TY - JOUR
T1 - Living kidney donor estimated glomerular filtration rate and recipient graft survival
AU - Young, Ann
AU - Joseph Kim, S.
AU - Garg, Amit X.
AU - Huang, Anjie
AU - Knoll, Greg
AU - Ramesh Prasad, G. V.
AU - Treleaven, Darin
AU - Lok, Charmaine E.
AU - Arnold, Jennifer
AU - Boudville, Neil
AU - Bugeya, Ann
AU - Dipchand, Christine
AU - Doshi, Mona
AU - Feldman, Liane
AU - Gerg, Amit
AU - Geddes, Colin
AU - Gibney, Eric
AU - Gill, John
AU - Karpinski, Martin
AU - Kim, Joseph
AU - Klarenbach, Scott
AU - Laok, Charmaine
AU - McFarlane, Philip
AU - Monroy-Cuadros, Mauricio
AU - Muirhead, Norman
AU - Nevis, Immaculate
AU - Nguan, Christopher Y.
AU - Parikh, Chirag
AU - Poggio, Emilio
AU - Ramesh Prasad, G. V.
AU - Storsley, Leroy
AU - Taub, Ken
AU - Thomas, Sonia
AU - Traleaven, Darin
AU - Youeng, Ann
N1 - Funding Information:
This project was conducted at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES). ICES is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. A.Y. was supported by the University of Toronto Medical Student Research Scholar Program and an unrestricted, investigator-initiated study grant from Astellas Pharma Canada, Inc. A.X.G. was supported by a Clinician Scientist Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The opinions, results, and conclusions reported in this paper are those of the authors, and are independent of the funding sources, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and Trillium Gift of Life Network. The results presented in this paper have not been published previously in whole or part, except in abstract format.
PY - 2014/1
Y1 - 2014/1
N2 - BackgroundKidney transplants from living donors with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 80 mL/min per 1.73 m2 may be at risk for increased graft loss compared with a recipient who receives a kidney from a living donor with a higher eGFR.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study considered 2057 living kidney donors and their recipients from July 1993 to March 2010 at five centres in Ontario, Canada, and linked them to population-based, universal healthcare databases. Recipients were divided into five groups based on their donor's baseline eGFR. The median (inter-quartile range) for the lowest eGFR group was 73 (68-77) mL/min per 1.73 m2. Subjects were followed for a median of 6 years (IQR: 3-10 years).ResultsThere was no significant difference in the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for graft loss when comparing recipients in each eGFR category to the referent group (≥110 mL/min per 1.73 m2). The adjusted HRs (95% CI) from the lowest (<80 mL/min per 1.73 m2) to highest (100-109.9 mL/min per 1.73 m2) eGFR categories were 1.27 (0.84-1.92), 1.43 (0.96-2.14), 1.23 (0.86-1.77) and 1.23 (0.85-1.77), respectively. Similar results were observed when dichotomizing the baseline donor eGFR using a cut-point of 80 mL/min per 1.73 m2-adjusted HR 1.01 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) (0.76-1.44)].ConclusionsFurther research in this setting should clarify whether additional tests (i.e. measured GFR) should be performed in potential donors whose eGFR is considered borderline, whether eGFR values should be standardized to body surface area, and the outcomes for donors after nephrectomy.
AB - BackgroundKidney transplants from living donors with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 80 mL/min per 1.73 m2 may be at risk for increased graft loss compared with a recipient who receives a kidney from a living donor with a higher eGFR.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study considered 2057 living kidney donors and their recipients from July 1993 to March 2010 at five centres in Ontario, Canada, and linked them to population-based, universal healthcare databases. Recipients were divided into five groups based on their donor's baseline eGFR. The median (inter-quartile range) for the lowest eGFR group was 73 (68-77) mL/min per 1.73 m2. Subjects were followed for a median of 6 years (IQR: 3-10 years).ResultsThere was no significant difference in the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for graft loss when comparing recipients in each eGFR category to the referent group (≥110 mL/min per 1.73 m2). The adjusted HRs (95% CI) from the lowest (<80 mL/min per 1.73 m2) to highest (100-109.9 mL/min per 1.73 m2) eGFR categories were 1.27 (0.84-1.92), 1.43 (0.96-2.14), 1.23 (0.86-1.77) and 1.23 (0.85-1.77), respectively. Similar results were observed when dichotomizing the baseline donor eGFR using a cut-point of 80 mL/min per 1.73 m2-adjusted HR 1.01 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) (0.76-1.44)].ConclusionsFurther research in this setting should clarify whether additional tests (i.e. measured GFR) should be performed in potential donors whose eGFR is considered borderline, whether eGFR values should be standardized to body surface area, and the outcomes for donors after nephrectomy.
KW - administrative data
KW - glomerular filtration rate
KW - kidney transplantation
KW - transplant outcomes
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84892715490&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84892715490&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/ndt/gft239
DO - 10.1093/ndt/gft239
M3 - Article
C2 - 24145461
AN - SCOPUS:84892715490
SN - 0931-0509
VL - 29
SP - 188
EP - 195
JO - Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
JF - Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
IS - 1
ER -