Past, present and future of kidney paired donation transplantation in India

Advantages of the single-center model in domino transplant processes: Operational planning and management experience

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is one of the most effective treatments for patients with end-stage renal disease. However, many regions face low deceased donor rates and limited ABO-compatible transplant availability, which increases reliance on living donors. These regional challenges necessitate the implementation of kidney paired donation (KPD) programs to overcome incompatibilities such as ABO mismatch or positive cross-matching, even when suitable and willing donors are available.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of a single-center domino KPD model in both operational planning and clinical management processes and to assess its impact on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Between April 2020 and January 2024, we retrospectively evaluated patients enrolled in our center’s domino kidney transplantation program. Donor-recipient pairs unable to proceed due to ABO incompatibility or positive cross-matching with their own living donors were included. Donors and recipients were assessed based on blood group compatibility, HLA tissue typing, and negative cross-match results. A specialized computer algorithm grouped patients into three-way, four-way, and five-way chains. All surgical procedures were performed on the same day at a single center.

RESULTS

A total of 169 kidney transplants were performed, forming 52 domino chains. These domino KPD transplants accounted for a notable proportion of our center’s overall transplant activity, which included both living donor kidney transplants and deceased donor transplants. Among these chains, the primary reasons for participation were ABO incompatibility (74%), positive cross-matching (10%), and the desire to improve HLA mismatch (16%). Improved HLA mismatch profiles and high graft survival (96% at 1 year, 92% at 3 years) and patient survival (98% at 1 year, 94% at 3 years) rates were observed, as well as low acute rejection episodes.

CONCLUSION

The single-center domino KPD model enhanced transplant opportunities for incompatible donor-recipient pairs while maintaining excellent clinical outcomes. By providing a framework that addresses regional challenges, improves operational efficiency, and optimizes clinical management, this model offers actionable insights to reduce waiting lists and improve patient outcomes.

Favorable Living Donor Kidney Transplantation Outcomes within a National Kidney Exchange Program: A Propensity Score-Matching Analysis

Key Points

KEP recipients have comparable long-term graft survival to direct living donor kidney transplantation recipients, which underscores the need to prioritize KEP over other's therapies. Our outcomes can be achieved regardless of whether the donor travels or the graft is transported, offering flexibility in program implementation.

Background

KEPs (kidney exchange programs) facilitate living donor kidney transplantations (LDKTs) for patients with incompatible donors, who are typically at higher risk than non-KEP patients because of higher sensitization and longer dialysis vintage. We conducted a comparative analysis of graft outcomes and risk factors for both KEP and non-KEP living donor kidney transplants.

Methods

All LDKTs performed in The Netherlands between 2004 and 2021 were included. The primary outcome measures were 1-, 5-, and 10-year death-censored graft survival. The secondary outcome measures were delayed graft function, graft function, rejection rates, and patient survival. We used a propensity score–matching model to account for differences at baseline.

Results

Of 7536 LDKTs, 694 (9%) were transplanted through the KEP. Ten-year graft survival was similar for KEP (0.916; 95% confidence interval, 0.894 to 0.939) and non-KEP (0.919; 0.912 to 0.926, P = 0.82). We found significant differences in 5-year rejection (12% versus 7%) and 5-year patient survival (KEP: 84%, non-KEP: 90%), which was nonsignificant after propensity score matching. Significant risk factors of lower graft survival included high donor age, retransplantations, extended dialysis vintage, higher panel reactive antibodies, and nephrotic syndrome as the cause of ESKD.

Conclusions

Transplantation through KEP offers a viable alternative for patients lacking compatible donors, avoiding specific and invasive pre- and post-transplant treatments. KEP's similar survival rate to non-KEPs suggests prioritizing KEP LDKTs over deceased donor kidney transplantation, desensitization, and dialysis. However, clinicians should consider the identified risk factors when planning and managing pre- and post-transplant care to enhance patient outcomes. Thus, we advocate for the broad adoption of KEP and establishment in regions lacking such programs, alongside initiation and expansion of international collaborations.

Addressing Kidney Transplant Shortage: The Potential of Kidney Paired Exchanges in Jordan

Jordan performed the Middle East's first living-donor kidney transplant in 1972. In 1977, the country became one of the first Arab countries to regulate organ donation and transplantation. Despite these early advances in living donor transplantation, Jordan's organ donation after brain death program remains inactive, making it challenging to meet organ demand and placing many patients on long transplant waiting lists. As of 2020, only 14.2% of the patients with end-stage kidney disease have access to a living donor. The scarcity of compatible living donors exacerbates Jordan's organ shortage, leaving patients with extended waits and uncertain transplant prospects. Due to the lack of living donors and the inactive brain death donation program, additional options are needed to meet organ demand. Kidney paired exchange (KPE), emerges as a potential solution to the problem of donor shortage and donor-recipient incompatibility. By allowing living donors to direct their donated organs to different compatible recipients, KPE offers the promise of expanding transplant opportunities for patients without suitable living donors. However, the current Jordanian law restricting living kidney donation to fifth-degree relatives further limits the pool of potential donors, aggravating the organ shortage situation. This article explores the feasibility of implementing KPE in Jordan and proposes an approach to implementing KPE in Jordan, considering ethical and legal aspects to substantially increase kidney transplants.

