Home  About us  Contact
 

Kidney Donation (kidney + donation)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences96%

Kinds of Kidney Donation

  • live kidney donation
    		•

    Selected Abstracts

    Does Hematuria Contraindicate Kidney Donation?

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2010
    B. J. Nankivell
    Whether to use kidneys from donors with asymptomatic microscopic hematuria necessitates a thoughtful nephrological approach. See article by Kido et al on page 1597. [source]

    Living Donor Kidney Donation in the United States: Quo Vadis?

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 6 2010
    G. Danovitch
    Editorial comment on the ethical concerns raised by Woodle, et al regarding a policy of preferentially allocating kidneys from non-directed living donors to facilitate paired-exchange and chain transplantation. See article by Woodle et al on page 1460. [source]

    Altruistic Donor Triggered Domino-Paired Kidney Donation for Unsuccessful Couples from the Kidney-Exchange Program

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2010
    J. I. Roodnat
    Between January 2000 and July 2009, 132 individuals inquired about altruistic kidney donation to strangers. These donors were willing to donate to genetically and emotionally unrelated patients. Some altruistic donors wished to donate to a specific person, but most wished to donate anonymously. In domino-paired donation, the altruistic donor donates to the recipient of an incompatible couple; the donor of that couple (domino-donor) donates to another couple or to the waiting list. In contrast to kidney-exchange donation where bilateral matching of couples is required, recipient and donor matching are unlinked in domino-paired donation. This facilitates matching for unsuccessful couples from the kidney-exchange program where blood type O prevails in recipients and is under-represented in donors. Fifty-one altruistic donors (39%) donated their kidney and 35 domino-donors were involved. There were 29 domino procedures, 24 with 1 altruistic donor and 1 domino-donor, 5 with more domino-donors. Eighty-six transplantations were performed. Donor and recipient blood type distribution in the couples limited allocation to blood type non-O waiting list patients. The success rate of domino-paired donation is dependent on the composition of the pool of incompatible pairs, but it offers opportunities for difficult to match pairs that were unsuccessful in the kidney-exchange program. [source]

    Diabetes after Kidney Donation

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 2 2010
    H. N. Ibrahim
    Kidney donors, similar to the general population, are at risk for development of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The course of donors who develop T2DM has not been studied. We surveyed 3777 kidney donors regarding the development of T2DM. Of the 2954 who responded, 154 developed T2DM 17.7 ± 9.0 years after donation. The multivariable risk of development of T2DM was associated with type 1 DM in the recipient, male gender and body mass index >30 kg/m2 at time of donation. Compared to age, gender, duration after donation and body mass index (BMI)-matched non-diabetic donor controls; diabetic donors were more likely to have hypertension (70.8% vs. 36.2%, p = 0.005), proteinuria (18.8% vs. 3.9%, p < 0.0001) but had a similar serum creatinine. eGFR change after T2DM development was ,0.80 ± 0.94 mL/min/year, ,0.70 ± 0.86 in nondiabetic donors with similar duration after donation and ,0.61 ± 0.76 mL/min/year in age, gender, BMI and duration after donation matched nondiabetic donor controls. These preliminary and shor-term data demonstrate that factors associated with T2DM in kidney donors are similar to those in the general population and donors screened carefully at the time of donation do not appear to have an acceleration of diabetic kidney disease. [source]

    Maternal and Fetal Outcomes After Living Kidney Donation

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2009
    I. F. Nevis
    Women considering kidney donation frequently ask whether a nephrectomy will impact their ability to have children. Two new studies consider this issue. We place the new information in the context of previous literature and practice guidelines, and discuss how we should counsel and care for our donors in the year 2009. [source]

