BACKGROUND: Current potential living kidney donor\'s assessment includes functional and anatomical evaluation. Scintigraphy is recommended in some cases and some centers include this test in the donor\'s protocol. Recent studies advocate for the avoidance of this test as CT or MRI volumetry showed to accurately assess donor\'s renal function.
OBJECTIVE: To summarize scientific evidence on image tests for pre-donation and/or post-nephrectomy renal function evaluation.
METHODS: This review followed the guidelines set by the European Association of Urology and adhered to PRISMA 2020 recommendations. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO on 10th December 2022 (ID: CRD42022379273).
RESULTS: Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria after thorough screening and eligibility assessment. According to QUADAS-2, patient selection and flow/timing domains showed a predominant low risk of bias. The correlation between split renal function (SRF) using CT and scintigraphy varied from weak (r = 0.21) to remarkably strong (r = 0.949). Bland-Altman agreement demonstrated moderate to excellent results, with mean differences ranging from -0.06% to 1.76%. The correlation between split renal volume (CT) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 6 months or 1 year after nephrectomy showed a moderate correlation, with coefficients ranging from 0.708 to 0.83. The correlation between SRF (MRI) and renal scintigraphy reported a moderate correlation, with correlation coefficients of 0.58 and 0.84. MRI and scintigraphy displayed a good agreement, with a 66% agreement observed and mean differences of ± 0.3%.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite study heterogeneity, MRI or CT-based renal volumetry appears promising compared to scintigraphy, with favorable correlations and agreement.

BACKGROUND: Living kidney donors are screened pre-donation to estimate the risk of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). We evaluate Machine Learning (ML) to predict the progression of kidney function deterioration over time using the estimated GFR (eGFR) slope as the target variable.
METHODS: We included 238 living kidney donors who underwent donor nephrectomy. We divided the dataset based on the eGFR slope in the third follow-up year, resulting in 185 donors with an average eGFR slope and 53 donors with an accelerated declining eGFR-slope. We trained three Machine Learning-models (Random Forest [RF], Extreme Gradient Boosting [XG], Support Vector Machine [SVM]) and Logistic Regression (LR) for predictions. Predefined data subsets served for training to explore whether parameters of an ESKD risk score alone suffice or additional clinical and time-zero biopsy parameters enhance predictions. Machine learning-driven feature selection identified the best predictive parameters.
RESULTS: None of the four models classified the eGFR slope with an AUC greater than 0.6 or an F1 score surpassing 0.41 despite training on different data subsets. Following machine learning-driven feature selection and subsequent retraining on these selected features, random forest and extreme gradient boosting outperformed other models, achieving an AUC of 0.66 and an F1 score of 0.44. After feature selection, two predictive donor attributes consistently appeared in all models: smoking-related features and glomerulitis of the Banff Lesion Score.
CONCLUSIONS: Training machine learning-models with distinct predefined data subsets yielded unsatisfactory results. However, the efficacy of random forest and extreme gradient boosting improved when trained exclusively with machine learning-driven selected features, suggesting that the quality, rather than the quantity, of features is crucial for machine learning-model performance. This study offers insights into the application of emerging machine learning-techniques for the screening of living kidney donors.

