Living donor kidney transplantation increases recipient and graft survival compared with cadaveric donor transplantation. Correct donor selection is essential to optimize transplant outcomes as well as post-donation safety. The aim of this study is to analyze the influence of baseline characteristics of living kidney donors on renal function, morbidity and mortality after nephrectomy.

An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study was designed that included living kidney donors followed up at the Salamanca University Hospital between 2011 and January 2023. Statistical significance was considered if p≤0.05.

Ninety-one donors were included, 63% women, with a mean age of 52±10.8 years. A percentage of 52.1 were overweight or obese, 9.9% had HT and 22% were dyslipidemic. Mortality was 0% and 84.3% had no complications. GFR (CKD-EPI) dropped from 92 to 57.1ml/min/1.73m2 at one month after nephrectomy. There was a significant increase in proteinuria at one month and 2 years. After nephrectomy, BMI, MAP, HbA1c, uric acid, total cholesterol, C-LDL and triglycerides increased (p≤0.05).

The mean GFR of donors as well as its compensation after nephrectomy was lower and slower than the figures reported in the literature, probably due to the higher mean age of our donors. The increased prevalence of obesity, dyslipidemia and hyperuricemia postdonation and worsening of HbA1c and MAP levels make strict monitoring of donors necessary. In our experience, kidney donation is a safe process with low morbidity and mortality.

To explore the effect of lupus nephritis (LN) on graft survival in renal transplant patients. Literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort, and case-control studies. The target population of interest was adult patients (aged >18 years) with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and no history of previous renal transplants. Primary outcomes of interest were graft survival and patient survival. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using random-effects models and reported as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 15 studies were included. Compared to patients with ESRD due to other causes, patients with LN undergoing kidney transplant had lower patient survival rate (HR 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.31; N = 15, I2=34.3%) and worse graft survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.11; N = 16, I2=0.0%), especially when studies with deceased donor were pooled together. Studies with a larger sample size (>200) showed that LN was strongly associated with lower graft and patient survival rates. Elevated risk of mortality in LN patients was detected in case-control studies, but not RCTs. On the other hand, RCTs, but not case-control studies, showed an increased risk of poor graft survival in LN patients. The findings suggest that the presence of LN might have a negative impact on both the graft survival and the overall patient survival of post-transplant ESRD patients. Further studies that account for factors such as study methodology, donor characteristics, and sample size are needed to reach definitive conclusions. Renal transplant patients with LN should undergo regular follow-up examinations.

Kidney transplantation (KT) is the optimal form of renal replacement therapy for patients with end-stage renal diseases. However, this health service is not available to all patients, especially in developing countries. The deceased donor KT programs are mostly absent, and the living donor KT centers are scarce. Single-center studies presenting experiences from developing countries usually report a variety of challenges. This review addresses these challenges and the opposing strategies by reviewing the single-center experiences of developing countries. The financial challenges hamper the infrastructural and material availability, coverage of transplant costs, and qualification of medical personnel. The sociocultural challenges influence organ donation, equity of beneficence, and regular follow-up work. Low interests and motives for transplantation may result from high medicolegal responsibilities in KT practice, intense potential psychosocial burdens, complex qualification protocols, and low productivity or compensation for KT practice. Low medical literacy about KT advantages is prevalent among clinicians, patients, and the public. The inefficient organizational and regulatory oversight is translated into inefficient healthcare systems, absent national KT programs and registries, uncoordinated job descriptions and qualification protocols, uncoordinated on-site investigations with regulatory constraints, and the prevalence of commercial KT practices. These challenges resulted in noticeable differences between KT services in developed and developing countries. The coping strategies can be summarized in two main mechanisms: The first mechanism is maximizing the available resources by increasing the rates of living kidney donation, promoting the expertise of medical personnel, reducing material consumption, and supporting the establishment and maintenance of KT programs. The latter warrants the expansion of the public sector and the elimination of non-ethical KT practices. The second mechanism is recruiting external resources, including financial, experience, and training agreements.

To assess the safety of vascular closure devices in living-donor nephrectomy (LDN), as staplers and non-transfixion techniques (polymer locking and metal clips) are the methods employed to secure the renal vessels during laparoscopic and robotic LDN, but the use of clips has come into question since the United States Food and Drug Administration and manufacturers issued a contraindication.

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the safety of vascular closure devices (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews [PROSPERO] registration: CRD42022364349). The PubMed, Scopus, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), and the Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS) databases were searched in September 2022. For comparative and non-comparative studies, incidence estimates and odds ratios (ORs), respectively, for the main variables regarding safety of vascular closure devices were pooled by using random effects meta-analyses. Quality assessment of the included comparative studies was conducted using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool.

Of the 863 articles obtained, data were retrieved from 44 studies, which included 42 902 patients. In non-comparative studies, the pooled estimate rates for device failure, severe haemorrhage rate, conversion to open surgery, and mortality were similar for both clips and staplers. Regarding the meta-analyses for comparative studies (three studies), there were no significant differences between the two groups for the severe haemorrhage rate (OR 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18-1.75; P = 0.33), conversion to open surgery (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.08-1.54; P = 0.16), or death rate (OR 3.64, 95% CI 0.47-28.45; P = 0.22). Based on weak evidence, device failure was lower in the polymer clip group (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.75; P = 0.00).

This study has confirmed that there is no evidence for the superiority of any vascular closure device in terms of safety in LDN. Standardised recommendations for vascular control in this context should be carefully designed and prospectively evaluated.