their experience positively, but some may experience psychosocial and financial burdens. We hypothesized that certain donor characteristics, poor outcome of the recipient, negative perceptions of care, and lack of support may be associated with poor psychosocial outcomes for donors.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

The Renal and Lung Living Donors Evaluation Study (RELIVE) examined long-term medical and psychosocial outcomes for kidney donors (at three U.S. transplant centers) who donated between 1963 and 2005. Standardized questionnaires evaluated donor perspectives, recovery time, social support, motivation, financial impact, insurability after donation, and current psychological status. Questionnaires were mailed to 6909 donors.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were returned by 2455 donors, who had donated 17 ± 10 years earlier (range, 5-48 years), a response rate of 36%. Most (95%) rated their overall donation experience as good to excellent. Rating the overall donor experience more negatively was associated with donor complications, psychological difficulties, recipient graft failure, and longer time since donation. Nine percent (n=231) reported one or more of the following poor psychosocial outcomes: fair or poor overall donor experience, financial burden, regret or discomfort with decision to donate, or psychological difficulties since donation. Recipient graft failure was the only predictor for reporting one or more of these poor psychosocial outcomes (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.33 to 2.34). Donors with lower educational attainment experienced greater financial burden. One of five employed donors took unpaid leave; 2% reported health and life insurability concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the majority of donors viewed their overall donation experience positively, almost 1 in 10 donors reported at least one negative consequence related to donation. Recipient graft failure was associated with poor psychosocial outcome, defined as one or more of these negative consequences. Some donors were financially disadvantaged, and some experienced insurance difficulties. Interventions to avoid negative psychosocial and financial consequences are warranted.

Gender differences in use of prescription narcotic medications among living kidney donors

Prescription narcotic use among living kidney donors is not well described. Using a unique database that integrates national registry identifiers for living kidney donors (1987-2007) in the United States with billing claims from a private health insurer (2000-2007), we identified pharmacy fills for prescription narcotic medications in periods 1-4 and >4 yr post-donation and estimated relative likelihoods of post-donation narcotic use by Cox regression. We also compared narcotic fill rates and medication possession ratios (MPRs, defined as (days of medication supplied)/(days observed)), between donors and age- and sex-matched non-donors. Overall, rates of narcotic medication fills were 32.3 and 32.4 per 100 person-years in periods 1-4 and >4 yr post-donation. After age and race adjustment, women were approximately twice as likely as men to fill a narcotic prescription in years 1-4 (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR, 2.28; 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.86-2.79) and >4 yr (aHR 1.70; 95% CI 1.50-1.93). MPRs in donors were low (<2.5% days exposed), and lower than among age- and sex-matched non-donors. Prescription narcotic medication use is more common among women than men in the intermediate term after live kidney donation. Overall, total narcotic exposure is low, and lower than among non-donors from the general population.

Satisfaction With Life Among Living Kidney Donors: A RELIVE Study of Long-Term Donor Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Little is known about living kidney donors' satisfaction with life (SWL) after donation. We compared donors' SWL to previously reported general population samples and investigated predictors of donors' SWL.

METHODS

Three transplant centers mailed questionnaires to assess SWL, physical health, optimism, retrospective evaluation of the donation experience, and demographic characteristics to living kidney donors' homes between 2010 and 2012. Two thousand four hundred fifty-five donors who were between 5 and 48 years from the time of their donor surgery completed the questionnaire.

RESULTS

Eighty-four percent of donors were satisfied with their lives (scores ≥ 20 on the Satisfaction With Life Scale). Donors were at least as satisfied with their lives as previously reported general population samples. After adjusting for physical health, optimism, and demographics, donors' SWL was significantly associated with donors' recalled experience of donation. Social support and positive effects of the donation on relationships predicted greater SWL. Financial difficulties associated with donation and longer recovery times predicted lower SWL. Recipient outcomes were not significantly related to donor SWL.

DISCUSSION

Limitations include the lack of predonation SWL data, potential bias in postdonation SWL because of the situational context of the questionnaire, and a sample that is not representative of all U.S. living kidney donors. Nonetheless, strategies focused on improving the donation experience, particularly related to recovery time, financial issues, and social support, may result in greater SWL after donation.