Analysis of kidney and liver exchange transplantation in India (2000–2025): a multicentre, retrospective cohort study

IF 6.2 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Vivek B. Kute , Himanshu V. Patel , Subho Banerjee , Feroz Aziz , Suraj M. Godara , Shyam B. Bansal , Anil K. Bhalla , Pranjal Modi , Ashish Sharma , Viswanath Billa , Sajith Narayanan , Priyadarshi Ranjan , Manish Singla , Arvinder S. Soin , Subhash Gupta , Sandeep Guleria , Prashant Bhangui , Ankur Gupta , Deepak S. Ray , Divyesh P. Engineer , Aneesh Srivastava
{"title":"Analysis of kidney and liver exchange transplantation in India (2000–2025): a multicentre, retrospective cohort study","authors":"Vivek B. Kute ,&nbsp;Himanshu V. Patel ,&nbsp;Subho Banerjee ,&nbsp;Feroz Aziz ,&nbsp;Suraj M. Godara ,&nbsp;Shyam B. Bansal ,&nbsp;Anil K. Bhalla ,&nbsp;Pranjal Modi ,&nbsp;Ashish Sharma ,&nbsp;Viswanath Billa ,&nbsp;Sajith Narayanan ,&nbsp;Priyadarshi Ranjan ,&nbsp;Manish Singla ,&nbsp;Arvinder S. Soin ,&nbsp;Subhash Gupta ,&nbsp;Sandeep Guleria ,&nbsp;Prashant Bhangui ,&nbsp;Ankur Gupta ,&nbsp;Deepak S. Ray ,&nbsp;Divyesh P. Engineer ,&nbsp;Aneesh Srivastava","doi":"10.1016/j.lansea.2025.100597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In India, where deceased organ donation rates are relatively low, living donor transplantation programmes face challenges due to ABO incompatibility and sensitisation. Approximately one-third of healthy, willing living donors are incompatible with their intended recipients due to these factors. No large-scale data are currently available on kidney exchange (KE) or liver exchange (LE) transplants in low- and middle-income countries, including India.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a multicentre, retrospective cohort study including KE (2000–2024) from 65 centres and LE (2007–2025) from 7 centres across India. The living donors were near-related donors without altruistic and deceased donors. Demographic and clinical data of both donors and recipients were included in the study. The reasons for KE/LE, post-transplant outcomes with respect to patient and graft survival, rejection episodes, and donor outcomes were analysed. Kidney allocation system guidelines were: (i) Thorough pre-transplant work-up of DRP was completed before allocation to avoid chain collapse. (ii) A policy of non-anonymous allocation was practised (in contrast to anonymous allocation in high-income countries), where pairs can create a rapport during evaluation and surgery. (iii) Simple two-way exchanges, and simultaneous surgeries were considered for less experienced transplant centres in order to avoid donor renege.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>A total of 1839 KE and 259 LE transplants were included in the study. The distribution of KE transplants included, 1594 (87%), 147 (8%), 44 (2%), 20 (1%), 24 (1%), and 10 (0.5%) transplants from 2-way, 3-way, 4-way, 5-way, 6-way and 10-way KE, respectively. Reasons for joining KE in transplanted pairs were ABO incompatibility 1610 (87%), compatible pairs 126 (7%), and sensitisation 103 (6%). There was notable gender imbalance, as more males were KE recipients 1504 (82%) and more females were donors 1469 (80%). The majority of LE were 2-way swaps (125 two-way vs. 3 three-way swaps), predominately involving male recipients (222 male vs. 37 females) and for ABO incompatibility.</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>Our largest-to-date cohort study supports that swap transplants are medically simple, but logistically complex. Access to KE or LE was unequally distributed and likely under-used. If replicated, our experience could increase access to transplants and help combat the looming threat of commercial transplants.</div></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><div>None.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":75136,"journal":{"name":"The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia","volume":"37 ","pages":"Article 100597"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277236822500068X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

