Doctors routinely refuse donation offers from prospective living kidney donors with certain comorbidities such as diabetes or obesity out of concern for donor wellbeing. This refusal occurs despite the ongoing shortage of kidney transplants and the superior performance of living donor kidney transplants compared to those from deceased donors. In this paper, we argue that this paternalistic refusal by doctors is unjustified and that, within limits, there should be greater acceptance of such donations. We begin by describing possible weak and strong paternalistic justifications of current conservative donor acceptance guidelines and practices. We then justify our position by outlining the frequently under-recognised benefits and the routinely overestimated harms of such donation, before discussing the need to respect the autonomy of willing donors with certain comorbidities. Finally, we respond to a number of possible objections to our proposal for more liberal kidney donor acceptance criteria. We use the situation in Australia as our case study, but our argument is applicable to comparable situations around the world.

Over the past few decades, the shortage in the kidney donor pool as compared to the increasing number of candidates on the kidney transplant waitlist led to loosening of kidney donors' acceptance criteria. Hypertension and obesity represent risk factors for chronic kidney disease, both in native kidneys and those in kidney transplant recipients. While great progress has been made in kidney transplantation from living donors to benefit the recipient survival and quality of life, progress has been slow to fully risk-characterize the donors. This review critically reassesses the current state of understanding regarding the risk of end-stage kidney disease in those donors with obesity, hypertension or both. Accurate risk assessment tools need to be developed urgently to fully understand the risk glomerular filtration rate compensation failure in the remaining kidney of the donors.

We examined a novel linkage of national US donor registry data with records from a pharmacy claims warehouse (2007-2016) to examine associations (adjusted hazard ratio, LCL aHRUCL ) of post-donation fills of antidiabetic medications (ADM, insulin or non-insulin agents) with body mass index (BMI) at donation and other demographic and clinical factors. In 28 515 living kidney donors (LKDs), incidence of ADM use at 9 years rose in a graded manner with higher baseline BMI: underweight, 0.9%; normal weight, 2.1%; overweight, 3.5%; obese, 8.5%. Obesity was associated with higher risk of ADM use compared with normal BMI (aHR, 3.36 4.596.27 ). Metformin was the most commonly used ADM and was filled more often by obese than by normal weight donors (9-year incidence, 6.87% vs 1.85%, aHR, 3.55 5.007.04 ). Insulin use was uncommon and did not differ significantly by BMI. Among a subgroup with BMI data at the 1-year post-donation anniversary (n = 19 528), compared with stable BMI, BMI increase >0.5 kg/m2 by year 1 was associated with increased risk of subsequent ADM use (aHR, 1.03 1.482.14, P = .04). While this study did not assess the impact of donation on the development of obesity, these data support that among LKD, obesity is a strong correlate of ADM use.

We evaluated potential kidney living donors and recipients for donation in our transplant center.

Candidates to be kidney living donors and kidney transplant recipients (KTxR) were retrospectively evaluated. All candidates were informed and assessed by transplant coordinator and nephrologists. All data were obtained from archive records.

The mean ages of 194 kidney living donors and 182 KTxR were 45.7 ± 13.1 and 37.7 ± 14.6 years, respectively. Percentages of female candidates were 55.2% and 34.1% among kidney living donors and KTxR respectively. The kidney living donor candidates were the patients' mothers (27.3%), spouses (24.2%), siblings (21.6%), fathers (12.4%), and sons or daughters (6.2%) of KTxRs and others (8.2%). The numbers of donors with body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m² and > 35kg/m² were 56 (28.9%) and 17 (8.8%) respectively. Due to withdrawal from donation (21.2%) and renal problems (15.3%), 85/194 (43.8%) kidney living donors were excluded. Of the remaining 51/182 (28%) KTxR candidates, 26/182 (14.2%) were unsuitable because their panel-reactive antibody (PRA) > 20%. Sixty-six KTxR were performed in our center. Nine donor candidates were rejected due to obesity (BMI > 35 kg/m²).

Most of our kidney living donors were mothers, housewives, and uneducated persons. Due to high percentages of suitability among candidates of KTxRs and kidney living donors as 72% and 56% may be an advantage for living kidney donation. However, PRA positivity in the recipients drew attention as a major barrier. The high incidence of obesity among the donor candidates suggests that societies must be more sensitive about this issue.

Although clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are used for the development of local protocols in kidney transplantation (Ktx), the quality of their methodology is variable. This systematic review aimed to critically appraise international CPGs in all aspects of Ktx using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool.

Clinical Practice Guidelines in Ktx and donation published between 2010 and 2017 were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, National Guideline Clearinghouse, National Health Service and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Evidence Searches, and the websites of transplant societies. Using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II, 3 appraisers assessed the quality of CPGs. Interrater reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Searches identified 3168 records, and 115 CPGs were included. The highest scoring Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II domain was "scope and purpose" (80%; range, 30%-100%), followed by "clarity of presentation" (77%; range, 43%-98%), "editorial independence" (52%; range, 0%-94%), "rigor of development" (47%; range 6%-97%) and "stakeholder involvement" (41%; range, 11%-85%). The poorest scoring domain was "applicability" (31%; range, 3%-74%). Most CPGs were recommended for future use either with (63%) or without (18%) modifications. A small number (14%) were not recommended for future use or reviewers (5%) did not agree on recommending the CPG. The overall mean CPG quality score was 4 of 7 (range, 2-7). The mean ICC of 0.74 indicated substantial agreement between reviewers.