BACKGROUND: Because most kidney transplantations in Japan are performed on the basis of living donors, after-transplant outcomes should achieve optimum results, overcoming participants\' possible reduced adherence.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between the Japanese version of the Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation (SIPAT-J) and outcomes, 1 year after the patient\'s living kidney transplant (LKT).
METHODS: The prospective cohort study was undertaken at Tokyo Women\'s Medical University Hospital from January 2020 to July 2021, with a 1-year follow-up period. The SIPAT-J assesses 18 psychosocial risk factors: (1) Patient\'s Readiness Level and Illness Management (SIPAT A), (2) Social Support System Level of Readiness (SIPAT B), (3) Psychological Stability and Psychopathology (SIPAT C), and (4) Lifestyle and Effect of Substance Use (SIPAT D). The evaluators, a psychiatrist and 3 clinical psychologists, conducted an independent, blinded application of the SIPAT-J using participants\' medical records. The study focused on physical composite outcomes, psychiatric outcomes, and nonadherent behaviors.
RESULTS: The participants were 173 LKT recipients (median age [interquartile range], 51 [38-59]); 67.1% were male and 67.1% were employed. The median (interquartile range) SIPAT scores were SIPAT A [7 (5-9)], SIPAT B [7 (5-9)], SIPAT C [2 (0-4)], SIPAT D [3 (3-4)], and SIPAT total [20 (16-23)]. The physical composite outcome was 25 (14.5%), psychiatric outcome 9 (5.2%), and nonadherent behavior 17 (9.8%). SIPAT C (odds ratio = 1.34, 95% confidence interval = 1.06-1.72, P = 0.02) was significantly associated with the psychiatric outcome. SIPAT B (odds ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval = 1.12-1.98, P = 0.01) and SIPAT total (odds ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval = 1.03-1.24, P = 0.01) were significantly associated with nonadherent behaviors. There was no significant association between the SIPAT and physical composite outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to examine the association between SIPAT and physical and psychiatric outcomes 1 year after LKT, controlling for follow-up periods and factors other than SIPAT. Comprehensive psychosocial assessment before LKT and early identification of factors that may negatively affect transplant success can allow targeted interventions to be implemented and increase the likelihood of favorable recipient outcomes.

Because of the lack of organ donation, living kidney transplantation (LKT) is increasing worldwide. Recently, the number of elderly donors has been increasing, and the patients with end-stage kidney diseases are older than those in the previous decades. Due to the advanced ages, their glomerular filtration rates (GFR) decrease, and the comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetic condition, and obesity are common. The clinicians now have to give their unwilling consent to the LKT from the donors with expanded criteria.
For the secure selection of donors, proper GFR measuring is essential. Although directly measured GFR (mGFR) was recommended in the guidelines, estimated GFR (eGFR) is used at the initial evaluation of donor renal function clinically. Many equations calculating eGFR have been published so far. In the selection of eGFR equations, the smaller difference between mGFR and eGFR and the closer relationship to the prevalence rates of comorbidities are requisite points. Therefore, we compared the specificity of the various eGFR equations. The eGFR calculated from the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation showed approximate reliability with minimal difference between mGFR and eGFR and the closer relationships to the prevalence rates of comorbidities.
The CKD-EPI-eGFR presented optimal performance in the donor renal function evaluation. Therefore, eGFR from the CKD-EPI equation is highly recommended in evaluating renal function in LKT donors.

Living kidney donation improves the lives of individuals with kidney failure; however, recent studies have suggested that living kidney donors may be at a relatively higher risk of reduced renal function than healthy non-donors. We therefore aimed to evaluate the clinical and pathological findings in living kidney donors who developed kidney disease.
From January 1991 to May 2019, 1,625 live kidney donations were performed at our hospital. Among the donors, 7 developed kidney disease after donation and underwent open renal biopsy. We studied the clinical and pathological findings of these patients from their clinical records.
There were 3 patients with immunoglobulin A (IgA) nephropathy, 2 with membranous nephropathy, 1 with anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated glomerulonephritis, and 1 with secondary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS). All patients with IgA nephropathy had latent IgA deposition on their baseline biopsy. One patient with membranous nephropathy demonstrated findings of membranous nephropathy on the baseline biopsy, despite being asymptomatic. All patients, except for those with ANCA-associated nephropathy and secondary FSGS, recovered from the nephritis or maintained an adequate renal function after treatment.
Baseline biopsy is necessary for assessing the renal condition of kidney donors, and these donors require long-term follow-up based on their baseline biopsy findings. If donors develop kidney disease, appropriate diagnosis and treatment are essential.

Due to its numerous advantages, transplantation from a living kidney donor is the best method of renal replacement therapy. However, the characteristics of the procedure require to consider well-being of not only the recipient, but also the donor - a person who suddenly becomes a patient despite former good health. The living donation is a selfless act, but also a decision that may endanger one\'s own health. The aim of this article was to review the current knowledge concerning the quality of life, symptoms of anxiety and depression occurring among living kidney donors and recipients. In order to do that, we performed a systematic research in the PubMed, Google Scholar and CINAHL databases for the years 2000-2019 with the use of key words. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were met by only 15 articles. This study shows that the mental state of donors is generally better than that of recipients. Additionally, reduction of anxiety and depression as well as increase in the quality of life occurs in both donors and recipients in the post-transplant period compared to the time before surgery. Further research is needed on this topic in order to improve psychological aspects of care of live kidney donors and recipients.

