John S Gill1, Elizabeth Hendren, Jianghu Dong, Olwyn Johnston, Jagbir Gill. 1. Division of Nephrology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada;, †Center for Health Evaluation and Outcomes Sciences, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, ‡Tufts-New England Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Obese patients encounter barriers to medical care not encountered by lean patients, and inequities in access to care among obese patients may vary by sex. This study aimed to determine the association of body mass index (BMI) with access to kidney transplantation in men and women. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In this retrospective analysis of 702,456 incident ESRD patients aged 18-70 years (captured in the US Renal Data System between 1995 and 2007), multivariate time-to-event analyses were used to determine the association of BMI with likelihood of transplantation from any donor source, transplantation from a living donor, and transplantation from a deceased donor, as well the individual steps in obtaining a deceased donor transplant (activation to the waiting list, and transplantation after wait-listing). RESULTS: Among women, a BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m(2) was associated with a lower likelihood of transplantation from any donor source (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.73 to 0.77), transplantation from a living donor (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.77), and transplantation from a deceased donor (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.77). By contrast, among men, a BMI of 25.0-34.9 kg/m(2) was associated with a higher likelihood of the outcomes of transplantation from any donor source (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.11), transplantation from a living donor (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.22), and transplantation from a deceased donor (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.07). Among men, the level beyond which BMI was associated with a lower likelihood of transplantation from any donor source or a living donor was ≥ 40.0 kg/m(2), and ≥ 35.0 kg/m(2) in the case of deceased donor transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: The association of BMI with access to transplantation varies between men and women. The reasons for this difference should be further studied.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Obesepatients encounter barriers to medical care not encountered by lean patients, and inequities in access to care among obesepatients may vary by sex. This study aimed to determine the association of body mass index (BMI) with access to kidney transplantation in men and women. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In this retrospective analysis of 702,456 incident ESRDpatients aged 18-70 years (captured in the US Renal Data System between 1995 and 2007), multivariate time-to-event analyses were used to determine the association of BMI with likelihood of transplantation from any donor source, transplantation from a living donor, and transplantation from a deceased donor, as well the individual steps in obtaining a deceased donor transplant (activation to the waiting list, and transplantation after wait-listing). RESULTS: Among women, a BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m(2) was associated with a lower likelihood of transplantation from any donor source (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.73 to 0.77), transplantation from a living donor (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.77), and transplantation from a deceased donor (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.77). By contrast, among men, a BMI of 25.0-34.9 kg/m(2) was associated with a higher likelihood of the outcomes of transplantation from any donor source (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.11), transplantation from a living donor (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.22), and transplantation from a deceased donor (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.07). Among men, the level beyond which BMI was associated with a lower likelihood of transplantation from any donor source or a living donor was ≥ 40.0 kg/m(2), and ≥ 35.0 kg/m(2) in the case of deceased donor transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: The association of BMI with access to transplantation varies between men and women. The reasons for this difference should be further studied.
Authors: Greg Knoll; Sandra Cockfield; Tom Blydt-Hansen; Dana Baran; Bryce Kiberd; David Landsberg; David Rush; Edward Cole Journal: CMAJ Date: 2005-11-08 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Salim Yusuf; Steven Hawken; Stephanie Ounpuu; Leonelo Bautista; Maria Grazia Franzosi; Patrick Commerford; Chim C Lang; Zvonko Rumboldt; Churchill L Onen; Liu Lisheng; Supachai Tanomsup; Paul Wangai; Fahad Razak; Arya M Sharma; Sonia S Anand Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-11-05 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: R A Wolfe; V B Ashby; E L Milford; W E Bloembergen; L Y Agodoa; P J Held; F K Port Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Dorry L Segev; Christopher E Simpkins; Richard E Thompson; Jayme E Locke; Daniel S Warren; Robert A Montgomery Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2007-12-19 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Patrick Ahearn; Kirsten L Johansen; Charles E McCulloch; Barbara A Grimes; Elaine Ku Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2018-10-11 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Thomas Prudhomme; Jean Baptiste Beauval; Marine Lesourd; Mathieu Roumiguié; Karel Decaestecker; Graziano Vignolini; Riccardo Campi; Sergio Serni; Angelo Territo; Luis Gausa; Volkan Tugcu; Selcuk Sahin; Antonio Alcaraz; Mireia Musquera; Michael Stockle; Martin Janssen; Paolo Fornara; Nasreldin Mohammed; Arnaud Del Bello; Nassim Kamar; Federico Sallusto; Alberto Breda; Nicolas Doumerc Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-06-19 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Kira L Newman; Raymond J Lynch; Andrew B Adams; Rebecca Zhang; Stephen O Pastan; Rachel E Patzer Journal: Transplantation Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Kyle H Sheetz; Kenneth J Woodside; Vahakn B Shahinian; Justin B Dimick; John R Montgomery; Seth A Waits Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Jordana B Cohen; Mary Ann Lim; Colleen M Tewksbury; Samuel Torres-Landa; Jennifer Trofe-Clark; Peter L Abt; Noel N Williams; Kristoffel R Dumon; Simin Goral Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 4.734