Perceptions of Live Donor Kidney Transplantation Using Segmentation Analysis and Perceptual Mapping to Understand Differences by Self-Reported Health Status in People on Dialysis

Living donor kidney transplantation is a superior treatment option for those with end stage kidney disease, but most transplants are from deceased donors. Securing a living donor for living donor kidney transplantation requires effective, well-timed communication which many may find difficult or intimidating. This study uses segmentation analysis and an innovative marketing technique called perceptual mapping to create three dimensional models to compare living donor kidney transplant perceptions by self-reported health status in 160 end-stage kidney disease dialysis patients of two hospital-based dialysis units and an online forum through cross-sectional surveys. Findings indicate patients with poor self-reported health status are more concerned with not knowing what to say or being afraid a person would say no to living donor kidney transplantation. They are also concerned about the donor’s ability to care for family or donate in the future. They are, however, more likely to see benefits of living donor kidney transplantation, including the kidney lasting longer and having a greater quality of life. Findings reveal messages that could be emphasized in interventions to enhance the ability to ask for living donor kidney transplantation, especially in those assessed as having poor health status. Segmentation analysis and perceptual mapping methods can provide a more nuanced look at how best to develop intervention content to increase living donor kidney transplant.

Living Donor Kidney Transplantation for a Recipient after 41 Years of Hemodialysis

Due to atrophic bladder, patients undergoing long-term dialysis experience vesicoureteral reflux and complicated urinary tract infections after kidney transplantation. A 58-year-old woman underwent living donor kidney transplantation after 41 years of dialysis. She had no contraindications, with good cardiac function and minimal artery calcification despite the long history of hemodialysis. Immunosuppression was initiated with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, prednisolone, and basiliximab. Ureteroneocystostomy with an antireflux technique was carefully conducted as her bladder volume was 15 mL. The postoperative clinical course was uneventful with immediate graft function. The bladder volume gradually increased to 81 mL at discharge, 3 weeks postoperatively. The patient was initially depressed due to frequent urination early post-transplant but recovered soon after as the bladder volume gradually increased to 400 mL. The patient has not yet reported a urinary tract infection episode. This case highlights living donor kidney transplantation-induced recovery of bladder function with careful ureteroneocystostomy, despite the long dialysis history.

Living Donor Kidney Transplantation in Patients With Donor-Specific HLA Antibodies After Desensitization With Immunoadsorption

Due to the current organ shortage, living donor kidney transplantation is increasingly performed across HLA (human leukocyte antigen) or ABO antibody barriers. There is still uncertainty about the risk of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) episodes, which may limit long-term graft survival. From March 2007 to December 2016, 58 sensitized living donor kidney transplant candidates were identified and 38 patients eventually included in the study: 36 patients (95%) had pre-transplant and pre-desensitization Luminex-detected donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSA), and 17/36 patients (47%) in addition had a positive crossmatch result. Two patients had no detectable DSA but a positive CDC B-cell crossmatch result. Patients were treated with pre- and post-transplant apheresis and powerful immunosuppression including the anti-CD20 antibody rituximab (N = 36) in combination with thymoglobulin (N = 20) or anti-IL2 receptor antibody (N = 18). The results of the 38 successfully desensitized and transplanted patients were retrospectively compared to the results of 76 matched standard-risk recipients. Desensitized patients showed patient and graft survival rates similar to that of standard-risk recipients (P = 0.55 and P = 0.16, respectively). There was a trend toward reduced death-censored graft survival in desensitized patients (P = 0.053) which, however, disappeared when the 34 patients who were transplanted after introduction of sensitive Luminex testing were analyzed (P = 0.43). The incidence of rejection episodes without borderline changes were in desensitized patients with 21% similar to the 18% in standard-risk patients (P = 0.74). Thirty-six patients had pre-transplant HLA class I and/or II DSA that were reduced by 85 and 81%, respectively, during pre-transplant desensitization (P < 0.001 for both). On day 360 after transplantation, 20 of 36 (56%) patients had lost their DSA. The overall AMR rate was 6% in these patients, but as high as 60% in 5 (14%) patients with persistent and de novo DSA during year 1; 2 (40%) of whom lost their graft due to AMR. Eleven (31%) patients with persistent DSA but without de novo DSA had an AMR rate of 18% without graft loss while one patient lost her graft without signs of AMR. Our desensitization protocol for pre-sensitized living donor kidney transplant recipients with DSA resulted in good graft outcomes with side effects and rejection rates similar to that of standard-risk recipients. Adequate patient selection prior to transplantation and frequent immunological monitoring thereafter is critical to minimize rejection episodes and subsequent graft loss.

Spousal and living related kidney transplantation: our center experience

Background Kidney transplantation is the most preferred type of renal displacement therapy for end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. More patients developed ESRD. The most important source is the donations from unrelated spouses. In this study, we aimed to compare the transplantation data obtained from the spouses of the patients with the transplantation data obtained from other relatives. Methods The data including 167 living kidney transplantations performed between January 2006 and December 2019 were retrospectively collected. The patients were divided into two groups; spousal donor group (n: 53) and living-related donor group (n: 114). Results There was no significant difference in delayed graft function in both groups. There were no patients with acute rejection proven by biopsy or considered biochemically in the spousal donor group. With regard to 3-year results in the living-related donor group the patient survival rate was 100%, while it was 98.2% in terms of graft survival. Conclusions In conclusion, similar patient and graft survival rates between spousal donor kidney transplantation and living-related kidney transplantation has made spousal donor kidney transplantation, with possible problems in terms of tissue compatibility, an acceptable alternative to donor supply.