Villeda-Sandoval CI, Rodríguez-Covarrubias F, Gomez-Conzatti y Martinez A, Lara-Nuñez D, Guinto-Nishimura GY, González-Sánchez B, Magaña-Rodríguez Jd, Alberú-Gómez J, Vilatobá-Chapa M, Gabilondo-Pliego B

Language: English
References: 16
Page: 645-650
PDF size: 82.14 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Donor-to-recipient gender match and mismatch may be a potential prognostic factor for living donor renal graft function. Methods: A retrospective review of donor-to-recipient pairs undergoing living donor kidney transplantation was done. They were classified according to gender match as: male-to-male, female-to-female, male-to-female, and female-to-male. Serum creatinine was recorded during one year for donors and for up to four years for recipients. Renal function was evaluated by estimating the glomerular filtration rate with the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration formula. A comparative statistical analysis was performed. Results: The analysis included 217 donor-to-recipient pairs. No significant differences across the four groups in estimated glomerular filtration rate and serum creatinine at any cut-off time point except at day one serum creatinine were found. Recipients had a significant difference in serum creatinine up to the first year of follow-up, with higher values for male recipients; no significant differences were found during the second through fourth year of follow-up. A significant difference was observed in estimated glomerular filtration rate throughout all follow-ups among the four groups, favoring female recipients of male kidneys. Conclusions: Donor-recipient mismatch may have a deleterious effect over long-term graft function. Female recipients of male kidneys have the best prognosis.

REFERENCES

1. Karkar A. Caring for Patients with CRF: Rewards and Benefits. Int J Nephrol. 2001;2011:639840.

2. 2007 Annual Data Report. Atlas of chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis. 2008;51:S1.

3. Nyengaard JR, Bendtsen TF. Glomerular number and size in relation to age, kidney weight, and body surface in normal man. Anat Rec. 1992;232:194-201.

4. Couchourel D, Leclerc M, Filep J. Testosterone enhances calcium reabsorption by the kidney. Mol Cell Cendocrinol. 2004;222:71-81.

5. Oudar O, Elger M, Bankir L, Ganten D, Ganten U, Kriz W. Differences in renal kidney morphology between males, females and testosterone treated females. Renal Physiol Biochem. 1991;14:92.

6. Levey AS, Stevens LA, Schmid CH, et al. A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Int Med. 2009;150:604-12.

7. Zeier M, Döhler B, Opelz G, Ritz E. The effect of donor gender on graft survival. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2002;13:2570-6.

8. Csete M. Gender issues in transplantation. Anesth Analg. 2008;107: 232-8.

9. Kwon OJ, Kwak JY, Kang CM. The impact of gender and age matching for long-term graft survival in living donor renal transplantation. Transpl Proc. 2005;37:726-28.

10. Jacobs SC, Nogueira JM, Phelan MW, Bartlett ST, Cooper M. Transplant recipient renal function is donor renal mass- and recipient gender-dependent. Transpl Int. 2008;21:340-5.

11. Lattimer JK. The action of testosterone propionate upon the kidneys of rats, dogs and men. J Urol. 1942;48:778-94.

12. Brenner BM, Cohen RA, Milfrd EL. In renal transplantation, one size may not fit all. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1992;3:162-9.

13. Nicholson ML, Windmill DC, Horsburgh T, Harris KP. Influence of allograft size to recipient body-weight ratio on the long-term outcome of renal transplantation. Brit J Surg. 2000;87:314-9.

14. Gaston RS, Hudson SL, Julian BA, et al. Impact of donor/recipient size matching on outcomes in renal transplantation. Transplantation. 1996;61:383-8.

15. Moreso F, Serón D, Anunciada AI, et al. Recipient body surface area as a predictor of posttransplant renal allograft evolution. Transplantation. 1998;65:671-6.

16. Zukowski M, Kotfis K, Biernawska J, et al. Donor-recipient gender mismatch affects early graft loss after kidney transplantation. Transpl Proc. 2011;43:2914-16.