Journals / Türk Nefroloji Diyaliz ve Transplantasyon Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 2

Canlı böbrek nakli verici adaylarının elenme nedenleri: tek merkez deneyimi

Exclusion reasons of living kidney donor candidates: a single-center experience

Pages
112–117
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall 261 (48.5%) donor candidates who underwent evaluation could not donate.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:OBJECTIVE: Due to severe organ shortage, living kidney donors are important choices foransplantation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the literature, reasons for living donor exclusion are reported from several countriesHowever, there is no published study that focused on exclusion reasons of donor candidates in Turkewhere living kidney transplantation rate is 73.4%.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall 261 (48.5%) donor candidates who underwent evaluation could not donate.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:2012 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Due to severe organ shortage, living kidney donors are important choices foransplantation. In Muslim countries, such as Turkey, living kidney donors are the main source odonor pool. In the literature, reasons for living donor exclusion are reported from several countriesHowever, there is no published study that focused on exclusion reasons of donor candidates in Turkewhere living kidney transplantation rate is 73.4%. The goal of this retrospective study was to examinhe exclusion reasons for donation among living kidney donor candidates at a single center in Turkey. MATERIAL and METHODS: A total 538 adults were evaluated as a living kidney donor candidatbetween December 1988 and January 2012. Evaluation outcome, exclusion reasons and demographidata were examined from electronic file system and immunology laboratory records. RESULTS: In this period 451 kidney transplantations (38.6% cadaveric, 61.4% living donor) waperformed. Overall 261 (48.5%) donor candidates who underwent evaluation could not donate. Wwere able to find the precise cause of exclusion of 86 donors (33%). Among excluded donor candidatehe most common exclusion reason was medical causes (64%) such as diabetes mellitus, low glomerulailtration rate and hypertension.CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that medical causes are significant exclusion reasons for livinkidney donation at our center.

Özet

AMAÇ: Organ bağışının istenilen düzeyde olmaması nedeni ile canlı böbrek nakli verici adayları, böbrek nakli için önemli kaynak oluşturmaktadır. Türkiye gibi Müslüman ülkelerde bu durum daha da belirgindir. Literatürde çeşitli ülkelerden böbrek nakli için canlı verici adaylarının elenme nedenlerini bildiren çalışmalar mevcuttur. Canlı böbrek nakli oranının %73,4 olduğu ülkemizden ise verici adaylarının elenme nedenlerine yönelik bir çalışma bulunmamaktadır. Çalışmamızın amacı, retrospektif olarak canlı böbrek nakli verici adaylarının elenme nedenlerini değerlendirmektir. GEREÇ ve YÖNTEMLER: Çalışmaya Aralık 1988 ve Ocak 2012 tarihleri arasında merkezimize böbrek nakli verici adayı olarak başvurmuş 538 kişi dahil edilmiştir. Elektronik dosyaların ve immünoloji laboratuvar kayıtlarının taranması ile adaylık değerlendirme sonuçları, elenme nedenleri ve demografik bilgileri değerlendirilmiştir. BULGULAR: Çalışma süresince merkezimizde 451 böbrek nakli (%38,6 kadaverik, %61,4 canlı) gerçekleştirilmiştir. Adaylardan 261 (%48,5) kişi verici olamamıştır. Seksen altı (%33) adayın kesin elenme nedenine ulaşabilmiştir. Diyabetes mellitus, düşük glomerüler filtrasyon hızı ve hipertansiyon gibi medikal nedenler en önemli (%64) elenme nedeni olarak belirlenmiştir.SONUÇ: Merkezimize başvuran canlı böbrek nakli verici adaylarının, en sık elenme nedeni medikal nedenler olarak tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ORUÇ, A., YILDIZ, A., TANDOĞAN, G., KARADAYI, D., GÜL, C. B., ERSOY, A. (2022). Canlı böbrek nakli verici adaylarının elenme nedenleri: tek merkez deneyimi. Türk Nefroloji Diyaliz ve Transplantasyon Dergisi, Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 2, 112–117. https://ajindex.com/articles/636254

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Oliver M, Woywodt A, Ahmed A, Saif I: Organ donation, transplantation and religion. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011; 26: 437- 444 Freitas MC: Kidney transplantation in the US: An analysis of the OPTN/UNOS registry. Clin Transpl 2011: 1-16 Einollahi B: Cadaveric kidney transplantation in Iran: Behind the Middle Eastern countries? Iran J Kidney Dis 2008; 2: 55-56 Kidney Transplantation. In: Suleymanlar G, Altiparmak MRSeyahi N, Trabulus S (eds), Registry of the Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation: Registry 2011. İstanbul: Pasifik Reklam ve Tanıtım, 2012; 28-35 Delmonico F: A Report of the Amsterdam Forum On the Care of the Live Kidney Donor: Data and medical guidelines. Transplantation 2005; 79: S53-66 Pham PC, Wilkinson AH, Pham PT: Evaluation of the potential living kidney donor. Am J Kidney Dis 2007; 50: 1043-1051
  2. Sachdeva M, Bhaskaran M, Molmenti EP, Dalton D, Mattana J: Approach to the pretransplant evaluation of the living kidney donorJ Transplant 2011; 2011: 245738 Kher A, Mandelbrot DA: The living kidney donor evaluation: Focus on renal issues. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2012; 7: 366-371
  3. Lapasia JB, Kong SY, Busque S, Scandling JD, Chertow GMTan JC: Living donor evaluation and exclusion: The Stanford experience. Clin Transplant 2011; 25: 697-704
  4. Zhao WY, Zhang L, Han S, Zhu YH, Wang LM, Zhou MS, Zeng L: Evaluation of living related kidney donors in China: Policies and practices in a transplant center. Clin Transplant 2010; 24: E158-162 Gabolde M, Herve C, Moulin AM: Evaluation, selection, and follow-up of live kidney donors: A review of current practice in French renal transplant centres. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001; 16: 2048-2052
  5. Norman SP, Song PX, Hu Y, Ojo AO: Transition from donor candidates to live kidney donors: The impact of race and undiagnosed medical disease states. Clin Transplant 2011; 25: 136-145
  6. Hidalgo G, Tejani C, Clayton R, Clayton R, Clements P, Distant D, Vyas S, Baqi N, Singh A: Factors limiting the rate of living- related kidney donation to children in an inner city setting. Pediatr Transplant 2001; 5: 419-424
  7. Okamoto M, Suzuki T, Fujiki M, Nobori S, Ushigome H, Sakamoto S, Yoshimura N: The consequences for live kidney donors with preexisting glucose intolerance without diabetic complication: Analysis at a single Japanese center. Transplantation 2010; 89: 1391-1395
  8. Guvence N, Oskay K, Ayli D: The assessment of long-term clinic and laboratory data of living related kidney donors. Transplant Proc 2012; 44: 1614-1617
  9. Boudville N, Pra