Hassan A.,The Sheffield Kidney Institute |
Halawa A.,The Sheffield Kidney Institute
Experimental and Clinical Transplantation | Year: 2015
During the past decades, dual kidney transplant has enabled greater use of marginal kidneys and reduced waiting time. Since the first description of dual transplant in 1996, the techniques and outcomes have improved. No clear allocation criteria for donors and suitable candidates have been outlined; however, in general, an older for older approach is followed by many centers. Many centers are hampered by the lack of a clear allocation policy and the fact that decisions for dual kidney transplant are solely clinician based. Unilateral placement of both kidneys is the technique of choice in many centers. En block pediatric dual transplant and several vascular reconstruction methods for dual kidneys have been adopted by surgeons to enable single arterial and venous anastomosis and to reduce complications. Although there is a higher prevalence of vascular complications, mainly in the form of graft thrombosis, the overall complication rate with dual kidney transplant is comparable to single kidney transplant. Kidney survival and function are encouraging and close to results with standard criteria single kidney transplant. Although the technique is well established in many centers, standardized guidelines are lacking. Here, we review the current experience with dual kidney transplant. © Başkent University 2015 Printed in Turkey. All Rights Reserved.
PubMed | The Sheffield Kidney Institute
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Nephron. Clinical practice | Year: 2011
Current guidelines for chronic kidney disease (CKD) diagnosis, referral and management are based on absolute thresholds of proteinuria/albuminuria with no reference to the residual nephron mass or function. This is illogical since the severity of proteinuria is a direct reflection of the number of filtering nephrons as well as their pathology and the capacity of the tubules to reabsorb filtered protein/albumin. The current simplistic approach to proteinuria may also compromise its usefulness as a robust guide to appropriate treatment, e.g. preferential use of inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. The routine measurement of the urinary protein/albumin:creatinine ratio (PCR/ACR) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) gives rise to the opportunity to index proteinuria for renal function (i.e. a PCR:eGFR or ACR:eGFR ratio). Since both PCR/ACR and eGFR are reflections of quantities assessed per unit body surface area, this is a logical approach to the assessment of proteinuria/albuminuria. We advocate a consideration of the benefits of indexing PCR/ACR for eGFR to optimise treatment decisions based on proteinuria/albuminuria.