In India, where deceased organ donation rates are relatively low, living donor transplantation programmes face challenges due to ABO incompatibility and sensitisation. Approximately one-third of healthy, willing living donors are incompatible with their intended recipients due to these factors. No large-scale data are currently available on kidney exchange (KE) or liver exchange (LE) transplants in low- and middle-income countries, including India.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre, retrospective cohort study including KE (2000–2024) from 65 centres and LE (2007–2025) from 7 centres across India. The living donors were near-related donors without altruistic and deceased donors. Demographic and clinical data of both donors and recipients were included in the study. The reasons for KE/LE, post-transplant outcomes with respect to patient and graft survival, rejection episodes, and donor outcomes were analysed. Kidney allocation system guidelines were: (i) Thorough pre-transplant work-up of DRP was completed before allocation to avoid chain collapse. (ii) A policy of non-anonymous allocation was practised (in contrast to anonymous allocation in high-income countries), where pairs can create a rapport during evaluation and surgery. (iii) Simple two-way exchanges, and simultaneous surgeries were considered for less experienced transplant centres in order to avoid donor renege.

Findings

A total of 1839 KE and 259 LE transplants were included in the study. The distribution of KE transplants included, 1594 (87%), 147 (8%), 44 (2%), 20 (1%), 24 (1%), and 10 (0.5%) transplants from 2-way, 3-way, 4-way, 5-way, 6-way and 10-way KE, respectively. Reasons for joining KE in transplanted pairs were ABO incompatibility 1610 (87%), compatible pairs 126 (7%), and sensitisation 103 (6%). There was notable gender imbalance, as more males were KE recipients 1504 (82%) and more females were donors 1469 (80%). The majority of LE were 2-way swaps (125 two-way vs. 3 three-way swaps), predominately involving male recipients (222 male vs. 37 females) and for ABO incompatibility.

Interpretation

Our largest-to-date cohort study supports that swap transplants are medically simple, but logistically complex. Access to KE or LE was unequally distributed and likely under-used. If replicated, our experience could increase access to transplants and help combat the looming threat of commercial transplants.

Funding

None.

Abstract Image

印度肾和肝交换移植的分析(2000-2025):一项多中心、回顾性队列研究
在印度,死者器官捐献率相对较低,活体供体移植计划由于ABO不相容和致敏而面临挑战。由于这些因素,大约三分之一的健康、自愿的活体捐献者与其预期的接受者不相容。目前还没有包括印度在内的中低收入国家肾脏交换(KE)或肝脏交换(LE)移植的大规模数据。方法:我们进行了一项多中心回顾性队列研究,包括来自印度65个中心的KE(2000-2024)和来自7个中心的LE(2007-2025)。活着的捐赠者是近亲捐赠者,没有利他主义和已故的捐赠者。供体和受者的人口统计学和临床资料都包括在研究中。分析KE/LE的原因、移植后患者和移植物存活、排斥事件和供体结果。肾脏分配系统的指导原则是:(i)在分配前完成DRP的彻底移植前工作,以避免链崩溃。实行了非匿名分配的政策(与高收入国家的匿名分配相反),在评估和手术期间结对可以建立融洽的关系。考虑在经验较少的移植中心进行简单的双向交换和同时手术,以避免供体食言。研究共纳入KE移植1839例,LE移植259例。2路、3路、4路、5路、6路和10路KE移植分别为1594例(87%)、147例(8%)、44例(2%)、20例(1%)、24例(1%)和10例(0.5%)。在移植对中加入KE的原因是ABO不相容1610(87%),相容126(7%)和致敏103(6%)。有明显的性别不平衡,男性更多的接受者1504(82%)和女性更多的捐赠者1469(80%)。大多数LE为双向交换(125例双向交换对3例三向交换),主要涉及男性受体(222例男性对37例女性)和ABO不相容。解释:我们迄今为止最大的队列研究支持交换移植在医学上是简单的,但在后勤上是复杂的。对KE或LE的访问分布不均,而且可能未得到充分利用。如果我们的经验被复制,可以增加移植的机会,并有助于对抗商业移植迫在眉睫的威胁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信