Citations

ABSTRACT Aim The supply of donor kidneys (living and deceased) has fallen far behind the need, while the number of patients with end stage kidney disease continues to rise, increasing their risk of cardiovascular mortality. Kidney transplant candidates frequently exhibit large artery calcification, a major contributor to cardiovascular death. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between abdominal arterial calcification (AAC) and survival in patients awaiting kidney transplant. Methods We modified the coronary calcium scoring method (Modified Agatston Method) and applied it to quantify AAC. This retrospective study included all adult patients ( N = 4184) listed for kidney transplant from 2005 to 2023 who had undergone abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans. Patients were categorised into two groups: those who died while on the waiting list (DWL) and those who survived (SWL). Results Among 4184 candidates, 446 (10.7%) died while on the waiting list, and 3738 (89.3%) survived to transplant or study end. Patients in the DWL group had significantly higher AAC scores across all vascular sites. The median total AAC score was 3605.8 (IQR 780.1–9017.3) in the DWL group versus 940.1 (IQR 49.2–4915.0) in the SWL group. Each 1000‐point increase in total AAC was associated with a 5.1% increase in mortality risk (HR 1.051; p < 0.001). An AAC cutoff of > 1769 correlated with reduced 5‐year survival (45.4% vs. 77.4%, p < 0.001). Conclusion AAC scoring on non‐contrast abdominal CT represents a noninvasive biomarker of mortality in kidney transplant waitlist patients and may enhance risk stratification and personalised care.

Obesity is increasingly prevalent among living kidney donor candidates, presenting complex clinical, ethical, and logistical challenges. Although obesity is linked to increased post-donation hypertension, diabetes, proteinuria, and chronic kidney disease, the overall absolute risks are modest and may differ depending on metabolic health and patterns of fat distribution. Current reliance on body mass index alone fails to capture the full spectrum of obesity-related risks, leading to inconsistent donor selection practices and potential inequities. This review examines the pathophysiological mechanisms of obesity-related kidney injury and available evidence on comorbidities and postdonation outcomes related to obesity. We discuss tools for better risk stratification, such as imaging-based adiposity assessment and personalized weight management strategies, and note that some risks may remain after weight loss. Barriers such as rigid body mass index cutoffs, limited access to treatment, and lack of long-term follow-up exacerbate disparities in access to donation. We argue for a shift toward individualized, risk-based evaluation supported by multidisciplinary care. We underscore the importance of donor counseling and advocate for a comprehensive, rather than paternalistic approach to living kidney donor selection. Advancing safe and equitable living donation in the context of rising obesity rates will necessitate revised guidelines, improved access to treatment, and an ongoing commitment to donor well-being.

ABSTRACT Background Abdominal arterial calcification (AAC) is a common comorbidity in patients with end‐stage kidney disease (ESKD) and a predictor of cardiovascular events post‐kidney transplant. However, prior studies lacked a standardized approach to evaluate AAC and its impact on post‐transplant outcomes. This study aimed to correlate AAC score values with post‐kidney transplant outcomes using a modified scoring system traditionally applied to coronary artery calcification. Methods This retrospective study included 14 339 adult patients listed for kidney transplant between 2002 and 2023 at three transplant centers. Among them, 3683 patients met the criteria of undergoing a kidney transplant and an abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan pre‐transplant. We modified the coronary calcium score software by adjusting intake data points to quantify calcification in the abdominal aorta, common iliac, external iliac, and internal iliac arteries. Outcomes focused on post‐transplant mortality. Results In 3683 kidney transplant recipients, higher AAC scores were significantly associated with increased mortality. Each 1000‐unit increase in AAC score elevated hazard ratios (HRs) across arterial regions, including 1.116 for the aorta and 1.389 for the internal iliac (all p < 0.001). Adjusted analyses confirmed AAC as an independent risk factor for mortality. Kaplan–Meier curves demonstrated lower survival with increasing AAC quartiles. Conclusions AAC, measured by a standardized score, is a significant mortality risk factor in kidney transplant recipients. Integrating AAC scores into pre‐transplant evaluations could enhance risk stratification and improve outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to validate these findings and explore interventions to reduce AAC and improve survival.