    Pregnancy and Birth After Kidney Donation: The Norwegian Experience

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2009
    A. V. Reisæter
    Reports on pregnancies in kidney donors are scarce. The aim was to assess pregnancy outcomes for previous donors nationwide. The Medical Birth Registry of Norway holds records of births since 1967. Linkage with the Norwegian Renal Registry provided data on pregnancies of kidney donors 1967,2002. A random sample from the Medical Birth Registry was control group, as was pregnancies in kidney donors prior to donation. Differences between groups were assessed by two-sided Fisher's exact tests and with generalized linear mixed models (GLMM). We identified 326 donors with 726 pregnancies, 106 after donation. In unadjusted analysis (Fisher) no differences were observed in the occurrence of preeclampsia (p = 0.22). In the adjusted analysis (GLMM) it was more common in pregnancies after donation, 6/106 (5.7%), than in pregnancies before donation 16/620 (2.6%) (p = 0.026). The occurrence of stillbirths after donation was 3/106 (2.8%), before donation 7/620 (1.1%), in controls (1.1%) (p = 0.17). No differences were observed in the occurrence of adverse pregnancy outcome in kidney donors and in the general population in unadjusted analysis. Our finding of more frequent preeclampsia in pregnancies after kidney donation in the secondary analysis must be interpreted with caution, as the number of events was low. [source]

    Pregnancy Outcomes After Kidney Donation

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2009
    H. N. Ibrahim
    The outcome of pregnancy in kidney donors has generally been viewed to be favorable. We determined fetal and maternal outcomes in a large cohort of kidney donors. A total of 2102 women have donated a kidney at our institution; 1589 donors responded to our pregnancy surveys; 1085 reported 3213 pregnancies and 504 reported none. Fetal and maternal outcomes in postdonation pregnancies were comparable to published rates in the general population. Postdonation (vs. predonation) pregnancies were associated with a lower likelihood of full-term deliveries (73.7% vs. 84.6%, p = 0.0004) and a higher likelihood of fetal loss (19.2% vs. 11.3%, p < 0.0001). Postdonation pregnancies were also associated with a higher risk of gestational diabetes (2.7% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.0001), gestational hypertension (5.7% vs. 0.6%, p < 0.0001), proteinuria (4.3% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.0001) and preeclampsia (5.5% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.0001). Women who had both pre- and post-donation pregnancies were also more likely to have these adverse maternal outcomes in their postdonation pregnancies. In this large survey of previous living donors in a single center, fetal and maternal outcomes and pregnancy outcomes after kidney donation were similar to those reported in the general population, but inferior to predonation pregnancy outcomes. [source]

    A systematic review of hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, Issue 5 2004
    P. Dasgupta
    Summary We provide a systematic review of hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (HALDN), a relatively new procedure. Medline search of HALDN between 1995 and 2002 was conducted. Published studies were scored by two independent assessors using a modified form of 11 generic questions. All questions required one of three responses: 0 , criterion not reported, 1 , criterion reported but inadequate, 2 , criterion reported and adequate. The studies were placed according to their scoRes in category A (score 20,22), category B (17,19) and category C (16 or less). Higher scores indicate better quality of studies. Where possible, statistical analysis of comparative data was performed. Most reports of HALDN are expert series, some comparative and a few prospective. There was good correlation between the assessors (r = 0.91), and of the seven published series on HALDN, two fell into category B and five into category C. At present, there is only one published randomised-controlled trial of HALDN vs. open donor nephrectomy; this is the only such trial in laparoscopic urology. HALDN allows kidneys to be harvested with short operating and warm ischaemia times and fewer ureteric complications. HALDN is a relatively new and effective technique, designed to make kidney donation more attractive and minimally invasive without affecting recipient outcomes. More prospective data of this technique is needed, and wide variation in reported outcome parameters need to be standardised to allow meaningful comparison. [source]

    Attitude of hospital personnel faced with living liver donation in a Spanish center with a living donor liver transplant program

    LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2007
    A. Ríos
    In Spain, despite its high rate of cadaveric donation, death while on the liver transplant waiting list is high. For this reason, living liver donation is being encouraged despite of the risk of morbidity for the donor. The objective of this study was to analyze attitudes toward living liver donation among hospital personnel in a hospital with a recently authorized living donor liver transplantation program. A random sample was taken and was stratified by type of service and job category (n = 1,262). Attitude was evaluated by means of a validated psychosocial questionnaire. The questionnaire was completed anonymously and was self-administered. Statistical analysis included the Student t test, the ,2 test, and logistical regression analysis. The questionnaire completion rate was 93% (n = 1,168). Only 15% (n = 170) of respondents were in favor of living liver donation if it were unrelated. An additional 65% (n = 766) were in favor if this donation, but only for relatives. Of the rest, 9% (n = 107) did not agree with living liver donation, and the remaining 11% (n = 125) were undecided. The variables related to this attitude were age (P = 0.044); job category (P = 0.002); type of service (according to whether it is related to organ donation and transplantation) (P = 0.044); participation in prosocial activities (P = 0.026); attitude toward cadaveric organ donation (P <0.001); attitude of a respondent's partner toward organ donation (P = 0.010); a respondent's belief that in the future, he or she may need a transplant (P < 0.001); and a willingness to receive a donated living liver organ if one were needed (P < 0.001). There is also a close relationship between attitude toward living kidney donation and living liver donation (P < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, the only common independent variable from the bivariate analysis was a willingness to receive a living donor liver transplant if one were needed (odds ratio = 9.3). Attitude toward living liver donation among hospital personnel in a hospital with a solid organ transplant program is favorable and is affected by factors related to cadaveric donation, altruistic activity, and feelings of reciprocity. Physicians and the youngest hospital workers are those who are most in favor, which leads us to think that there is a promising future for living liver transplantation, which is essential given the cadaveric organ deficit and the high mortality rate while on the waiting list. Liver Transpl 13:1049,1056, 2007. © 2007 AASLD. [source]

    Encouraging Psychological Outcomes After Altruistic Donation to a Stranger

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 6 2010
    E. K. Massey
    In a growing number of transplant centers worldwide, altruistic donors are accepted to anonymously donate a kidney to a stranger. An important hesitation to expand these transplantation programs is the fear of evoking psychological distress in the altruistic donor after donation. To what extent this fear is justified has not yet been systematically investigated. In this study, 24 altruistic donors were interviewed on average 2 years after donation. Lifetime mental health history, current psychological complaints, satisfaction with and impact of the donation on well-being, motives for donation, communication with recipient and donation experience were assessed. Altruistic donors report a considerable positive impact of donation on psychological well-being, whereas negative impact was limited. Satisfaction with donation was very high. Although a history of a psychiatric diagnosis was ascertained in almost half of the donors, psychological complaints before and after donation were comparable to national average norm scores. Motives for donation were genuine and the experience of donation generally conformed to their expectations. In conclusion, living kidney donation to a stranger does not appear to exacerbate psychological complaints. Moreover, altruistic donors report considerable satisfaction and personal benefit. The exceptional gift of altruistic donors can contribute toward solving the current organ shortage issue. [source]

    Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy with Vaginal Extraction: Initial Report

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 6 2010
    M. E. Allaf
    The recent decrease in the total number of living kidney transplants coupled with the increase in the number of candidates on the waiting list underscores the importance of eliminating barriers to living kidney donation. We report what we believe to be the first pure right-sided laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy with extraction of the kidney through the vagina. The warm ischemia time was 3 min and the renal vessels and ureter of the procured kidney were of adequate length for routine transplantation. The donor did not receive any postoperative parenteral narcotic analgesia, was discharged home within 24 h and was back to normal activity in 14 days. The kidney functioned well with no complications or infections. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy with vaginal extraction may be a viable alternative to open and standard laparoscopic approaches. Potential advantages include reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay and convalescence and a more desirable cosmetic result. These possible, but yet unproven, advantages may encourage more individuals to consider live donation. [source]

    Altruistic Donor Triggered Domino-Paired Kidney Donation for Unsuccessful Couples from the Kidney-Exchange Program

