Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Voiculescu, A.
Right arrow Articles by Grabensee, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Voiculescu, A.
Right arrow Articles by Grabensee, B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant (2003) 18: 418-425
© 2003 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association

Kidney transplantation from related and unrelated living donors in a single German centre

Adina Voiculescu1,, Katrin Ivens1, Gerd Rüdiger Hetzel1, Markus Hollenbeck1, Wilhelm Sandmann2, Klaus Grabitz2, Kai Balzer2, Frank Schneider3 and Bernd Grabensee1

1 Department of Nephrology and Rheumatology, 2 Department of Vascular Surgery and Kidney Transplantation and 3 Department of Psychiatry, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany

Background. Organ transplantation began in 1954 with living related donation (LRD). Because of organ shortage from cadavers, unrelated kidney donation (LURD) has been proposed and shown to have good results despite complete HLA mismatching. This study aims to look at differences and similarities comparing LRD and LURD performed in our centre since the implementation of the German transplant law in 1997.

Methods. Between January 1997 and July 2001, 62 out of 112 potential living donors and their recipients were accepted. Immunosuppression consisted of triple therapy (steroids, cyclosporin, mycophenolate) in patients with three or fewer mismatches, or quadruple therapy including mono- or polyclonal antibody treatment in patients with four or more mismatches or cytotoxic antibodies. LRD and LURD groups were compared for number and type of rejections, complications and kidney function at the end of observation (median 15.5 months, range 1–50 months).

Results. Out of 112 pairs presenting, transplantation was performed in only 62 cases (55.4%). Reasons to deny transplantation were medical problems of the potential donors in 19, psychological problems in 13, recipient problems in seven and other reasons in 11 pairs. In 38 cases LRD transplantation and in 24 cases LURD transplantation was carried out. Recipient age was significantly lower in the LRD group (37.7±12.1 years) compared with the LURD group (53.6±7.8 years). Mean donor age was 49.7±9.2 years in the LRD group and 50.3±9.1 years in the LURD group (ns). The number of mismatches was lower in LRD (2.1±1) than in LURD (4.4±0.9) (P=0.001) transplantation. The acute rejection rate was similar in both groups (52.2 vs 54.2%). OKT3 and tacrolimus rescue therapy for more severe rejections was more often applied in the LRD group but the difference did not reach the level of significance. There were more infectious complications in LURD transplantation (66.7 vs 36.4%, P=0.036) and a trend towards more surgical complications in LRD transplantation (28.9 vs 8.3%, P=0.062). One graft was lost due to transplant artery thrombosis and one recipient died 4 months after transplantation subsequent to cerebral ischaemia. Both patients belonged to the LRD group. Creatinine values at the end of observation time were 1.76±0.6 mg/dl in the LRD group and 1.62±0.5 mg/dl in the LURD group (ns).

Conclusion. Although kidney transplantation from unrelated donors was performed with a lower HLA match and although the recipients were older, the results are equivalent to living related transplantation. Therefore, kidney transplantation from emotionally related living donors represents a valuable option for patients with end-stage renal disease. Careful selection of donors and recipients is a prerequisite of success.

Keywords: kidney transplantation; living kidney donation; related donors; unrelated donors

Correspondence and offprint requests to: A. Voiculescu, MD, Department of Nephrology and Rheumatology, Heinrich-Heine-University, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Düsseldorf, Germany. Email: voicules{at}uni-duesseldorf.de


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.