Background. Living kidney donation (KD) evaluation particularly focuses on glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Assessing GFR in living kidney donors can be done by estimation (eGFR) or measurement (mGFR). This study aims to evaluate the impact of eGFR equations, focusing on the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) 2021 equation for donor eligibility screening and the reclassification of donors excluded by eGFR criteria to mGFR assessments. Methods. Retrospective, single-center observational study of 2512 kidney donors evaluated between 2011 and 2023, at the Mayo Clinic. We performed analyses and comparisons of 4 eGFR formulae and 2 mGFR methods in terms of performance, eligibility criteria according to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines/age-adjusted criteria, eligibility reclassification, and subgroup analyses. Results. The CKD-EPI 2021 resulted in a higher percentage of patients being eligible for KD (81.4%) and achieved the highest P10 (32%–34%) and P30 (87%–88%) across all mGFR methods. When patients were deemed eligible for donation by any eGFR formula, 95% retained this status on reassessment with mGFR. Conversely, when an eGFR formula classified a patient as ineligible, this was revised to be eligible in about 90% of cases on reassessment with mGFR, with a higher reclassification rate observed when the IoCl was used instead of CrCl. Conclusions. The CKD-EPI 2021 performs best for screening potential KD. If a KD is deemed ineligible by CKD-EPI 2021, there is a high likelihood that they will be reclassified as eligible when assessed with mGFR. This study strongly supports using mGFR in donor evaluations, especially when the eGFR does not meet the criteria to ensure equity of access to being a living donor.

ABSTRACT Background Ureteral stents are commonly placed during kidney transplantation (KT) to mitigate urologic complications. The objective of this study was to compare clinical outcomes in KT recipients with either early stent removal when attached to the Foley catheter or late removal via cystoscopy when unattached. Methods We conducted a multi‐center retrospective analysis of consecutive living donor KT patients (8/18/21‐4/21/23) stratified into Foley‐attached and unattached stent groups. Outcomes assessed were ureteral stricture, urine leaks, UTIs at 90 days and allograft failure and BKV DNAemia (BK virus DNAemia) at 1 year. Data are reported as mean and standard deviation. Results Among 247 patients with attached and 260 with unattached stents, baseline demographics (age, sex, diabetes) were similar between groups. There was a difference in race (87.9% vs. 77.8% Caucasian; p = 0.004). Foley catheters remained longer in the attached group (3.7 ± 1.8 vs. 3.0 ± 2.0 days; p < 0.001), but stents were removed earlier (3.7 ± 1.8 vs. 21.9 ± 4.7 days; p < 0.001). Comparing attached versus unattached, there were no differences in ureteral stricture (0.4% vs. 1.5%; p = 0.197), urine leak (0.8% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.533), BKV DNAemia (17.7% vs. 16.9%; p = 0.616), or allograft failure (0% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.167). However, UTI incidence by 90 days was lower in the attached group (5.7% vs. 11.9% p = 0.013). Induction therapy differed significantly between groups, with Alemtuzumab more common in the unattached group (58.1% vs. 19.4%, p < 0.001), Basiliximab more common in the attached group (43.3% vs. 35.0%, p < 0.001), and Thymoglobulin more common in the attached group (36.0% vs. 6.9%, p < 0.001). Baseline steroid use was higher in the unattached group (81.9% vs. 57.9%, p < 0.001). Conclusion Early stent removal via connection to the Foley catheter had similarly low rates of ureteral complications while reducing urinary tract infections and avoiding cystoscopic removal.

ABSTRACTIntroductionThe diagnosis of antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) requires input from several transplant professionals. Bringing clinical and laboratory experts together may help standardize care. Yet, little is known about current global practices of multidisciplinary meetings for AMR management.MethodsThe Banff Antibody‐Mediated Injury Working Group approached professional societies worldwide to distribute a survey on the availability, content, participants, perceived value, and barriers to the implementation of multidisciplinary meetings.ResultsFour hundred two transplant professionals from six continents caring for kidney (90.55%), liver (21.14%), pancreas (20.65%), heart (15.17%), and lung (14.18%) transplant recipients participated in the survey, and 302 (75.12%) reported attending multidisciplinary meetings. Multidisciplinary meetings were more prevalent in academic centers, in high‐ versus low‐to‐middle‐income regions (81.03% and 65.99%, respectively; p < 0.001), and in mid‐to‐large size transplant programs compared to smaller programs. Perceived value included continued professional development (97.68%) and trainee education (95.70%). AMR was reported to be discussed at these meetings by 217 respondents with case presentations reviewing patient characteristics, histology, and HLA antibody data. A third of the respondents reviewed non‐HLA/pathogenic autoantibodies and/or molecular diagnostics, with the latter being more frequently applied in high‐ versus low‐to‐middle‐income regions (46.71% and 12.31%, respectively; p < 0.001). AMR case presentations allowed diagnosis revision, actionable management plans and were perceived as improving care. The primary barrier to the implementation of multidisciplinary meetings (63.27%) was the unavailability of transplant professionals (e.g., transplant immunologists).ConclusionFacilitating multidisciplinary meetings through the remote participation of pertinent experts and incentivizing participation through remuneration, protected time, or continued medical education may help standardize AMR diagnosis and harmonize its management.