Abstract
Abstract
Background and Aims
Living donor kidneys are considered the best quality organs. In the attempt to expand the donor pool, the donor’s age, sex and body mass index (BMI) might be considered as potential determinants of the kidney transplant outcomes, and thus guide recipient selection. We aimed to investigate the effects of donor demographics on kidney function, graft and recipient survival, delayed graft function (DGF) and acute rejection (AR).
Methods
Systematic review and meta-analysis. EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, BIOSIS, CABI, SciELO and Cochrane were searched using algorithms. NHBLI tools were used for risk of bias assessment. Mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD), and risk ratio (RR) were calculated in Revman 5.4
Results
Altogether, 5129 studies were identified by the search algorithm; 47 studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. No significant difference in recipient 1-year survival was found between recipients of donors aged < 50 vs donors aged > 50 (RR = 0.65 95% CI: 0.1–4.1), and recipients of donors aged < 60 vs donors aged > 60 (RR = 0.81 95% CI: 0.3–2.3). Graft survival was significantly higher in recipients of grafts from donors aged < 60. Risk of AR (RR = 0.62 95% CI: 0.5–0.8) and DGF (RR = 0.28 95% CI: 0.1–0.9) were significantly lower in recipients of grafts from donors aged < 60. One-year serum creatinine was significantly lower in recipients from donors aged < 60 years compared to donors aged > 60 years (MD = 0.3 mg/dl 95% CI: 0.1–0.9), although there was high heterogeneity. Recipients of grafts from male donors had lower 1-year serum creatinine (MD = 0.12 mg/dl 95% CI: 0.2–0.1) and higher eGFR compared to recipients of female donors (p < 0.00001). Donor obesity increased the incidence of delayed graft function but not acute rejection (RR = 0.66 95% CI: 0.32–1.34).
Conclusions
Older donor age was associated with worse post-transplant outcomes and recipients of male donors had better 1-year eGFR. Donor obesity affects the incidence of delayed graft function, but not the incidence of acute rejection in recipients.
Graphical Abstract
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference59 articles.
1. Reese PP, Boudville N, Garg AX (2015) Living kidney donation: outcomes, ethics, and uncertainty. Lancet 385(9981):2003–2013
2. Bellini MI, Charalampidis S, Stratigos I, Dor F, Papalois V (2019) The effect of donors’ demographic characteristics in renal function post-living kidney donation. Analysis of a UK Single Centre Cohort. J Clin Med 8:6
3. Ahmadi AR, Lafranca JA, Claessens LA, Imamdi RMS, IJzermans JNM, Betjes MG, Dor FJMF (2015) Shifting paradigms in eligibility criteria for live kidney donation: a systematic review. Kidney Int 87(1):31–45
4. Bellini MI, Yiu J, Nozdrin M, Papalois V (2019) The effect of preservation temperature on liver, kidney, and pancreas tissue ATP in animal and preclinical human models. J Clin Med 8:9
5. Kayler LK, Rasmussen CS, Dykstra DM, Ojo AO, Port FK, Wolfe RA, Merion RM (2003) Gender imbalance and outcomes in living donor renal transplantation in the United States. Am J Transpl 3(4):452–458
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献