Roles of Donor/Recipient Body Surface Area Ratio and Donor Kidney Glomerular Filtration Rate in Kidney Selection for Living Transplantation from Family Members

Autores: Zheng Youqing, Guan Yawei, Li Zhihui, Zhang Guohui, Guo Yanjie, Ai Xing

Resumen

Background: Accurate assessing donor renal function is crucial to the success of living kidney transplants. We studied the roles of donor kidney glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and donor/recipient body surface area (BSA) ratio in kidney selection for living transplantation fron family members. Methods: We included 204 recipients who were subjected to living kidney transplantation fron family members in our hospital fron February 2011 to February 2015 and followed up for over 2 years. Recipients were divided into six groups according to donor GFR and donor/recipient BSA ratio. The effects of donor GFR or donor/recipient BSA ratio on the recovery of renal graft functions were evaluated. Results: The post-operative serum creatinine (SCr) reduction rate, steady-state SCr level, and estimated GFR (eGFR) of the group with donor GFR > 40 ml/min were slightly higher to those of the group with donor GFR < 40 ml/min (p > 0.05). The renal function recovery of the group with donor/recipient BSA ratio < 0.8 was significantly lower than that of the group with donor/recipient BSA ratio > 1.2 (p < 0.05). The post-operative S SCr reduction rate, steady-state S SCr level, and eGFR of the group with GFR < 40 ml/min and donor/recipient BSA ratio < 0.8 were all significantly lower than those of the other five groups (P < 0.05). Such values of the two groups with donor/recipient BSA ratio >1.2 were significantly higher than those of the other four groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The selection of donor kidneys fron relatives for living kidney transplantation should also consider donor/recipient BSA ratio in addition to donor GFR.

Palabras clave: Glomerular filtration rate body surface area renal transplantation.

2018-08-27   |   532 visitas   |   Evalua este artículo 0 valoraciones

Vol. 70 Núm.4. Julio-Agosto 2018 Pags. 169-176 Rev Invest Clin 2018; 70(4)