OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the follow-up rate of living kidney donors and explored the factors related to continuous follow-up and remnant renal function, enabling the optimal management of living kidney donors.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 180 living kidney donors who underwent donor nephrectomies at our institute. Clinical information was obtained from medical charts, and remnant renal function was defined as the estimated glomerular filtration rate 12 months after donor nephrectomy.
RESULTS: Overall, 6/180 donors (3.3%) were lost to follow-up within a year, and the follow-up rate gradually declined yearly. Independent risk factors for loss to follow-up included a follow-up period <60 months and graft survival of the recipient (p=0.002 and p=0.043, respectively). Recipient survival was correlated with loss to follow-up; however, this was not significant (p=0.051). Regarding remnant renal function, age ≥60 years, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate <74 ml/min/1.73 m2, and a Δsingle-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate <9.3 ml/min/1.73m2 were independent risk factors for poorly preserved remnant renal function (p=0.036, p<0.0001, and p<0.0001, respectively). Using propensity score matching to adjust for preoperative factors, a Δsingle-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate <9.3 ml/min/1.73 m2 was the only significant postoperative factor for poorly preserved remnant renal function (p=0.023).
CONCLUSIONS: An increased 5-year follow-up rate could lead to an increase in long-term follow-up, and recipient prognosis may be correlated with the living kidney donor follow-up status. Furthermore, Δsingle-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate was identified as a factor for establishing the optimal precision follow-up management of living kidney donors.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetic kidney disease is a major vascular complication in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). However, the association between the hemoglobin (Hb)A1c levels, notably the prediabetic levels, and renal pathological changes remains unclear. We investigated the association between the HbA1c levels and renal arteriolar lesions in subjects without any apparent kidney dysfunction using a living kidney donor cohort.
METHODS: Between January 2006 and May 2016, 393 living kidney donors underwent a \"zero-time\" biopsy at Kyushu University Hospital. The patients were divided into four groups (HbA1c levels ＜5.6%, 5.6%-5.7%, 5.8%-6.4%, and ≥ 6.5%, or diagnosed with DM [DM group]). Renal arteriolar hyalinization and wall thickening were assessed using semi-quantitative grading. We then investigated the association between the HbA1c levels and renal pathological changes.
RESULTS: 158 (40.2%) patients had arteriolar hyalinization and 148 (37.6%) showed wall thickening. A significant correlation was observed between the HbA1c levels and wall thickening (p for trend ＜0.001). An elevated HbA1c level was significantly associated with wall thickening according to a multivariable logistic analysis in subjects with HbA1c levels of 5.6%-5.7% and 5.8%-6.4%, and the DM group, compared with those with HbA1c levels of ＜5.6% (odds ratio [OR], 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.03-3.54] for 5.6%-5.7%, OR, 1.96; 95% CI: [1.09-3.53] for 5.8%-6.4%, and OR, 2.86; 95% CI: [0.91-9.01] for the DM group), whereas arteriolar hyalinization did not increase within the nondiabetic HbA1c levels.
CONCLUSIONS: Elevated high-normal HbA1c levels are considered to be independent risk factors for arteriolar wall thickening. Subclinical renal arteriolar sclerosis may develop in patients with prediabetic HbA1c levels.

BACKGROUND: Elderly living kidney donors (LKDs) are becoming increasingly important in countries with a high prevalence of living-donor kidney transplants and an aging society. This study explored the features of elderly LKDs, focusing on their subsequent outcomes.
METHODS: This single-center, retrospective, observational study included eligible LKDs who donated their kidneys between April 2008 and July 2022. LKDs were categorized into an elderly (≥70 years at donation) or a non-elderly group (<70 years). We examined pre-operative characteristics and post-operative outcomes, such as kidney function, complications, development of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and mortality.
RESULTS: Of the 188 LKDs observed for a median of 5.7 years, 31 were in the elderly group (16.5%) and 157 (83.5%) were in the non-elderly group (mean age 72.5 ± 2.7 and 58.2 ± 7.3 years, respectively). No significant differences were observed in hospital stay length or peri-operative complications between groups. Both groups experienced a similar decline in post-donation estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)-approximately 37%. In the elderly group, four LKDs died, and one progressed to ESKD. In the non-elderly group, two LKDs died, and none progressed to ESKD. The cause of death was not strongly suspected to be associated with the donation.
CONCLUSIONS: eGFR was maintained even in elderly LKDs post-donation. Prioritizing LKDs\' safety is paramount; however, donations from elderly people would be acceptable, considering their life expectancy. This can expand the pool of living kidney donors and address the growing demand for kidney transplants.