The quality of international CPGs in Ktx was variable, and most CPGs lacked key aspects of methodological robustness and transparency. Improvements in methodology, patient involvement, and strategies for implementation are required.

The 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors is intended to assist medical professionals who evaluate living kidney donor candidates and provide care before, during and after donation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies that included critical appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations. However, many recommendations, for which there was no evidence or no systematic search for evidence was undertaken by the Evidence Review Team, were issued as ungraded expert opinion recommendations. The guideline work group concluded that a comprehensive approach to risk assessment should replace decisions based on assessments of single risk factors in isolation. Original data analyses were undertaken to produce a "proof-in-concept" risk-prediction model for kidney failure to support a framework for quantitative risk assessment in the donor candidate evaluation and defensible shared decision making. This framework is grounded in the simultaneous consideration of each candidate's profile of demographic and health characteristics. The processes and framework for the donor candidate evaluation are presented, along with recommendations for optimal care before, during, and after donation. Limitations of the evidence are discussed, especially regarding the lack of definitive prospective studies and clinical outcome trials. Suggestions for future research, including the need for continued refinement of long-term risk prediction and novel approaches to estimating donation-attributable risks, are also provided.In citing this document, the following format should be used: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Living Kidney Donor Work Group. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors. Transplantation. 2017;101(Suppl 8S):S1-S109.

Recent literature suggests that living kidney donation may be associated with an excess risk of end-stage kidney disease and death. Efforts to maximize access to transplantation may result in acceptance of donors who do not fit within current guidelines, potentially placing them at risk of adverse long-term outcomes.

We studied the risk profile of Australian and New Zealand living kidney donors using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Living Kidney Donor Registry over 2004 to 2012. We compared their predonation profile against national guidelines for donor acceptance.

The analysis included 2,932 donors (mean age 48.8 ± 11.2 years, range 18-81), 58% female and 87% Caucasian. Forty (1%) had measured glomerular filtration rate less than 80 mL/min; 32 (1%) had proteinuria >300 mg/day; 589 (20%) were hypertensive; 495 (18%) obese; 9 (0.3%) were diabetic while a further 55 (2%) had impaired glucose tolerance; and 218 (7%) were current smokers. Overall 767 donors (26%) had at least one relative contraindication to donation and 268 (9%) had at least one absolute contraindication according to national guidelines.

Divergence of current clinical practice from national guidelines has occurred. In the context of recent evidence demonstrating elevated long-term donor risk, rigorous follow-up and reporting of outcomes are now mandated to ensure safety and document any change in risk associated with such a divergence.

Living kidney donors are often excluded from the shared decision making and patient-centered models that are advocated in medical practice. Thresholds for acceptable risk vary between transplant centers, and between clinicians and donors. Although donor selection committees commonly focus on medical risks, potential donors also consider nonmedical risks and burdens, which may alter their assessment of an acceptable level of medical risk. Thus, transplant centers may encounter ethical tensions between nonmaleficence and respect for donor autonomy. A donor-centered model of risk assessment and risk reconciliation would integrate the donor's values and preferences in a shared decision about their eligibility to donate. This paper argues for shifting to a donor-centered model of risk assessment, and presents a research agenda to facilitate the greater participation of donors in their own evaluation and approval processes.

As the organ shortage increases, inherently the demand for donor kidneys continues to rise. Thus, live kidney donation is essential for increasing the donor pool. In order to create successful expansion, extended criteria live kidney donors should be considered. This review combines current guidelines with all available literature in this field, trying to seek and establish the optimal extended criteria. Comprehensive searches were carried out in major databases until November 2013 to search for articles regarding older age, overweight and obesity, hypertension, vascular anomalies/multiplicity, nulliparous women, and minors as donors. Of the 2079 articles found, 152 fell within the scope of the review. Five major guidelines were included and reviewed. Based on the literature search, live kidney donation in older donors (up to 70 years of age) seems to be safe as outcome is comparable to younger donors. Obese donors have comparable outcome to lean donors, in short- and mid-term follow-up. Since little literature is available proving the safety of donation of hypertensive donors, caution is advised. Vascular multiplicity poses no direct danger to the donor and women of childbearing age can be safely included as donors. Although outcome after donation in minors is shown to be comparable to adult donors, they should only be considered if no other options exist. We conclude that the analyzed factors above should not be considered as absolute contraindications for donation.

In this era of organ donor shortage, live kidney donation has been proven to increase the donor pool; however, it is extremely important to make careful decisions in the selection of possible live donors. A body mass index (BMI) above 35 is generally considered as a relative contraindication for donation. To determine whether this is justified, a systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to compare perioperative outcome of live donor nephrectomy between donors with high and low BMI. A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library). All aspects of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement were followed. Of 14 studies reviewed, eight perioperative donor outcome measures were meta-analyzed, and, of these, five were not different between BMI categories. Three found significant differences in favor of low BMI (29.9 and less) donors with significant mean differences in operation duration (16.9 min (confidence interval (CI) 9.1-24.8)), mean difference in rise in serum creatinine (0.05 mg/dl (CI 0.01-0.09)), and risk ratio for conversion (1.69 (CI 1.12-2.56)). Thus, a high body mass index (BMI) alone is no contraindication for live kidney donation regarding short-term outcome.