Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Volume: 20 Issue: 8 August 2022 - Supplement - 4


Donor Selection and Outcome for Pediatric Living Donor Kidney Transplant

Abstract Preemptive related living donor kidney transplant carries the best outcomes for pediatric patients with end-stage kidney disease. Donor age, sex, and comorbidities are to be considered in selecting donors, including marginal extended criteria donors. Kidney size and number of vessels, to match recipient weight and vasculature, are also important parameters. Genetic screening is occasionally required according to the recipient’s primary disease. Posttransplant, follow-up and assessment of living related donors are mandatory to evaluate not only the clinical parameters but also to assess quality of life and social and psychological status. In a 1-year follow-up of 50 donors at Abo El-Reesh Hospital (Cairo, Egypt), there were no significant changes in serum creatinine versus glomerular filtration rate (at normal levels), a 16% elevation of blood pressure, and a tendency of impaired glucose tolerance among female donors. Donors reported positive social and psychological effects. Prompt donor selection before transplant is crucial, and posttransplant care and follow-up are mandatory.

Key words : Donor outcomes, Extended criteria donors, Genetic screening, Quality of life, Renal transplant


Despite increases in kidney transplant activities worldwide, there has been an exponential increase of patients with advanced end-stage renal disease who require renal replacement therapy, resulting in an expansion of patients on wait lists for transplant due to organ shortages.1,2 Donor selection and allocation have traditionally been based on HLA, with its documented impact on patient and graft survival. HLA matching must consider the best selection options to resolve the issues of acceptable, crossreacting antigen groups, permissible mismatches, and unacceptable mismatches. Implementation of HLA eplet and epitope matching would be a further advance in the utilization of HLA matching.3The detection of the recipient’s specific immune reactivity to donor alloantigens, whether by solid-phase or cell-based assays, is a cornerstone in the management of pretransplant sensitization reactivity and posttransplant outcomes.4

Impact of Donor Age and Donor Risk Factors

Although most guidelines consider the presence of normal kidney function mandatory for living kidney donation, several risk factors are not crucial barriers for donation, including body mass index, controlled hypertension, and prediabetes, among other factors that allow consideration of extended criteria donation.5 Younger donor age has been shown to have a beneficial effect on long-term graft survival, with younger age also better for younger recipients.6-8 However, when the overall beneficial outcomes of transplant are considered, guidelines do not put any age limit for living donation.5 Although older donor age has shown a marginal, yet significant, effect on lower levels of graft function in the short term, this has not been encountered in the long term. The impact of other donor risk factors on graft outcomes, whether over the short or long term, was insignificant.9

Safety of Donation

Although reports of survival after donation indicate better outcomes compared with the general population, this outcome may carry some bias because of better donor selection criteria that exclude gross risk factors.8 Donor nephrectomy may pose transient effects on kidney function of donors, showing a transient, early postoperative increase in the urinary protein excretion and low molecular weight protein markers of tubular injury (including α1- and α2-microglobulins and retinol binding protein). A modest reduction of estimated glomerular filtration rate, as measured 1 year after donation, has also been reported.10

The possibility of progression in renal impairment may be more frequently encountered among Black donors than among White donors as well as more pronounced among male donors.7 This signifies the need for meticulous risk stratification and selection of donors with the utmost care after donation.

The concept of altruistic donation has shown positive impacts on psychological and social factors and quality of life, with reasonable safety.11


With the increased need to treat patients with end-stage renal disease by transplant, whether from deceased or living sources, there have been a shortage of available organs and an increased number of patients on wait lists for transplant. With proper evaluation and risk assessment of individuals who are potential living kidney donors, donation is reasonably safe and should be encouraged hand in hand with enhancing deceased organ procurement. There is no age limit among the risk stratification guidelines for living kidney donation. Crucial needs of donors include their long-term follow-up to monitor the expected clinical and psychosocial impacts of donation and providing them with the best care deserved.


  1. Andre M, Huang E, Everly M, Bunnapradist S. The UNOS Renal Transplant Registry: review of the last decade. Clin Transpl. 2014:1-12.
    CrossRef - PubMed
  2. Schold JD, Huml AM, Poggio ED, et al. Patients with high priority for kidney transplant who are not given expedited placement on the transplant waiting list represent lost opportunities. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2021;32(7):1733-1746. doi:10.1681/ASN.2020081146
    CrossRef - PubMed
  3. Duquesnoy RJ. Humoral alloimmunity in transplantation: relevance of HLA epitope antigenicity and immunogenicity. Front Immunol. 2011;2:59. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2011.00059
    CrossRef - PubMed
  4. Regele H. Non-HLA antibodies in kidney allograft rejection: convincing concept in need of further evidence. Kidney Int. 2011;79(6):583-586. doi:10.1038/ki.2010.517
    CrossRef - PubMed
  5. Torreggiani M, Esposito C, Martinelli E, et al. Outcomes in living donor kidney transplantation: the role of donor’s kidney function. Kidney Blood Press Res. 2021;46(1):84-94. doi:10.1159/000512177
    CrossRef - PubMed
  6. Noppakun K, Cosio FG, Dean PG, Taler SJ, Wauters R, Grande JP. Living donor age and kidney transplant outcomes. Am J Transplant. 2011;11(6):1279-1286. doi:10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03552.x
    CrossRef - PubMed
  7. Cantarelli C, Cravedi P. Criteria for living donation from marginal donors: one, no one, and one hundred thousand. Nephron. 2019;142(3):227-232. doi:10.1159/000500498
    CrossRef - PubMed
  8. Berger JC, Muzaale AD, James N, et al. Living kidney donors ages 70 and older: recipient and donor outcomes. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;6(12):2887-2893. doi:10.2215/CJN.04160511
    CrossRef - PubMed
  9. Plage H, Pielka P, Liefeldt L, et al. Extended criteria donors in living kidney transplantation including donor age, smoking, hypertension and BMI. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2020;16:787-793. doi:10.2147/TCRM.S256962
    CrossRef - PubMed
  10. Theil G, Weigand K, Fischer K, Bialek J, Fornara P. Organ-specific monitoring of solitary kidney after living donation by using markers of glomerular filtration rate and urinary proteins. Urol Int. 2021;105(11-12):1061-1067. doi:10.1159/00051567
    CrossRef - PubMed
  11. Fathallah MG, Fadel FI, Saadi G, Abdel Mawla MA, Salah DM. Renal outcome and health related quality of life of living related donors in pediatric kidney transplantation. Biomed Pharmacol J. 2021;14(3):1397-1403 doi:10.13005/bpj/2242
    CrossRef - PubMed

Volume : 20
Issue : 8
Pages : 30 - 31
DOI : 10.6002/ect.DonorSymp.2022.L19


From the Department of Internal Medicine and Nephrology, Cairo University, Pediatric Kidney Transplantation Unit, Abo El-Reesh Hospital, Cairo University
Acknowledgements: The author has not received any funding or grants in support of the presented research or for the preparation of this work and has no declarations of potential conflicts of interest.
Corresponding author: Gamal Saadi, 64, street 105, Maadi, Cairo, Egypt, 11431
Phone: +20 1222142818