UNASSIGNED: Understanding national attitudes about living kidney donation will enable us to identify and address existing disincentives to living kidney donation. We performed a national survey to describe living kidney donation perceptions, perceived factors that affect the willingness to donate, and analyzed differences by demographic subgroups.
UNASSIGNED: The survey items captured living kidney donation awareness, living kidney donation knowledge, willingness to donate, and barriers and facilitators to living kidney donation.
UNASSIGNED: We surveyed 802 US adults (aged 25-65 years) in June 2021, randomly selected from an online platform with diverse representation.
UNASSIGNED: We developed summed, scaled indices to assess the association between the living kidney donation knowledge (9 items) and the willingness to donate (8 items) to self-reported demographic characteristics and other variables of interest using analysis of variance. All other associations for categorical questions were calculated using Pearson\'s χ2 and Fisher exact tests. We inductively evaluated free-text responses to identify additional barriers and facilitators to living kidney donation.
UNASSIGNED: Most (86.6%) of the respondents reported that they might or would definitely consider donating a kidney while they were still living. Barriers to living kidney donation included concerns about the risk of the surgery, paying for medical expenses, and potential health effects. Facilitators to living kidney donation included having information on the donation surgery\'s safety, knowing that the donor would not have to pay for medical expenses related to the donation, and hearing living kidney donation success stories. Awareness of the ability to participate in kidney-paired donation was associated with a higher willingness to donate.
UNASSIGNED: Potential for selection bias resulting from the use of survey panels and varied incentive amounts, and measurement error related to respondents\' attention level.
UNASSIGNED: Most people would consider becoming a living kidney donor. Increased rates of living kidney donation may be possible with investment in culturally competent educational interventions that address risks associated with donating, policies that reduce financial disincentives, and communication campaigns that raise awareness of kidney-paired donation and living kidney donation.
Understanding what the general public thinks about living kidney donation will help to develop better education and increase the number of living kidney donors. We surveyed the public to find out: (1) how aware they are about the opportunity to donate a kidney while alive; (2) how much they know about living kidney donation; (3) whether they would be willing to donate; and (4) what would affect their willingness to donate. We found that teaching people about the risks of donating, decreasing costs related to donation, and raising awareness about it could increase the number of people willing to donate.

BACKGROUND: Living kidney donations (LKDs) face a persistent demand for patients with end-stage renal disease, emphasizing the importance of LKDs\' growth and success. Although living kidney donors generally exhibit excellent survival rates, little research has explored the development of long-term sexual dysfunction following LKD.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze differences in 5-year sexual dysfunction outcomes between male and female living kidney donors, utilizing the TriNetX database, a federated network of electronic medical records from multiple U.S. healthcare organizations.
METHODS: A propensity score-matched cohort study compared 45-year sexual dysfunction outcomes in adult male and female living kidney donors from December 2013 to December 2022. Cohorts were matched on age; sex; race and ethnicity; diabetes, cardiovascular, genitourinary, and psychiatric comorbidities; lifestyle-related factors; and medications that may impact normal sexual functioning. Primary outcomes included hazard ratio (HR) for decreased libido, sexual dysfunction (composite of male erectile dysfunction, ejaculatory disorders, vaginismus/dyspareunia, infertility, orgasmic disorders, arousal/desire disorders), and sexually transmitted diseases. Secondary outcomes assessed sex counseling and interpersonal relationship issues with spouses or partners.
RESULTS: The matched cohorts included 2315 patients each (male, female), and the mean age was 42.3 ± 12.5 years. At 5 years, male donors had a significantly higher HR for sexual dysfunction (HR, 3.768; 95% confidence interval, 1.929-7.358). Erectile dysfunction occurred in 1% of male patients, while vaginismus/dyspareunia affected <1% of female patients. Other sexual disorders, decreased libido, sexually transmitted diseases, and incidences of sexual and interspousal counseling were not significantly different.
CONCLUSIONS: Male living kidney donors faced a higher risk of developing sexual dysfunction 5 years after donation. While LKD remains a safe and viable alternative, clinicians and donors should be mindful of the potential association with sexual dysfunction postdonation. Further research may enhance support for the well-being of living kidney donors.

Thirteen years after kidney donation, a 70-year-old man was referred to a nephrologist because of proteinuria. The serum creatinine, albumin, and urinary protein levels were 2.39 mg/dL, 3.0 g/dL, and 6.72 g/gCr, respectively. A kidney biopsy revealed thickening of the glomerular basement membrane with sub-epithelial deposits, suggesting membranous nephropathy. Considering the apparent interstitial fibrosis and diffuse glomerulosclerosis, supportive treatment was chosen. However, 11 months after the kidney biopsy, hemodialysis was required. The present case constitutes an important teaching point, as glomerular disease can occur in living donors and require careful and long-term medical checkup examinations.