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2010
    J. I. Roodnat
    Between January 2000 and July 2009, 132 individuals inquired about altruistic kidney donation to strangers. These donors were willing to donate to genetically and emotionally unrelated patients. Some altruistic donors wished to donate to a specific person, but most wished to donate anonymously. In domino-paired donation, the altruistic donor donates to the recipient of an incompatible couple; the donor of that couple (domino-donor) donates to another couple or to the waiting list. In contrast to kidney-exchange donation where bilateral matching of couples is required, recipient and donor matching are unlinked in domino-paired donation. This facilitates matching for unsuccessful couples from the kidney-exchange program where blood type O prevails in recipients and is under-represented in donors. Fifty-one altruistic donors (39%) donated their kidney and 35 domino-donors were involved. There were 29 domino procedures, 24 with 1 altruistic donor and 1 domino-donor, 5 with more domino-donors. Eighty-six transplantations were performed. Donor and recipient blood type distribution in the couples limited allocation to blood type non-O waiting list patients. The success rate of domino-paired donation is dependent on the composition of the pool of incompatible pairs, but it offers opportunities for difficult to match pairs that were unsuccessful in the kidney-exchange program. [source]

    A Curious Chain of Events

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 6 2009
    M. D. Stegall
    Therapeutic options for sensitized renal transplant candidates continue to increase. This commentary outlines the current options including new approaches to paired kidney donation. See article by Gentry et al on page 1330,1336. [source]

    Maternal and Fetal Outcomes After Living Kidney Donation

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2009
    I. F. Nevis
    Women considering kidney donation frequently ask whether a nephrectomy will impact their ability to have children. Two new studies consider this issue. We place the new information in the context of previous literature and practice guidelines, and discuss how we should counsel and care for our donors in the year 2009. [source]

    Pregnancy and Birth After Kidney Donation: The Norwegian Experience

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2009
    A. V. Reisæter
    Reports on pregnancies in kidney donors are scarce. The aim was to assess pregnancy outcomes for previous donors nationwide. The Medical Birth Registry of Norway holds records of births since 1967. Linkage with the Norwegian Renal Registry provided data on pregnancies of kidney donors 1967,2002. A random sample from the Medical Birth Registry was control group, as was pregnancies in kidney donors prior to donation. Differences between groups were assessed by two-sided Fisher's exact tests and with generalized linear mixed models (GLMM). We identified 326 donors with 726 pregnancies, 106 after donation. In unadjusted analysis (Fisher) no differences were observed in the occurrence of preeclampsia (p = 0.22). In the adjusted analysis (GLMM) it was more common in pregnancies after donation, 6/106 (5.7%), than in pregnancies before donation 16/620 (2.6%) (p = 0.026). The occurrence of stillbirths after donation was 3/106 (2.8%), before donation 7/620 (1.1%), in controls (1.1%) (p = 0.17). No differences were observed in the occurrence of adverse pregnancy outcome in kidney donors and in the general population in unadjusted analysis. Our finding of more frequent preeclampsia in pregnancies after kidney donation in the secondary analysis must be interpreted with caution, as the number of events was low. [source]

    Pregnancy Outcomes After Kidney Donation

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2009
    H. N. Ibrahim
    The outcome of pregnancy in kidney donors has generally been viewed to be favorable. We determined fetal and maternal outcomes in a large cohort of kidney donors. A total of 2102 women have donated a kidney at our institution; 1589 donors responded to our pregnancy surveys; 1085 reported 3213 pregnancies and 504 reported none. Fetal and maternal outcomes in postdonation pregnancies were comparable to published rates in the general population. Postdonation (vs. predonation) pregnancies were associated with a lower likelihood of full-term deliveries (73.7% vs. 84.6%, p = 0.0004) and a higher likelihood of fetal loss (19.2% vs. 11.3%, p < 0.0001). Postdonation pregnancies were also associated with a higher risk of gestational diabetes (2.7% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.0001), gestational hypertension (5.7% vs. 0.6%, p < 0.0001), proteinuria (4.3% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.0001) and preeclampsia (5.5% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.0001). Women who had both pre- and post-donation pregnancies were also more likely to have these adverse maternal outcomes in their postdonation pregnancies. In this large survey of previous living donors in a single center, fetal and maternal outcomes and pregnancy outcomes after kidney donation were similar to those reported in the general population, but inferior to predonation pregnancy outcomes. [source]

