M Oikawa1, S Hatakeyama2, T Narita1, H Yamamoto1, S Hosogoe1, A Imai1, T Yoneyama1, Y Hashimoto3, T Koie1, T Fujita4, R Murakami4, H Saitoh5, T Funyu5, S Narumi6, C Ohyama7. 1. Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan. 2. Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan. Electronic address: shingorilla2@gmail.com. 3. Department of Advanced Transplant and Regenerative Medicine, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan. 4. Department of Cardiology, Respiratory Medicine and Nephrology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan. 5. Department of Urology, Oyokyo Kidney Research Institute, Hirosaki, Japan. 6. Department of Transplant Surgery, Nagoya Daini Red Cross Hospital, Nagoya, Japan. 7. Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan; Department of Advanced Transplant and Regenerative Medicine, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the safety and feasibility of living kidney transplantation from marginal donors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between June 2006 and March 2015, we performed 61 living related renal transplantations at two renal transplantation centers. Marginal donors were defined as those who were older than 70 years or who had hypertension, reduced renal function, body mass index greater than 30 kg/m(2), or mildly impaired glucose tolerance. We retrospectively compared renal function and graft survival between marginal and standard living donor kidney transplantations. To evaluate renal function, creatinine clearance (CCr) was preoperatively used for donors, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was postoperatively used for donors and recipients. RESULTS: Among 61 donors, 14 (23%) met the marginal criteria, the major reason being hypertension (91%). The mean age tended to be higher in the marginal group. Preoperative eGFR was significantly lower in the marginal group, whereas postoperative renal function decline ratio at two years was not significantly different between the groups (67% vs 67%, P = .960). Five-year graft survival rates were not significantly different between the two groups. However, recipient eGFR 1 year after kidney transplantation was lower in the marginal group than in the standard group (44 ± 8 vs 55 ± 9 in eGFR, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were observed between the groups regarding donor renal function. Careful marginal donor selection can be safe and feasible for donors and recipients of living kidney transplantation; however, it may have a negative impact on recipient renal function.
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the safety and feasibility of living kidney transplantation from marginal donors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between June 2006 and March 2015, we performed 61 living related renal transplantations at two renal transplantation centers. Marginal donors were defined as those who were older than 70 years or who had hypertension, reduced renal function, body mass index greater than 30 kg/m(2), or mildly impaired glucose tolerance. We retrospectively compared renal function and graft survival between marginal and standard living donor kidney transplantations. To evaluate renal function, creatinine clearance (CCr) was preoperatively used for donors, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was postoperatively used for donors and recipients. RESULTS: Among 61 donors, 14 (23%) met the marginal criteria, the major reason being hypertension (91%). The mean age tended to be higher in the marginal group. Preoperative eGFR was significantly lower in the marginal group, whereas postoperative renal function decline ratio at two years was not significantly different between the groups (67% vs 67%, P = .960). Five-year graft survival rates were not significantly different between the two groups. However, recipient eGFR 1 year after kidney transplantation was lower in the marginal group than in the standard group (44 ± 8 vs 55 ± 9 in eGFR, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were observed between the groups regarding donor renal function. Careful marginal donor selection can be safe and feasible for donors and recipients of living kidney transplantation; however, it may have a negative impact on recipient renal function.