The Impact of Cold Ischaemia Time on Outcomes of Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Studies have been carried out to investigate the effect of a prolonged cold ischaemia time (CIT) on the outcomes of living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). There is no clear consensus in the literature about the effects of CIT on LDKT outcomes, and therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide evidence on this subject. Searches were performed in five databases up to 12 July 2021. Articles comparing different CIT in LDKT describing delayed graft function (DGF), graft and patient survival, and acute rejection were considered for inclusion. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019131438. In total, 1452 articles were found, of which eight were finally eligible, including a total of 164,179 patients. Meta-analyses showed significantly lower incidence of DGF (odds ratio (OR) = 0.61, p < 0.01), and significantly higher 1-year graft survival (OR = 0.72, p < 0.001) and 5-year graft survival (OR = 0.88, p = 0.04), for CIT of less than 4 h. Our results underline the need to keep CIT as short as possible in LDKT (ideally < 4 h), as a shorter CIT in LDKT is associated with a statistically significant lower incidence of DGF and higher graft survival compared to a prolonged CIT. However, clinical impact seems limited, and therefore, in LDKT programmes in which the CIT might be prolonged, such as kidney exchange programmes, the benefits outweigh the risks. To minimize these risks, it is worth considering including CIT in kidney allocation algorithms and in general take precautions to protect high risk donor/recipient combinations.

The Impact of Cold Ischaemia Time on Outcomes of Living Donor Kidney Transplantation in the UK Living Kidney Sharing Scheme

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of CIT on living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) outcomes in the UKLKSS versus outside the scheme.

BACKGROUND

LDKT provides the best treatment option for end-stage kidney disease patients. end-stage kidney disease patients with an incompatible living donor still have an opportunity to be transplanted through Kidney Exchange Programmes (KEP). In KEPs where kidneys travel rather than donors, cold ischaemia time (CIT) can be prolonged.

METHODS

Data from all UK adult LDKT between 2007 and 2018 were analysed.

RESULTS

9969 LDKT were performed during this period, of which 1396 (14%) were transplanted through the UKLKSS, which we refer to as KEP. Median CIT was significantly different for KEP versus non-KEP (339 versus 182 minutes, P < 0.001). KEP LDKT had a higher incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) (2.91% versus 5.73%, P < 0.0001), lower 1-year (estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) 57.90 versus 55.25 ml/min, P = 0.04) and 5-year graft function (eGFR 55.62 versus 53.09 ml/min, P = 0.01) compared to the non-KEP group, but 1- and 5-year graft survival were similar. Within KEP, a prolonged CIT was associated with more DGF (3.47% versus 1.95%, P = 0.03), and lower graft function at 1 and 5-years (eGFR = 55 vs 50 ml/min, P = 0.02), but had no impact on graft survival.

CONCLUSION

Whilst CIT was longer in KEP, associated with more DGF and lower graft function, excellent 5-year graft survival similar to non-KEP was found.

Kidney exchange transplantation current status, an update and future perspectives

Kidney exchange transplantation is well established modality to increase living donor kidney transplantation. Reasons for joining kidney exchange programs are ABO blood group incompatibility, immunological incompatibility (positive cross match or donor specific antibody), human leukocyte antigen (HLA) incompatibility (poor HLA matching), chronological incompatibility and financial incompatibility. Kidney exchange transplantation has evolved from the traditional simultaneous anonymous 2-way kidney exchange to more complex ways such as 3-way exchange, 4-way exchange, n-way exchange,compatible pair, non-simultaneous kidney exchange,non-simultaneous extended altruistic donor, never ending altruistic donor, kidney exchange combined with desensitization, kidney exchange combined with ABO incompatible kidney transplantation, acceptable mismatch transplant, use of A2 donor to O patients, living donor-deceased donor list exchange, domino chain, non-anonymous kidney exchange, single center, multicenter, regional, National, International and Global kidney exchange. Here we discuss recent advances in kidney exchanges such as International kidney exchange transplantation in a global environment, three categories of advanced donation program, deceased donors as a source of chain initiating kidneys, donor renege myth or reality, pros and cons of anonymity in developed world and (non-) anonymity in developing world, pros and cons of donor travel vs kidney transport, algorithm for management of incompatible donor-recipient pairs and pros and cons of Global kidney exchange. The participating transplant teams and donor-recipient pairs should make the decision by consensus about kidney donor travel vs kidney transport and anonymity vs non-anonymity in allocation as per local resources and logistics. Future of organ transplantation in resource-limited setting will be liver vs kidney exchange, a legitimate hope or utopia?

Risk Taking and Decision Making in Kidney Paired Donation: A Qualitative Study by Semistructured Interviews

INTRODUCTION

Despite excellent outcomes of kidney paired donation (KPD), little is known about how a patient's frame (apply cognitive bias) or weight (attribute value) and concerns relating to risk, justice, and equity affect his or her decision-making process.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A pilot study consisting of 3 KPD transplant recipients and 3 KPD kidney donors in the last year was conducted to identify and explore themes in decision making and risk taking. The pilot study was followed by the main study comprised of 20 recipients who had already undergone KPD transplantation and 20 donors who had undergone donor nephrectomy. We conducted semistructured interviews in this cohort and analyzed the data thematically. Each donor-recipient pair was interviewed together to facilitate dyadic conversation and provide deeper insight into the decision-making process leading to transplant and donation.

RESULTS

Common themes to both recipient and donor decision making included quality of life; characteristics of the unknown donor and post-transplant expectations. Recipient-specific themes included failure to reach life span milestones, experiences of fellow patients, and altruistic desire to expand the donor pool. Donor-specific themes included balancing existing life commitments with the recipient's need for a kidney, equity and mental accounting in kidney exchange (comparable quality of the kidney received versus the kidney donated), and logistical justice for the recipient.

DISCUSSION

Donors and recipients frame and weight the concepts of risk, justice, and equity differently. This may have direct implications to facilitating patient-centered communication and engagement in KPD pairs.