TY - JOUR
T1 - Feasible kidney donation with living marginal donors, including diabetes mellitus
AU - Yoshinaga, Kasumi
AU - Araki, Motoo
AU - Wada, Koichiro
AU - Sekito, Takanori
AU - Watari, Shogo
AU - Maruyama, Yuki
AU - Mitsui, Yosuke
AU - Sadahira, Takuya
AU - Kubota, Risa
AU - Nishimura, Shingo
AU - Edamura, Kohei
AU - Kobayashi, Yasuyuki
AU - Tanabe, Katsuyuki
AU - Takeuchi, Hidemi
AU - Kitagawa, Masashi
AU - Kitamura, Shinji
AU - Wada, Jun
AU - Watanabe, Masami
AU - Watanabe, Toyohiko
AU - Nasu, Yasutomo
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank Satomi Yamashita, the renal transplantation coordinator, at Okayama University Hospital.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. Immunity, Inflammation and Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2021/9
Y1 - 2021/9
N2 - Objectives: To compare the donor outcomes of living donor kidney transplantation between standard donors (SDs) and marginal donors (MDs) including diabetic patients (MD + DM). Methods: MDs were defined according to Japanese guideline criteria: (a) age >70-years, (b) blood pressure ≤130/80 mmHg on hypertension medicine, (c) body mass index >25 to ≤32 kg/m2, (d) 24-h creatinine clearance ≥70 to <80 ml/min/1.73 m2, and (e) hemoglobin A1c > 6.2 or ≤6.5 with oral diabetic medicine. Fifty-three of 114 donors were MDs. We compared donor kidney functions until 60 months postoperatively. Results: No kidney function parameters were different between SDs and MDs. When comparing SD and MD + DM, MD + DM had a lower postoperative eGFR (48 vs. 41 (1 (month), p =.02), 49 vs. 40 (12, p <.01), 48 vs. 42 (24, p =.04), 47 vs. 38 (36, p =.01)) and the percentage of residual eGFR (SD vs. MD + DM: 63 vs. 57 (1 (month), p <.01), 63 vs. 57 (2, p <.01), 64 vs. 56 (12, p <.01), 63 vs. 57 (24, p <.01), 63 vs. 52 (36, p =.02)). However, when MD with a single risk factor of DM was compared to SD, the difference disappeared. Nine out of 12 (75%) MD + DM had ≥2 risk factors. Conclusions: Although long-term observation of donor kidney function is necessary, careful MD + DM selection had the potential to expand the donor pool.
AB - Objectives: To compare the donor outcomes of living donor kidney transplantation between standard donors (SDs) and marginal donors (MDs) including diabetic patients (MD + DM). Methods: MDs were defined according to Japanese guideline criteria: (a) age >70-years, (b) blood pressure ≤130/80 mmHg on hypertension medicine, (c) body mass index >25 to ≤32 kg/m2, (d) 24-h creatinine clearance ≥70 to <80 ml/min/1.73 m2, and (e) hemoglobin A1c > 6.2 or ≤6.5 with oral diabetic medicine. Fifty-three of 114 donors were MDs. We compared donor kidney functions until 60 months postoperatively. Results: No kidney function parameters were different between SDs and MDs. When comparing SD and MD + DM, MD + DM had a lower postoperative eGFR (48 vs. 41 (1 (month), p =.02), 49 vs. 40 (12, p <.01), 48 vs. 42 (24, p =.04), 47 vs. 38 (36, p =.01)) and the percentage of residual eGFR (SD vs. MD + DM: 63 vs. 57 (1 (month), p <.01), 63 vs. 57 (2, p <.01), 64 vs. 56 (12, p <.01), 63 vs. 57 (24, p <.01), 63 vs. 52 (36, p =.02)). However, when MD with a single risk factor of DM was compared to SD, the difference disappeared. Nine out of 12 (75%) MD + DM had ≥2 risk factors. Conclusions: Although long-term observation of donor kidney function is necessary, careful MD + DM selection had the potential to expand the donor pool.
KW - diabetes mellitus
KW - kidney function
KW - kidney transplantation
KW - marginal donor
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85107593376&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85107593376&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/iid3.470
DO - 10.1002/iid3.470
M3 - Article
C2 - 34102025
AN - SCOPUS:85107593376
SN - 2050-4527
VL - 9
SP - 1061
EP - 1068
JO - Immunity, inflammation and disease
JF - Immunity, inflammation and disease
IS - 3
ER -