    Limiting Financial Disincentives in Live Organ Donation: A Rational Solution to the Kidney Shortage

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 11 2006
    R. S. Gaston
    Availability of kidney transplantation is limited by an inadequate supply of organs, with no apparent remedy on the immediate horizon and increasing reliance on living donors (LDs). While some have advocated financial remuneration to stimulate donation, the National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) of 1984 expressly forbids the offer of ,valuable consideration.' However, recent developments indicate some fluidity in the definition of valuable consideration while evolving international standards highlight deficiencies (particularly regarding long-term care and follow-up) in the current American system. Recognizing that substantial financial and physical disincentives exist for LDs, we propose a policy change that offers the potential to enhance organ availability as well as address concerns regarding long-term care. Donors assume much greater risk than is widely acknowledged, risk that can be approximated for the purpose of determining appropriate compensation. Our proposal offsets donor risk via a package of specific benefits (life insurance, health insurance and a small amount of cash) to minimize hazard and ensure donor interests are protected after as well as before nephrectomy. It will fund medical follow-up and enable data collection so that long-term risk can be accurately assessed. The proposal should be cost effective with only a small increase in the number of LDs, and the net benefit will become greater if removal of disincentives stimulates even further growth. As importantly, by directly linking compensation to risk, we believe it preserves the essence of kidney donation as a gift, consistent with NOTA and implementable in the United States without altering current legal statutes. [source]

    Direction of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and United Network for Organ Sharing Regarding the Oversight of Live Donor Transplantation and Solicitation for Organs

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 1 2006
    F. L. Delmonico
    The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) operated by United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) has taken recent steps to address public solicitation for organ donors and its oversight of live donor transplantation. This report provides the direction of the OPTN regarding deceased donor solicitation. The OPTN has authority under federal law to equitably allocate deceased donor organs within a single national network based upon medical criteria, not upon one's social or economic ability to utilize resources not available to all on the waiting list. The OPTN makes a distinction between solicitations for a live donor organ versus solicitations for directed donation of deceased organs. As to live donor solicitation, the OPTN cannot regulate or restrict ways relationships are developed in our society, nor does it seek to do so. OPTN members have a responsibility of helping protect potential recipients from hazards that can arise from public appeals for live donor organs. Oversight and support of the OPTN for live donor transplantation is now detailed by improving the reporting of live donor follow-up, by providing a mechanism for facilitating anonymous live kidney donation, and by providing information for potential live kidney donors via the UNOS Transplant LivingSM website. [source]

    Concomitant Surgery With Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 2 2003
    Ernesto P. Molmenti
    Routine live donor evaluations reveal unexpected silent pathologies. Herein, we describe our experience treating such pathologies at the time of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. We have not encountered any previous reports of such an approach. We prospectively collected data on 321 donors. Concomitant surgeries at the time of procurement included two laparoscopic adrenalectomies, one colposuspension, one laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and one liver biopsy. Mean operative time was 321 min (range 230,380), with a mean blood loss of 280 mL (range 150,500). No blood transfusions were required. The left kidney was procured in four cases. The right kidney was obtained on one occasion. Mean hospital stay was 3 days (median 3, range 2,4). No short- or long-term complications have been identified. Mean follow-up time was 2.63 years (median 2.76, range 2.23,2.99). Four of the five kidney recipients were first-time transplants who had not yet started dialysis. Simultaneous surgical interventions at the time of laparoscopic live kidney donation are safe and can be undertaken in selected cases. This practice is beneficial to both the donor and the recipient, and is likely to become more commonplace with changing practice patterns involving donor evaluation and management. [source]

