Non-simultaneous kidney exchange cycles in resource-restricted countries without non-directed donation - a prospective single-center cohort study

Impact of single centre kidney-exchange transplantation to increase living donor pool in India: A cohort study involving non-anonymous allocation

AIM

In India, 85% of organ donations are from living donors and 15% are from deceased donors. One-third of living donors were rejected because of ABO or HLA incompatibility. Kidney exchange transplantation (KET) is a cost-effective and legal strategy to increase living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) by 25%-35%.

METHODS

We report our experience with 539 KET cases and the evolution of a single-centre program to increase the use of LDKT.

RESULTS

Between January 2000 and 13 March, 2024, 1382 deceased donor kidney transplantations and 5346 LDKT were performed at our centre, including 10% (n = 539) from KET. Of the 539 KET, 80.9% (n = 436) were ABO incompatible pairs, 11.1% (n = 60) were compatible pairs, and 8% (n = 43) were sensitized pairs. There were 75% 2-way (n = 2 × 202 = 404), 16.2% 3-way (n = 3 × 29 = 87), 3% 4-way (n = 4 × 4 = 16), 1.8% 5-way (n = 5 × 2 = 10), 2.2% 6-way (n = 6 × 2 = 12), and 1.8% 10-way KET (n = 10 × 1 = 10). Of the recipients 81.2% (n = 438) were male and 18.8% (n = 101) were female, while of the donors, 78.5% (n = 423) were female and 21.5% (n = 116) were male. All donors were near relatives; wives (54%, n = 291) and mothers (20%, n = 108) were the most common donors. At a median follow-up of 8.2 years, patient survival, death censored graft survival, acute rejection, and median serum creatinine levels of functioning grafts were 81.63% (n = 440), 91% (n = 494), 9.8% (n = 53) and 1.3 mg/dL respectively. We credited the success to maintaining a registry of incompatible pairs, high-volume LDKT programs, non-anonymous allocation and teamwork.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest single-centre KET program in Asia. We report the challenges and solutions to replicate our success in other KET programs.

A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study on Management Protocols and Clinical Outcomes After ABO-incompatible Kidney Transplantation in India

BACKGROUND

There is no robust evidence-based data for ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation (ABOiKT) from emerging countries.

METHODS

Data from 1759 living donor ABOiKT and 33 157 ABO-compatible kidney transplantations (ABOcKT) performed in India between March 5, 2011, and July 2, 2022, were included in this retrospective, multicenter (n = 25) study. The primary outcomes included management protocols, mortality, graft loss, and biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR).

RESULTS

Protocol included rituximab 100 (232 [13.18%]), 200 (877 [49.85%]), and 500 mg (569 [32.34%]); immunoadsorption (IA) (145 [8.24%]), IVIG (663 [37.69%]), and no induction 200 (11.37%). Mortality, graft loss, and BPAR were reported in 167 (9.49%), 136 (7.73%), and 228 (12.96%) patients, respectively, over a median follow-up of 36.3 mo. In cox proportional hazard model, mortality was higher with IA (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.53 [1.62-3.97]; P  < 0.001), BPAR (HR: 1.83 [1.25-2.69]; P  = 0.0020), and graft loss (HR: 1.66 [1.05-2.64]; P  = 0.0310); improved graft survival was associated with IVIG (HR: 0.44 [0.26-0.72]; P  = 0.0010); higher BPAR was reported with conventional tube method (HR: 3.22 [1.9-5.46]; P  < 0.0001) and IA use (HR: 2 [1.37-2.92]; P  < 0.0001), whereas lower BPAR was reported in the prepandemic era (HR: 0.61 [0.43-0.88]; P  = 0.008). Primary outcomes were not associated with rituximab dosing or high preconditioning/presurgery anti-A/anti-B titers. Incidence of overall infection 306 (17.39%), cytomegalovirus 66 (3.75%), and BK virus polyoma virus 20 (1.13%) was low. In unmatched univariate analysis, the outcomes between ABOiKT and ABOcKT were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Our largest multicenter study on ABOiKT provides insights into various protocols and management strategies with results comparable to those of ABOcKT.

Kidney paired donation in developing countries: A global perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review the key principles of kidney paired donation (KPD) and discuss the status and unique considerations for KPD in developing countries.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the advantages of KPD programs, they remain rare among developing nations, and the programs that exist have many differences with those of in developed countries. There is a paucity of literature and lack of published data on KPD from most of the developing nations. Expanding KPD programs may require the adoption of features and innovations of successful KPD programs. Cooperation with national and international societies should be encouraged to ensure endorsement and sharing of best practices.

SUMMARY

KPD is in the initial stages or has not yet started in the majority of the emerging nations. But the logistics and strategies required to implement KPD in developing nations differ from other parts of the world. By learning from the KPD experience in developing countries and adapting to their unique needs, it should be possible to expand access to KPD to allow more transplants to happen for patients in need world-wide.

Behavioral market design

When it comes to behavioral change, economic design and behavioral science are complements, not substitutes. Chater & Loewenstein give examples from policy design. In this commentary, I use examples, often from my own research, to show how behavioral insights inform the design of the rules that govern market transactions.

Effect of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on Transplantation and Nephrology in India: A Nationwide Report From India

BACKGROUND

The effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on a developing nation is sparsely reported and, more importantly, the discrepancies in public and private sectors are underexplored.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated the data on the effect of COVID-19 on renal transplantation between 2019 and 2020 in a nationwide analysis from 8 public and 10 private sector hospitals of India.

RESULTS

On comparing the yearly data, the number of living-related transplants and deceased donor transplants declined by 48% (2610 vs 1370) and 49% (194 vs 99), respectively. The outpatient numbers and in-center admissions decreased by 40.4% (616,741 vs 367,962) and 30.8 % (73,190 vs 49,918). respectively. There was no increase in the number of renal or graft biopsies in the COVID-19 era. The number of waitlisted patients on hemodialysis was higher in public (304,898 vs 338,343) when compared with private (163,096 vs 150,292) in the last 2 years. Similarly, the number of waitlisted patients on peritoneal dialysis (4655 vs 3526) was higher in the public sector compared with private sector (932 vs 745). The decline in living transplants during the pandemic was higher in public sectors (58%) compared with the private (49%). However, the decline in deceased donation was higher in private (57.9%) relative to public (50.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 has adversely affected the transplantation activities across the Indian transplantation centers, with a disproportionately higher impact on waitlisted patients in public sector programs. A sound prioritization of health care resources is mandated to safeguard the most deprived and high-risk waitlisted patients during the pandemic.

Global kidney chains

Kidney failure is among the leading causes of death worldwide, and the best treatment is transplantation. However, transplants are in short supply because of shortfalls of transplantable organs and of finances. In the United States and some other countries, kidney exchange chains have emerged as a way to increase the number of transplants; patients who have a willing donor but cannot receive that donor’s kidney can each receive a compatible kidney from another patient’s intended donor. Such programs are much better developed within the borders of wealthy countries, which is of little help to patients in countries with limited kidney transplantation or exchange. This paper proposes and analyzes a way to extend kidney exchange chains to share the benefits globally.

Kidney failure is a worldwide scourge, made more lethal by the shortage of transplants. We propose a way to organize kidney exchange chains internationally between middle-income countries with financial barriers to transplantation and high-income countries with many hard to match patients and patient–donor pairs facing lengthy dialysis. The proposal involves chains of exchange that begin in the middle-income country and end in the high-income country. We also propose a way of financing such chains using savings to US health care payers.