The occurrence of acute antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is higher in flow cytometric crossmatch (FCXM)-positive patients despite desensitization. Accumulating evidence suggests a correlation between the complement-binding ability of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) and the risk of ABMR. Here, we investigated the correlation between complement C3d-fixing ability of preformed DSA and ABMR risk, the efficacy of a desensitization protocol for patients with C3d-fixing DSA, and the risk of ABMR in 21 DSA- and FCXM-positive patients. We retrospectively analyzed the C3d-fixing ability and mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of preformed DSA before and after desensitization. Six patients had non-C3d-fixing DSA and 15 had C3d-fixing DSA. The presence of C3d-fixing DSA before desensitization was correlated with the incidence of acute ABMR within 1 year after transplantation (p = .04) and chronic ABMR (p = .03). Moreover, the MFI of preformed DSA differed between responder and non-responder C3d-fixing DSA after desensitization (p < .0001). The C3d-fixing ability of preformed DSA with low MFI disappeared after desensitization. These results indicate that measuring DSA C3d-fixing ability may identify patients with a high risk of ABMR, especially before desensitization. CLINICAL TRIAL NOTATION: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) number: UMIN000033449.

OBJECTIVE: First robotic-assisted kidney transplants (RAKT) were performed in Germany in 2016. To introduce and establish this method as a routine procedure for patients in transplantation medicine, our 2-year experiences are presented.
METHODS: Non-randomized open-label cohort study to compare functional and operative results as well as complication rates between RAKT and standard open transplantation. Collected data are part of ERUS RAKT Group Registry.
RESULTS: Since initiation of the RAKT program 21/27 transplantations after living kidney donations have been performed as RAKT. This represents the largest series of RAKT in Germany. Patient survival, transplant survival, and primary function rate are 100% (mean follow-up 12.9 ± 8.6 month). Mean incision to closure time was 306.1 ± 45.5, mean handling time 70.8 ± 13.1 min compared to 212.1 ± 40.6 min and 51.7 ± 9.9 min, respectively, in the standard group. Despite extended operating times using the robotic approach, comparable complication rates and graft function with significant reduction in median length of hospital stay (14 vs. 20 days) were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: RAKT extends the options for recipients towards minimally invasive techniques. Compared to classic open surgery, RAKT appears to be safe in selected patients without influencing graft outcome or higher complication rates. However, RAKT till today is not suitable for all patients but seems to be one of the upcoming new standard techniques in kidney transplantation.

ABO-incompatible living kidney transplantation (ABO-ILKT) is an effective option for increasing living kidney transplant opportunities. ABO-ILKT has been conducted in our institution since 1989 to widen the indication for living kidney transplantation. ABO-ILKT is considered to require extra treatment, and it has increased risks compared with ABO-compatible living kidney transplantation (ABO-CLKT). In the past two decades, some protocols have removed anti-blood-type antibodies to prevent the production of antibodies. Additionally, we have made considerable changes to our ABO-ILKT protocol as new immunosuppressive agents have been developed. Consequently, increased immunosuppression and immunological understanding have helped shape recent desensitization protocols. Herein, we review the history, therapeutic strategy, pathology, and future directions of ABO-ILKT. Our standard immunosuppressive regimen and desensitization protocol for ABO-ILKT recipients consist of low doses of tacrolimus (TAC), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and rituximab; several sessions of double filtration plasmapheresis; and basiliximab induction. We do not use thymoglobulin induction, intravenous immunoglobulin, or prophylactic post-transplant plasmapheresis. Recently, ABO-ILKT has been recognized as a useful alternative therapy for end-stage kidney disease with ABO-incompatibility, and its outcome is comparable to that of ABO-CLKT.

暂无摘要。