    Short-term renal outcomes in African American and Caucasian donors following live kidney donation

    CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5 2010
    A. Reeves-Daniel
    Reeves-Daniel A, Freedman BI, Assimos D, Hartmann EL, Bleyer A, Adams PL, Westcott C, Stratta RJ, Rogers J, Farney AC, Daniel KR. Short-term renal outcomes in African American and Caucasian donors following live kidney donation. Clin Transplant 2009 DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2009.01170.x © 2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract:, Introduction:, Although African Americans (AA) are considered higher risk kidney donors than Caucasians, limited data are available regarding outcomes of AA donors. Methods:, We performed a single-center retrospective review of all kidney donors from 1993 to 2007 and evaluated race/ethnic differences in post-donation changes in renal function, incident proteinuria, and systolic blood pressure (SBP) using linear mixed models. Results:, A total of 336 kidney donors (63 AA, 263 Caucasian, 10 other) were evaluated. Before donation, AA had higher serum creatinine concentrations, estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) values, and SBP levels than Caucasians. No significant changes in SBP or renal function were observed between the two groups within the first year after donation, although results were limited by incomplete follow-up. Conclusion:, AA had higher pre-donation serum creatinine, GFR, and SBP values compared to Caucasians; however, the degree of change in renal function and blood pressure did not differ between groups following kidney donation. Although long-term studies are needed, our study suggests that AA and Caucasians experience similar short-term consequences after donation. The incomplete data available on donor outcomes in our center and in prior publications also indicates a global need to implement systems for structured follow-up of live kidney donors. [source]

    Evidence for a need to mandate kidney transplant living donor registries

    CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5 2008
    Mahmoud Emara
    Abstract:, Kidney disease is a global public health problem of growing proportions. Currently the best treatment for end-stage renal failure is transplantation. Living organ donation remains a complex ethical, moral and medical issue. It is based on a premise that kidney donation is associated with short-term minimal risks to harm the donor, and is outweighed by the definite advantages to the recipient. A growing number of patients with end-stage renal disease and shortage of kidney donors poses a pressing need to expand the criteria needed to accept kidney donors. The current donor registries are structured and are driven to expand donor pool. As living kidney donation is not without risks, more attention should be given to protect the donor health. After kidney donation, mild to moderate renal insufficiency may occur. Renal insufficiency, even mild, is associated with increased risks of hypertension, proteinuria and cardiovascular morbidity. We, therefore, foresee a need to mandate the establishment of renal transplant donor registries at all transplanting programs as a prerequisite to protect the long-term well being of kidney donors. These registries can collect the database necessary to develop standards of practice and guidelines for future kidney donation. [source]

