Pretransplant Dialysis and Preemptive Transplant in Living Donor Kidney Recipients. Issue 6 (30th June 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lai, Mason; Gao, Ying; Tavakol, Mehdi; Freise, Chris; Lee, Brian K.; Park, Meyeon
• Is Part Of: Kidney360. Volume 3:Issue 6(2022)
• Page Start: 1080
• Page End: 1088
• Publication Date: 2022-06-30
• Subjects: dialysis -- kidney transplantation -- living donor -- preemptive transplant -- renal dialysis; 616.61
• DOI: 10.34067/KID.0007652021
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2641-7650

Abstract

Key Points: Peritoneal dialysis and multimodal dialysis were the most prevalent access modalities among living donor transplant recipients. Living donor transplant recipients may benefit from a case-by-case approach for dialysis access given shorter time to transplant. Visual Abstract: Abstract : Background: The optimal timing of dialysis access placement in individuals with stage 5 CKD is challenging to estimate. Preemptive living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is the gold-standard treatment for ESKD due to superior graft survival and mortality, but dialysis initiation is often required. Among LDKT recipients, we sought to determine which clinical characteristics were associated with preemptive transplant. Among non–preemptive LDKT recipients, we sought to determine what dialysis access was used, and their duration of use before receipt of living donor transplant. Methods: We retrospectively extracted data on 569 LDKT recipients, >18 years old, who were transplanted between January 2014 and July 2019 at UCSF, including dialysis access type (arteriovenous fistula [AVF], arteriovenous graft [AVG], peritoneal dialysis catheter [PD], and venous catheter), duration of dialysis, and clinical characteristics. Results: Preemptive LDKT recipients constituted 30% of our cohort and were older, more likely to be White, more likely to have ESKD from polycystic kidney disease, and less likely to have ESKD from type 2 diabetes. Of the non–preemptive patients, 26% used AVF, 0.5% used AVG, 32% used peritoneal catheter, 11% used venous catheter, and 31% used more than one access type. Median (IQR) time on dialysis for AVF/AVG use was 1.86 (0.85–3.32) years; for PD catheters, 1.12 (0.55–1.92) years; for venous catheters, 0.66 (0.23–1.69) years; and for multimodal access, 2.15 (1.37–3.72) years. Conclusions: We characterized the dialysis access landscape in LDKT recipients. Venous catheter and PD were the most popular modality in the first quartile of dialysis, and patients using these modalities had shorter times on dialysis compared with those with an AVF. Venous catheter or PD can be considered a viable bridge therapy in patients with living donor availability given their shorter waitlist times. Earlier referral of patients with living donor prospects might further minimize dialysis need.