Successful expansion of the living donor pool by alternative living donation programs

Between January 2000 and December 2007, 786 potential recipients and 1059 potential donors attended our pretransplant unit with the request for a living-donor renal transplant procedure. The recipients brought one potential donor in 77.2% and two or more donors in 22.8% of cases. In the regular living donor program, a compatible donor was found for 467 recipients. Without considering alternative donation, 579 donors would have been refused. Alternative living donation programs led to 114 compatible combinations: kidney-exchange program (35), ABO-incompatible donation (25), anonymous donation (37) and domino-paired anonymous donation (17). Together, the 114 alternative program donations and the 467 regular living donations led to 581 living donor transplantations (24.4% increase). Eventually for 54.9% (581/1059) of our donors, a compatible combination was found. Donor-recipient incompatibility comprised 19.4% (89/458) in the final refused population, which is 8.8% of the potential donor-recipient couples. Without considering alternative donation, 30.1% (174/579) of the refused donors would have been refused on incompatibility and 6.4% (37/579) because they were anonymous. This is 20% of the potential donor population (211/1059). The implementation of alternative living donation programs led to a significant increase in the number of transplantations, while transplantations via the direct donation program steadily increased.</p

Transplantation Results of Completely HLA-Mismatched Living and Completely HLA-Matched Deceased-Donor Kidneys Are Comparable

Transplantation and autoimmunit

Creating Options for Difficult-to-match Kidney Transplant Candidates

Background.Most transplantation centers recognize a small patient population that unsuccessfully participates in all available, both living and deceased donor, transplantation programs for many years: the difficult-to-match patients. This population consists of highly immunized and/or ABO blood group O or B patients.Methods.To improve their chances, Computerized Integration of Alternative Transplantation programs (CIAT) were developed to integrate kidney paired donation, altruistic/unspecified donation, and ABO and HLA desensitization. To compare CIAT with reality, a simulation was performed, including all patients, donors, and pairs who participated in our programs in 2015-2016. Criteria for inclusion as difficult-to-match, selected-highly immunized (sHI) patient were as follows: virtual panel reactive antibody >85% and participating for 2 years in Eurotransplant Acceptable Mismatch program. sHI patients were given priority, and ABO blood group incompatible (ABOi) and/or HLA incompatible (HLAi) matching with donor-specific antigen-mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) <8000 were allowed. For long-waiting blood group O or B patients, ABOi matches were allowed.Results.In reality, 90 alternative program transplantations were carried out: 73 compatible, 16 ABOi, and 1 both ABOi and HLAi combination. Simulation with CIAT resulted in 95 hypothetical transplantations: 83 compatible (including 1 sHI) and 5 ABOi combinations. Eight sHI patients were matched: 1 compatible, 6 HLAi with donor-specific antigen-MFI <8000 (1 also ABOi), and 1 ABOi match. Six/eight combinations for sHI patients were complement-dependent cytotoxicity cross-match negative.Conclusions.CIAT led to 8 times more matches for difficult-to-match sHI patients. This offers them better chances because of a more favorable MFI profile against the new donor. Besides, more ABO compatible matches were found for ABOi couples, while total number of transplantations was not hampered. Prioritizing difficult-to-match patients improves their chances without affecting the chances of regular patients.Transplantation and autoimmunit

The detrimental effect of donor-specific antibodies is irrespective of its level in highly-immunized living donor kidney transplant recipients: A case-control series

BACKGROUND: The impact of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) in (highly-) immunized living donor kidney transplant recipients is reported differentially in various patient cohorts. METHODS: We have performed a retrospective analysis of all consecutive HLA-incompatible living donor kidney transplant recipients in our center between 2010-2019. Recipients who underwent plasmafiltration for a positive CDC-crossmatch were excluded. For each DSA+ recipient (DSA+), one immunized recipient without DSA (pPRA+) and two non-immunized recipients (pPRA-) were included. Patient and graft survival were analyzed and a subgroup analysis of DSA+ recipients was performed. RESULTS: For 63 DSA+ recipients, 63 PRA+ and 126 PRA- recipients were included. 26 (41%) had class I, 24 (38%) class II and 13 (21%) combined HLA class I and II DSA. Death-censored graft survival was inferior in DSA+ recipients compared to pPRA+ (HR 2.38 [95% CI 1.00-5.70]) as well as to pPRA- (HR 3.91 [1.86-8.22]). In multivariate analysis, DSA remained of negative influence on death-censored graft survival. Flowcytometric crossmatch, MFI value, HLA class and origin of DSA were not of significant impact. CONCLUSION: In our cohort of (highly-) immunized recipients, pretransplant DSA led to inferior death-censored graft survival. There were no "safe" DSA characteristics since only DSA per se impacted death-censored graft survival

A functional polymorphism in Ficolin-2 in the donor kidney is associated with improved renal transplant outcome

Nephrolog