Medicinski glasnik : official publication of the Medical Association of Zenica-Doboj Canton, Bosnia and Herzegovina · 2026
Determining kidney function before and after kidney donation in living kidney donors: single-centre experience.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pjanić Mirha, Alečković-Halilović Mirna, Zukić Edin, Klapić Alma, Morić Naida, Čerkez Ivana, Jašarević Amila, Bašić-Denjagić Mirela, Hodžić Selma, Dugonjić-Taletović Maida, Izić Belkisa, Sulejmanović Maja
Аннотация
AIM: The most common type of kidney transplantation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is from living donors, but there is a lack of published data on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) values and kidney outcomes in living kidney donors. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of living kidney donation at our centre.
METHODS: One hundred and seventy living kidney donors at the University Clinical Centre Tuzla were analysed. Initially, there were 170 participants; however, only 31 provided all the required medical data and completed the study. GFR was estimated (eGFR) using the CKD-EPI and MDRD formulas, and a web-based calculator was used to predict GFR > 90 ml/min/1.73 m², along with measurement of creatinine clearance (CrCl). Measured GFR (mGFR) was assessed through technetium-99m diethylene triamine pentaacetic acid (DTPA) renogram, with follow-up visits to estimate post-donation GFR.
RESULTS: The CKD-EPI, MDRD, and web-based application showed similar diagnostic performances, with MDRD and CKD-EPI systematically underestimating mGFR. CrCl demonstrated strong diagnostic performance. Follow-up visits showed that most donors had post-donation eGFR values between 45 and 89 mL/min/1.73 m², with none progressing to pre-dialysis or the dialysis stage after kidney donation.
CONCLUSION: CrCl demonstrated strong diagnostic performance in our study population, and the DTPA renogram reliably assessed kidney function. Post-donation eGFR levels were satisfactory, indicating that our diagnostic workup for potential living kidney donors in our centre is safe and effective.
METHODS: One hundred and seventy living kidney donors at the University Clinical Centre Tuzla were analysed. Initially, there were 170 participants; however, only 31 provided all the required medical data and completed the study. GFR was estimated (eGFR) using the CKD-EPI and MDRD formulas, and a web-based calculator was used to predict GFR > 90 ml/min/1.73 m², along with measurement of creatinine clearance (CrCl). Measured GFR (mGFR) was assessed through technetium-99m diethylene triamine pentaacetic acid (DTPA) renogram, with follow-up visits to estimate post-donation GFR.
RESULTS: The CKD-EPI, MDRD, and web-based application showed similar diagnostic performances, with MDRD and CKD-EPI systematically underestimating mGFR. CrCl demonstrated strong diagnostic performance. Follow-up visits showed that most donors had post-donation eGFR values between 45 and 89 mL/min/1.73 m², with none progressing to pre-dialysis or the dialysis stage after kidney donation.
CONCLUSION: CrCl demonstrated strong diagnostic performance in our study population, and the DTPA renogram reliably assessed kidney function. Post-donation eGFR levels were satisfactory, indicating that our diagnostic workup for potential living kidney donors in our centre is safe and effective.