Perceptions of Live Donor Kidney Transplantation Using Segmentation Analysis and Perceptual Mapping to Understand Differences by Self-Reported Health Status in People on Dialysis

Living donor kidney transplantation is a superior treatment option for those with end stage kidney disease, but most transplants are from deceased donors. Securing a living donor for living donor kidney transplantation requires effective, well-timed communication which many may find difficult or intimidating. This study uses segmentation analysis and an innovative marketing technique called perceptual mapping to create three dimensional models to compare living donor kidney transplant perceptions by self-reported health status in 160 end-stage kidney disease dialysis patients of two hospital-based dialysis units and an online forum through cross-sectional surveys. Findings indicate patients with poor self-reported health status are more concerned with not knowing what to say or being afraid a person would say no to living donor kidney transplantation. They are also concerned about the donor’s ability to care for family or donate in the future. They are, however, more likely to see benefits of living donor kidney transplantation, including the kidney lasting longer and having a greater quality of life. Findings reveal messages that could be emphasized in interventions to enhance the ability to ask for living donor kidney transplantation, especially in those assessed as having poor health status. Segmentation analysis and perceptual mapping methods can provide a more nuanced look at how best to develop intervention content to increase living donor kidney transplant.

Living Donor Kidney Transplantation for a Recipient after 41 Years of Hemodialysis

Due to atrophic bladder, patients undergoing long-term dialysis experience vesicoureteral reflux and complicated urinary tract infections after kidney transplantation. A 58-year-old woman underwent living donor kidney transplantation after 41 years of dialysis. She had no contraindications, with good cardiac function and minimal artery calcification despite the long history of hemodialysis. Immunosuppression was initiated with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, prednisolone, and basiliximab. Ureteroneocystostomy with an antireflux technique was carefully conducted as her bladder volume was 15 mL. The postoperative clinical course was uneventful with immediate graft function. The bladder volume gradually increased to 81 mL at discharge, 3 weeks postoperatively. The patient was initially depressed due to frequent urination early post-transplant but recovered soon after as the bladder volume gradually increased to 400 mL. The patient has not yet reported a urinary tract infection episode. This case highlights living donor kidney transplantation-induced recovery of bladder function with careful ureteroneocystostomy, despite the long dialysis history.

Risk Due to ABO Incompatibility and Donor-Recipient Weight Mismatch in Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A National Cohort Study

The effect of donor-recipient weight mismatch is not well established in ABO-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). A total of 2584 LDKT patients in the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry were classified into four groups according to the presence or absence of ABO incompatibility and donor-recipient weight mismatch (donor-to-recipient weight ratio (DRWR) < 0.8). In a multivariable Cox analysis, the combination of ABO incompatibility and DRWR incompatibility (n = 124) was an independent risk factor for graft survival (HR = 2.73, 95% CI = 1.11–6.70) and patient survival (HR = 3.55, 95% CI = 1.39–9.04), whereas neither factor alone was a significant risk factor for either outcome. The combination of ABO incompatibility and DRWR incompatibility was not an independent risk factor for biopsy-proven graft rejection (HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 0.88–1.82); however, it was an independent risk factor for pneumonia (HR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.64–5.57). The mortality rate due to infection was higher among patients with both ABO incompatibility and DRWR incompatibility than among patients with neither factor or with either factor alone. The combination of ABO incompatibility and DRWR incompatibility was an independent risk factor for graft and patient survival after LDKT, whereas neither factor alone significantly affected graft or patient survival. Thus, donor-recipient weight matching should be cautiously considered in LDKT with ABO incompatibility.