    Optimizing open live-donor nephrectomy , long-term donor outcome

    CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 3 2004
    M Schostak
    Abstract:, Introduction:, The technique of laparoscopic or retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy has been increasingly propagated in recent years. The central advantage is supposed to be a reduction of perioperative discomfort. However, there have not been many reports describing the subjective feeling associated with an open donor nephrectomy, particularly with respect to the pain level in the perioperative and long-term course. This retrospective study examines the perioperative pain and morbidity and long-term outcome of living kidney donors from 35 yr of experience at the University Hospital Benjamin Franklin of the Free University of Berlin. Methods:, A total of 102 living kidney donors were asked to fill out a questionnaire. Five epidemiological questions were posed and the rest dealt mainly with lasting subjective and objective surgical impairments. There were also questions relating to the perioperative pain level (VAS/NAS-Score). In addition, basic information was obtained regarding the donor's current health status (physical examination, serum creatinine; sometimes also ultrasound, protein IU, blood pressure), and/or examinations were performed. Results:, The mean age at the time of donation was 45.5 and 55% were women. Donor nephrectomies were left-sided in 78 cases and right-sided in 24. There was a total complication rate of 53%, but serious complications only occurred in two cases (1.9%). A total of 53 donors could be reached. Although 41.5% felt they had a lasting impairment, somatic sequelae like respiratory, abdominal or scar problems were rare, affecting a maximum of only four patients in each case. Fifteen patients reported neurological problems such as sensory disturbances. The mean serum creatinine was 89.9 ,mol/L in female and 114.2 ,mol/L in male donors. Microalbuminuria was found in 22.6% of the donors, hypertension in 35.8%. Persistent pain was reported by 20.7%, its occurrence being permanent in two of the donors and very frequent in one. All the others rarely have pain. The median perioperative VAS/NAS score was 8 on the first day after surgery, 5 after 1 wk and 1 after 1 month. The analgesia was rated as good or very good by 71%. Everyday life was managed as well as before surgery after 2,4 wk by the highest percentage (42%) of patients, but working capacity was only regained after 1,3 months by a comparable percentage (44%). Forty-six percent had a very good and 33% a good feeling after the kidney donation. The relationship to the recipient had intensified in most cases. Ninety-one percent would again decide in favor of a donation. Conclusion:, Donor nephrectomy in an open technique is a safe and reliable procedure with low morbidity. After a median post-operative period of 7 yr, however, 42% of the donors still report general impairment due to the intervention, although concrete somatic problems were only detected in a few cases. Nearly all these patients underwent surgery in a full flank position. Wound-healing impairments were also significantly more frequent with this surgical technique. This positioning should thus be avoided. The post-operative pain level was relatively high, but a marked improvement was achieved in the course of the observation period by optimizing analgesic management. [source]

    The Shared History: Unknotting Fictive Kinship and Legal Process

    LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW, Issue 1 2009
    Marie-Andrée Jacob
    This article looks in detail at a form of kinship that is contingently crafted and mobilized to achieve specific purposes. On the basis of ethnographic material collected among local actors within bodies that regulate kidney transplants in Israel, the objective of this article is to expand the sociolegal definition of fictive kinship. I use transplant relatedness to refer to the set of formal and informal norms that grow out of social and medico-legal practices in the field of kidney donations and sales; however, the form of fictive kinship that appears in this specific field tells us something broader about kinship as it is constructed and performed in legal processes more generally. The configuration of fictive kinship that is examined is the shared history (historia meshoutefet). I argue that in the present case, the shared history alters social and legal deep-seated understandings of kinship and ultimately makes the distinctions between allegedly real and pseudo-kinship collapse. [source]

    2509 Living Donor Nephrectomies, Morbidity and Mortality, Including the UK Introduction of Laparoscopic Donor Surgery

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 11 2007
    V. G. Hadjianastassiou
    The worldwide expansion of laparoscopic, at the expense of open, donor nephrectomy (DN) has been driven on the basis of faster convalescence for the donor. However, concerns have been expressed over the safety of the laparoscopic procedure. The UK Transplant National Registry collecting mandatory information on all living kidney donations in the country was analyzed for donations between November 2000 (start of living donor follow-up data reporting) to June 2006 to assess the safety of living DN, after the recent introduction of the laparoscopic procedure in the United Kingdom. Twenty-four transplant units reported data on 2509 donors (601 laparoscopic, 1800 open and 108 [4.3%] unspecified); 46.5% male; mean donor age: 46 years. There was one death 3 months postdischarge and a further five deaths beyond 1 year postdischarge. The mean length of stay was 1.5 days less for the laparoscopic procedure (p < 0.001). The risk of major morbidity for all donors was 4.9% (laparoscopic = 4.5%, open = 5.1%, p = 0.549). The overall rate of any morbidity was 14.3% (laparoscopic = 10.3%, open = 15.7%, p = 0.001). Living donation has remained a safe procedure in the UK during the learning curve of introduction of the laparoscopic procedure. The latter offers measurable advantages to the donor in terms of reduced length of stay and morbidity. [source]