このエントリーをはてなブックマークに追加
ID 62210
FullText URL
Author
Yoshinaga, Kasumi Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Araki, Motoo Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University ORCID Kaken ID publons researchmap
Wada, Koichiro Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University ORCID researchmap
Sekito, Takanori Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Watari, Shogo Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Maruyama, Yuki Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Mitsui, Yosuke Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Sadahira, Takuya Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Kubota, Risa Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Nishimura, Shingo Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Edamura, Kohei Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Kobayashi, Yasuyuki Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University ORCID Kaken ID
Tanabe, Katsuyuki Department of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University ORCID Kaken ID publons researchmap
Takeuchi, Hidemi Department of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Kitagawa, Masashi Department of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University Kaken ID
Kitamura, Shinji Department of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University Kaken ID publons
Wada, Jun Department of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University ORCID Kaken ID publons researchmap
Watanabe, Masami Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University Kaken ID publons researchmap
Watanabe, Toyohiko Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University
Nasu, Yasutomo Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Science, Okayama University Kaken ID publons researchmap
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the donor outcomes of living donor kidney transplantation between standard donors (SDs) and marginal donors (MDs) including diabetic patients (MD + DM).
Methods: MDs were defined according to Japanese guideline criteria: (a) age >70-years, (b) blood pressure <= 130/80 mmHg on hypertension medicine, (c) body mass index >25 to <= 32 kg/m(2), (d) 24-h creatinine clearance >= 70 to <80 ml/min/1.73 m(2), and (e) hemoglobin A1c > 6.2 or <= 6.5 with oral diabetic medicine. Fifty-three of 114 donors were MDs. We compared donor kidney functions until 60 months postoperatively.
Results: No kidney function parameters were different between SDs and MDs. When comparing SD and MD + DM, MD + DM had a lower postoperative eGFR (48 vs. 41 (1 (month), p = .02), 49 vs. 40 (12, p < .01), 48 vs. 42 (24, p = .04), 47 vs. 38 (36, p = .01)) and the percentage of residual eGFR (SD vs. MD + DM: 63 vs. 57 (1 (month), p < .01), 63 vs. 57 (2, p < .01), 64 vs. 56 (12, p < .01), 63 vs. 57 (24, p < .01), 63 vs. 52 (36, p = .02)). However, when MD with a single risk factor of DM was compared to SD, the difference disappeared. Nine out of 12 (75%) MD + DM had >= 2 risk factors.
Conclusions: Although long-term observation of donor kidney function is necessary, careful MD + DM selection had the potential to expand the donor pool.
Keywords
diabetes mellitus
kidney function
kidney transplantation
marginal donor
Published Date
2021-06-08
Publication Title
Immunity Inflammation and Disease
Publisher
Wiley
ISSN
2050-4527
Content Type
Journal Article
language
English
OAI-PMH Set
岡山大学
Copyright Holders
© 2021 The Authors.
File Version
publisher
PubMed ID
NAID
DOI
Web of Science KeyUT
Related Url
isVersionOf https://doi.org/10.1002/iid3.470
License
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/