Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: More than 20,000 candidates for kidney transplantation in the United States are sensitized to HLA and may have a prolonged wait for a transplant, with a reduced transplantation rate and an increased rate of death. One solution is to perform live-donor renal transplantation after the depletion of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies. Whether such antibody depletion results in a survival benefit as compared with waiting for an HLA-compatible kidney is unknown. METHODS: We used a protocol that included plasmapheresis and the administration of low-dose intravenous immune globulin to desensitize 211 HLA-sensitized patients who subsequently underwent renal transplantation (treatment group). We compared rates of death between the group undergoing desensitization treatment and two carefully matched control groups of patients on a waiting list for kidney transplantation who continued to undergo dialysis (dialysis-only group) or who underwent either dialysis or HLA-compatible transplantation (dialysis-or-transplantation group). RESULTS: In the treatment group, Kaplan-Meier estimates of patient survival were 90.6% at 1 year, 85.7% at 3 years, 80.6% at 5 years, and 80.6% at 8 years, as compared with rates of 91.1%, 67.2%, 51.5%, and 30.5%, respectively, for patients in the dialysis-only group and rates of 93.1%, 77.0%, 65.6%, and 49.1%, respectively, for patients in the dialysis-or-transplantation group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Live-donor transplantation after desensitization provided a significant survival benefit for patients with HLA sensitization, as compared with waiting for a compatible organ. By 8 years, this survival advantage more than doubled. These data provide evidence that desensitization protocols may help overcome incompatibility barriers in live-donor renal transplantation. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and the Charles T. Bauer Foundation.).

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplants from pediatric donors after cardiac death (PDCD) have quadrupled in the past 9 years, but little data exist on outcomes using these donors. We hypothesized that pediatric organs might be more sensitive to the pathophysiology of cardiac death. METHODS: We evaluated outcomes and rates of discard of more than 12,000 pediatric kidneys recovered between 2000 and 2009. We compared short- and long-term graft function among adult and pediatric recipients of PDCD kidneys compared with recipients of pediatric kidneys from donors after brain death (PDBD). RESULTS: Overall, 6.3% of pediatric kidneys recovered were PDCD and 93.7% were PDBD. Discard rates were higher for PDCD kidneys (adjusted odds ratio=1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.31-2.18, P<0.001). Delayed graft function (DGF) was twice as common in recipients of PDCD grafts compared with PDBD (26.2% vs. 13.0%, P<0.001); however, among pediatric recipients, DGF rates were half of those observed in adults, and a statistically significant difference in DGF could not be detected between PDBD and PDCD grafts (6.9% vs. 4.9%, P=0.6). Among all recipients, PDCD kidneys had a greater risk of graft loss compared with PDBD kidneys (adjusted hazard ratio=1.32, 95% CI=1.06-1.65, P=0.01), although among pediatric recipients this increased risk was not statistically significant (adjusted hazard ratio=2.01, 95% CI=0.89-4.54, P=0.1). CONCLUSIONS: The differences in outcomes between adult recipients of PDCD and PDBD kidneys, and the attenuation of these differences among pediatric recipients, should be weighed against risks of prolonged waitlist time in recipients being considered for these grafts.

Incompatibility between the candidate recipient and the prospective donor is a major obstacle to living donor kidney transplant. Kidney paired donation (KPD) can circumvent the incompatibility by matching them to another candidate and living donor for an exchange of transplants such that both transplants are compatible. KPD has faced legal, logistical, and ethical challenges since its inception in the 1980s. Although the full potential of this modality for facilitating transplant for individuals with incompatible donors is unrealized, great strides have been made. In this review article, we detail how several impediments to KPD have been overcome to the benefit of ever greater numbers of patients. Limitations and questions that have been addressed include blood group type O imbalance, reciprocal match requirements, simultaneous donor nephrectomy requirements, combining KPD with desensitization, the role of list-paired donation, geographic barriers, legal barriers, concerns regarding living donor safety, fragmented registries, and inefficient matching algorithms.

OBJECTIVE: On November 13, 2007, the first reported case in 20 years of HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) transmission from a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention high-risk donor (HRD) made national headlines. We sought to characterize change in the practice of transplant surgeons resulting from this rare event. DESIGN: We performed a survey between January 17, 2008, and April 15, 2008, assessing attitudes and practices of transplant surgeons regarding HRDs. Descriptions of changes in practice after the event were categorized, and associations between responses and regional-, center-, and physician-level factors were studied. SETTING: Transplant centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred twenty-two transplant surgeons in current practice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Changing practice following the 2007 HIV transmission event. RESULTS: Among surgeons who responded to the survey, 31.6% changed their practice following the event. Also, 41.7% decreased use of HRDs, 34.5% increased emphasis on informed consent, 16.7% increased use of nucleic acid testing, and 6.0% implemented a formal policy. Ranking fear of being sued or hospital pressure as important disincentives to HRD use was associated with more than 2-fold higher odds of changing practice. Ranking medical risks of HIV as an important disincentive was associated with 8.29-fold higher odds of decreasing HRD use. CONCLUSION: The most common responses to this rare event were avoidance (decreased HRD use) and assurance (increased emphasis on informed consent) behaviors rather than patient safety measures (increased use of nucleic acid testing and implementation of formal policies), suggesting that fear of legal or regulatory consequences was the biggest driver of physician decision making and that the current litigious environment is failing to protect patient interests.