Cohort analysis evaluates outcomes of ABO-incompatible kidney transplants, indicating promising feasibility amidst organ shortages.
Background ABO-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (ABOi-LDKT) offers a potential solution to organ shortages, but its safety and economic impact in China remain uncertain. This study evaluated short- to mid-term outcomes of ABOi-LDKT in a Chinese population by integrating evidence from a meta-analysis and a single-center cohort. Methods We performed a meta-analysis of 18 studies including 15,611 kidney transplant recipients to compare graft and patient survival between ABOi-LDKT and ABO-compatible LDKT (ABOc-LDKT). In parallel, we conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study of 41 ABOi-LDKT and 132 ABOc-LDKT recipients transplanted between 2021 and 2022. Outcomes included patient and graft survival, renal function, postoperative complications, infections, delayed graft function (DGF), acute rejection, and hospitalization costs. Results The meta-analysis showed lower 1-year graft survival and 3-year patient survival in ABOi-LDKT than in ABOc-LDKT. In contrast, our single-center cohort demonstrated comparable 1- and 3-year patient and graft survival between groups. No significant differences were observed in surgical complications, infections, DGF, or acute rejection. ABOi-LDKT recipients showed better renal function at two weeks post-transplant, with no sustained differences thereafter. Hospitalization costs were higher in the ABOi-LDKT group, reflecting additional desensitization procedures. Conclusion In this Chinese single-center cohort, ABOi-LDKT achieved short- to mid-term clinical outcomes comparable to ABOc-LDKT despite higher upfront costs. When combined with contemporary desensitization protocols, ABOi-LDKT appears to be a safe and feasible strategy to expand access to living donor kidney transplantation in settings with severe organ shortages.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: