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.

Kidney transplantation is the optimal therapy for end-stage renal disease, prolonging survival and reducing spending. Prior economic analyses of kidney transplantation, using Markov models, have generally assumed compatible, low-risk donors. The economic implications of transplantation with high Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) deceased donors, ABO incompatible living donors, and HLA incompatible living donors have not been assessed. The costs of transplantation and dialysis were compared with the use of discrete event simulation over a 10-year period, with data from the United States Renal Data System, University HealthSystem Consortium, and literature review. Graft failure rates and expenditures were adjusted for donor characteristics. All transplantation options were associated with improved survival compared with dialysis (transplantation: 5.20-6.34 quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] vs dialysis: 4.03 QALYs). Living donor and low-KDPI deceased donor transplantations were cost-saving compared with dialysis, while transplantations using high-KDPI deceased donor, ABO-incompatible or HLA-incompatible living donors were cost-effective (<$100 000 per QALY). Predicted costs per QALY range from $39 939 for HLA-compatible living donor transplantation to $80 486 for HLA-incompatible donors compared with $72 476 for dialysis. In conclusion, kidney transplantation is cost-effective across all donor types despite higher costs for marginal organs and innovative living donor practices.

The risk and predictors of post-kidney transplantation myocardial infarction (PTMI) are not well described. Registry data collected by the United States Renal Data System were used to investigate retrospectively PTMI among adult first renal allograft recipients who received a transplant in 1995 to 2000 and had Medicare as the primary payer. PTMI events were ascertained from billing and death records, and participants were followed for up to 3 yr after transplant or until the end of observation (December 31, 2000). Extended Cox’s hazards analysis was used to identify independent clinical correlates of PTMI (hazard ratio [HR]) and to examine PTMI as an outcomes predictor. Among 35,847 eligible participants, the cumulative incidence of PTMI was 4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1 to 4.5%), 5.6% (95% CI, 5.3 to 5.8%), and 11.1% (95% CI, 10.7 to 11.5%) at 6, 12, and 36 mo, respectively. Risk factors for PTMI included older recipient age, pretransplantation comorbidities (diabetes, angina, peripheral vascular disease, and MI), transplantation from older donors and deceased donors, and delayed graft function. Women, blacks, Hispanics, and employed recipients experienced reduced risk. The hazard of PTMI rose after a diagnosis of posttransplantation diabetes (HR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.88) and markedly increased after graft failure (HR, 2.78; 95% CI, 2.41 to 3.19). In separate analyses, PTMI predicted death-censored graft failure (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.63 to 2.20) and strongly predicted death in a manner that declined with time after PTMI. Risk factors for PTMI include potentially modifiable posttransplantation complications. Because PTMI in turn predicts graft failure and death, reducing the risk for PTMI may improve outcomes after kidney transplantation.

Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) engaged an evidence review team and convened a work group to produce a guideline to evaluate and manage candidates for living kidney donation. The evidence for most guideline recommendations is sparse and many "ungraded" expert consensus recommendations were made to guide the donor candidate evaluation and care before, during, and after donation. The guideline advocates for replacing decisions based on assessments of single risk factors in isolation with a comprehensive approach to risk assessment using the best available evidence. The approach to simultaneous consideration of each candidate's profile of demographic and health characteristics advances a new framework for assessing donor candidate risk and for defensible shared decision making.

Data regarding health outcomes among living kidney donors are lacking, especially among nonwhite persons. We linked identifiers from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) with administrative data of a private U.S. health insurer and performed a retrospective study of 4650 persons who had been living kidney donors from October 1987 through July 2007 and who had post-donation nephrectomy benefits with this insurer at some point from 2000 through 2007. We ascertained post-nephrectomy medical diagnoses and conditions requiring medical treatment from billing claims. Cox regression analyses with left and right censoring to account for observed periods of insurance benefits were used to estimate absolute prevalence and prevalence ratios for diagnoses after nephrectomy. We then compared prevalence patterns with those in the 2005–2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for the general population. Among the donors, 76.3% were white, 13.1% black, 8.2% Hispanic, and 2.4% another race or ethnic group. The median time from donation to the end of insurance benefits was 7.7 years. After kidney donation, black donors, as compared with white donors, had an increased risk of hypertension (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 1.88), diabetes mellitus requiring drug therapy (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.33 to 3.98), and chronic kidney disease (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.48 to 3.62); findings were similar for Hispanic donors. The absolute prevalence of diabetes among all donors did not exceed that in the general population, but the prevalence of hypertension exceeded NHANES estimates in some subgroups. End-stage renal disease was identified in less than 1% of donors but was more common among black donors than among white donors. As in the general U.S. population, racial disparities in medical conditions occur among living kidney donors. Increased attention to health outcomes among demographically diverse kidney donors is needed. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others.)

Background and objectives: Variation in kidney transplant access across the United States may motivate relocation of patients with ability to travel to better-supplied areas. Design, setting, participants, & measurements: We examined national transplant registry and U.S. Census data for kidney transplant candidates listed in 1999 to 2009 with a reported residential zip code (n = 203,267). Cox9s regression was used to assess associations of socioeconomic status (SES), distance from residence to transplant center, and relocation to a different donation service area (DSA) with transplant access and outcomes. Results: Patients in the highest SES quartile had increased access to transplant compared with those with lowest SES, driven strongly by 76% higher likelihood of living donor transplantation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.70 to 1.83). Waitlist death was reduced in high compared with low SES candidates (aHR 0.86, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.89). High SES patients also experienced lower mortality after living and deceased donor transplant. Patients living farther from the transplant center had reduced access to deceased donor transplant and increased risk of post-transplant death. Inter-DSA travel was associated with a dramatic increase in deceased donor transplant access (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.88 to 2.00) and was predicted by high SES, white race, and longer deceased-donor allograft waiting time in initial DSA. Conclusions: Ongoing disparities exist in kidney transplantation access and outcomes on the basis of geography and SES despite near-universal insurance coverage under Medicare. Inter-DSA travel improves access and is more common among high SES candidates.