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies suggested that living kidney donors do not have a higher risk of death or kidney failure than the general population. However, living kidney donor risk is controversial. Furthermore, only a few studies have evaluated long-term kidney function after kidney donation.
METHODS: This study evaluated Japanese kidney donor\' long-term outcomes, including mortality and kidney function. From 1965 to 2015, 230 donors (76 males, 154 females, and a median age of 54) were enrolled in this study. The median observation period was 11.0 (range, 0.3-41.0) years.
RESULTS: In total, 215 donors were still alive, and 15 had died. Causes of death included malignancies, cardiovascular disease, pneumonia, suicide, gastrointestinal bleeding, and kidney failure. Actual donor survival rates at 10, 20, and 30 years were 95.3%, 90.7%, and 80.9%, respectively. These values were comparable to age- and gender-matched expected survival. Long-term kidney function after donation was evaluated in 211 donors with serum creatinine data. Two donors developed kidney failure 24 and 26 years post-donation, respectively. The percentage of donors whose estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) remained ≥45 mL/min/1.73 m2 at 10, 20, and 30 years after donation were 84.2%, 73.0%, and 63.9%, respectively. Survival rates of donors with eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 were comparable to those in persons with eGFR >45 mL/min/1.73 m2.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings revealed that kidney donors did not have a higher long-term risk of death than the general population. Although some donors showed decreased kidney function after donation, kidney function did not impact their survival.

BACKGROUND: Donors bravely donate their kidneys because they expect that living donor kidney transplantation (LKT) confers benefits to recipients. However, the magnitude of the survival benefit of LKT is uncertain.
METHODS: This prospective cohort study used two Japanese nationwide databases for dialysis and kidney transplantation and included 862 LKT recipients and 285,242 hemodialysis (HD) patients in the main model and 5299 LKT recipients and 151,074 HD patients in the supplementary model. We employed time-dependent model in the main model and assessed the hazard ratio and the difference in the restricted mean survival time (RMST) between LKT recipients and HD patients. In the main analysis of the main model (LKT, N = 675; HD, N = 675), we matched LKT recipients with HD patients by age, sex, dialysis vintage, and cause of renal failure and excluded HD patients with dementia or performance status grades 2, 3, or 4.
RESULTS: The median observational period was 8.00 (IQR 3.58-8.00) years. LKT was significantly associated with a lower risk of mortality (hazard ratios (95% confidence interval (CI)), 0.50 (0.35-0.72)) and an increase in life expectancy (7-year RMST differences (95% CI), 0.48 (0.35-0.60) years) compared with HD. In subgroup analysis, the survival benefit of LKT was greater in female patients than in male patients in the Cox model; whereas older patients gained longer life expectancy compared with younger patients.
CONCLUSIONS: LKT was associated with better survival benefits than HD, and the estimated increase in life expectancy was 0.48 years for 7 years.

BACKGROUND: Residence in rural areas is often a barrier to health care access. To date, differences in access to kidney transplantation among children who reside in rural and micropolitan areas of the US have not been explored.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of children < 18 years who developed kidney failure between 2000 and 2019 according to the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). We examined the association between rurality of patient residence and time to living and/or deceased donor kidney transplantation (primary outcomes) and waitlist registration (secondary outcome) using Fine-Gray models.
RESULTS: We included 18,530 children, of whom 14,175 (76.5%) received a kidney transplant (39.8% from a living and 60.2% from a deceased donor). Residence in micropolitan (subhazard ratio (SHR) 1.16; 95% CI 1.06-1.27) and rural (SHR 1.18; 95% CI 1.06-1.3) areas was associated with better access to living donor transplantation compared with residence in metropolitan areas. There was no statistically significant association between residence in micropolitan (SHR, 0.95; 95%CI 0.88-1.03) and rural (SHR, 0.94; 95%CI 0.86-1.03) areas compared with metropolitan areas in the access of children to deceased donor transplantation. There was also no difference in the time to waitlist registration comparing micropolitan (SHR 1.04; 95%CI 0.98-1.10) and rural (SHR 1.05; 95% CI 0.98-1.13) versus metropolitan areas.
CONCLUSIONS: In children with kidney failure, residence in rural and micropolitan areas was associated with better access to living donor transplantation and similar access to deceased donor transplantation compared with residence in metropolitan areas.

BACKGROUND: A growing body of research has examined the physical, psychological, social and financial impacts of living kidney donation. However, little is known about the unique experiences or additional burdens faced by living donors from regional or remote locations.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the experiences of living kidney donors who live outside metropolitan centres and to determine how support services could be orientated to better meet their unique needs.
METHODS: Seventeen living kidney donors participated in semistructured telephone interviews. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Eight themes were identified: (1) donor\'s emotional well-being is influenced by the recipient\'s outcome, (2) varied levels of access to medical support and other important services in rural areas, (3) travel takes a toll on time, finances and well-being, (4) varied level of financial impact, (5) medical, emotional and social challenges, (6) both lay and health professional support is valued, (7) varied levels of knowledge and experiences accessing information and (8) a worthwhile experience overall.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite many challenges, and travel adding to the complexity, rural living kidney donors generally consider it to be a worthwhile experience. The provision of additional emotional, practical and educational support would be welcomed by this group.