ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Innovative strategies in kidney paired donation: single-center experience achieving the highest annual transplant volume globally.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Kidney Paired Donation (KPD) programs expand transplant opportunities for immunologically incompatible donor-recipient pairs. This study describes the operational framework and clinical outcomes of a high-volume, single-center KPD program, which became the highest-volume center globally in 2024. Methods: We analyzed all kidney transplants performed through our KPD program between January and December 2024. The program aimed to achieve full HLA and ABO compatibility for incompatible pairs, while also incorporating additional strategies: inclusion of compatible pairs to improve HLA matching, acceptance of ABO quasi-compatible matches (e.g., A2 donors to O or B recipients), low-risk HLA-incompatible matching for HLA-incompatible candidates with cPRA >80%, and ABO-incompatible matching for those with cPRA >95%. Results: A total of 135 patients (121 adults, 14 pediatrics) underwent KPD-facilitated transplantation, including 69 HLA-incompatible (51.1%), 37 ABO-incompatible (27.4%), and 29 compatible (21.5%) pairs. Females comprised 60.7% of the cohort, with a significantly higher proportion in the HLA-incompatible group (p < 0.001). HLA-incompatible recipients were older than others (mean age 42.5 years, p < 0.001). Most transplants (93.3%) occurred through 2- to 5-way closed chains, with the remainder via domino chains (6.7%). At baseline, 25% of patients were very highly sensitized (cPRA ≥95%) HLA- incompatible recipients, and ABO-incompatible recipients were blood group O individuals whose intended donors had A1 or B blood groups (high risk combinations). Following matching, 70% of patients achieved full HLA and ABO compatibility, while 30% underwent transplantation with acceptable immunologic risk (i.e. low-risk HLA incompatibility and/or ABO incompatibility). Early post-transplant outcomes were favorable, with a mean serum creatinine of 87.2 µmol/L. Acute rejection occurred in 6.7% of patients, antibody-mediated rejection in 0.7%, and graft loss in 0.7%. Conclusion: Our single-center experience demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of a high-volume KPD program in overcoming immunologic barriers to kidney transplantation. Strategic inclusion of compatible pairs, ABO quasi-compatible matching, low-risk HLA-incompatible, and ABO-incompatible matchings significantly increased access for difficult-to-match recipients. This model may serve as a replicable framework for other high-capacity transplant centers seeking to expand transplant access and improve outcomes for complex patient populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.