BACKGROUND: The number of living donor kidney transplantations increases steeply in Europeans, whereas the non-Europeans are dependent on deceased donor transplantations. We wondered whether a low attendance or a high decline of potential non-European donors could explain this difference. METHODS: This retrospective study includes all 1059 potential living kidney donors who attended our pretransplant clinic between 2000 and 2007. Potential donors were divided according to eight countries of origin: African, Dutch Antillean, European, Indonesian, Moroccan, Surinamese, Turkish, and various countries. In addition to direct living donation, alternative living donation programs are operational in our center: kidney exchange, domino paired, ABO incompatible, and anonymous donation. RESULTS: European donors predominated in both the potential (79%) and the actual donor populations (85%). Actual donors comprised 39% of non-European and 59% of the European potential donors (P<0.001). Participation in alternative donation programs is significantly less among non-European donors in comparison with European donors (3.6% vs. 12.6%, P<0.001). In all non-European populations, genetically related donors predominated, whereas genetically related and unrelated donors were equally represented in the European potential donor population (P<0.001). Partners were under-represented in all non-European populations (P<0.001). The attitude and behavior of non-Europeans with the longest duration of stay in the Netherlands were closest to that of the Europeans. The population with the shortest stay differed the most. This could possibly be attributed to integration. CONCLUSION: There are less non-European donors than expected based on the population composition. Living donor characteristics are different between Europeans and non-Europeans. The reasons for the difference deserve investigation.
BACKGROUND: The number of living donor kidney transplantations increases steeply in Europeans, whereas the non-Europeans are dependent on deceased donor transplantations. We wondered whether a low attendance or a high decline of potential non-European donors could explain this difference. METHODS: This retrospective study includes all 1059 potential living kidney donors who attended our pretransplant clinic between 2000 and 2007. Potential donors were divided according to eight countries of origin: African, Dutch Antillean, European, Indonesian, Moroccan, Surinamese, Turkish, and various countries. In addition to direct living donation, alternative living donation programs are operational in our center: kidney exchange, domino paired, ABO incompatible, and anonymous donation. RESULTS: European donors predominated in both the potential (79%) and the actual donor populations (85%). Actual donors comprised 39% of non-European and 59% of the European potential donors (P<0.001). Participation in alternative donation programs is significantly less among non-European donors in comparison with European donors (3.6% vs. 12.6%, P<0.001). In all non-European populations, genetically related donors predominated, whereas genetically related and unrelated donors were equally represented in the European potential donor population (P<0.001). Partners were under-represented in all non-European populations (P<0.001). The attitude and behavior of non-Europeans with the longest duration of stay in the Netherlands were closest to that of the Europeans. The population with the shortest stay differed the most. This could possibly be attributed to integration. CONCLUSION: There are less non-European donors than expected based on the population composition. Living donor characteristics are different between Europeans and non-Europeans. The reasons for the difference deserve investigation.
Authors: Steef Redeker; Emma K Massey; Charlotte Boonstra; Jan J van Busschbach; Reinier Timman; Harald F H Brulez; Daan A A M J Hollander; Luuk B Hilbrands; Frederike Bemelman; Stefan P Berger; Jacqueline van de Wetering; René M A van den Dorpel; Margriet Dekker-Jansen; Willem Weimar; Sohal Y Ismail Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2021-09-21 Impact factor: 3.842
Authors: Sohal Y Ismail; Annemarie E Luchtenburg; Willij C Zuidema; Charlotte Boonstra; Willem Weimar; Emma K Massey; Jan J Busschbach Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2012-07-23 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Sohal Y Ismail; Emma K Massey; Annemarie E Luchtenburg; Lily Claassens; Willij C Zuidema; Jan J V Busschbach; Willem Weimar Journal: Med Health Care Philos Date: 2012-05
Authors: Rosalie A Poldervaart; Mirjam Laging; Tessa Royaards; Judith A Kal-van Gestel; Madelon van Agteren; Marry de Klerk; Willij Zuidema; Michiel G H Betjes; Joke I Roodnat Journal: J Transplant Date: 2015-09-02
Authors: Lotte Timmerman; Sohal Y Ismail; Annemarie E Luchtenburg; Willij C Zuidema; Jan N M IJzermans; Jan J V Busschbach; Willem Weimar; Emma K Massey Journal: Int J Behav Med Date: 2015-10
Authors: Katja Kloss; Sohal Ismail; Steef Redeker; Lothar van Hoogdalem; Annemarie Luchtenburg; Jan J V Busschbach; Jacqueline van de Wetering Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 2.692