We reviewed any study where 10 or more healthy adults donated a kidney, and proteinuria, or glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was assessed at least 1 year later. Bibliographic databases were searched until November 2005. 31 primary authors provided additional information. Forty-eight studies from 27 countries followed a total of 5048 donors. An average of 7 years after donation (range 1-25 years), the average 24 h urine protein was 154 mg/day and the average GFR was 86 ml/min. In eight studies which reported GFR in categories, 12% of donors developed a GFR between 30 and 59 ml/min (range 0-28%), and 0.2% a GFR less than 30 ml/min (range 0-2.2%). In controlled studies urinary protein was higher in donors and became more pronounced with time (three studies totaling 59 controls and 129 donors; controls 83 mg/day, donors 147 mg/day, weighted mean difference 66 mg/day, 95% confidence interval (CI) 24-108). An initial decrement in GFR after donation was not accompanied by accelerated losses over that anticipated with normal aging (six studies totaling 189 controls and 239 donors; controls 96 ml/min, donors 84 ml/min, weighted mean difference 10 ml/min, 95% CI 6-15; difference not associated with time after donation (P=0.2)). Kidney donation results in small increases in urinary protein. An initial decrement in GFR is not followed by accelerated losses over a subsequent 15 years. Future studies will provide better estimates, and identify those donors at least risk of long-term morbidity.

Knowledge of the psychosocial benefits and harms faced by living kidney donors is necessary for informed consent and follow-up. We reviewed any English language study where psychosocial function was assessed using questionnaires in 10 or more donors after nephrectomy. We searched MEDLINE, EM-BASE, Web of Science, Psych INFO, Sociological Abstracts and CINAHL databases and reviewed reference lists from 1969 through July 2006. Independently, two reviewers abstracted data on study, donor and control group characteristics, psychosocial measurements and their outcomes. Fifty-one studies examined 5139 donors who were assessed an average of 4 years after nephrectomy. The majority experienced no depression (77-95%) or anxiety (86-94%), with questionnaire scores similar to controls. The majority reported no change or an improved relationship with their recipient (86-100%), spouse (82-98%), family members (83-100%) and nonrecipient children (95-100%). Some experienced an increase in self-esteem. A majority (83-93%) expressed no change in their attractiveness. Although many scored high on quality of life measures, some prospective studies described a decrease after donation. A small proportion of donors had adverse psychosocial outcomes. Most kidney donors experience no change or an improvement in their psychosocial health after donation. Harms may be minimized through careful selection and follow-up.

On the basis of the limited studies conducted to date, kidney donors may have a 5-mm Hg increase in blood pressure within 5 to 10 years after donation over that anticipated with normal aging. Future controlled, prospective studies with long periods of follow-up will better delineate safety and identify donors at lowest risk for long-term morbidity.

Donors incur many types of costs attributable to kidney donation and the total costs are certainly higher than previously reported. To guide informed consent and fair reimbursement policies, further data on all relevant costs, preferably from a detailed prospective multi-centre cohort study, are required.

BackgroundHyperuricemia may contribute to renal injury. We do not know whether use of treatments that lower urate reduce the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and cardiovascular disease. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the benefits and risks of treatments that lower urate in patients with stages 3-5 CKD.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and trial registers for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) without language restriction. Two authors independently screened articles, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Data obtained included serum uric acid, serum creatinine or other estimates of glomerular filtration rate, incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), systolic and diastolic blood pressure, proteinuria, cardiovascular disease and adverse events.ResultsFrom the 5497 citations screened, 19 RCTs enrolling 992 participants met our inclusion criteria. Given significant heterogeneity in duration of follow-up and study comparators, only trials greater than 3 months comparing allopurinol and inactive control were meta-analyzed using random effects models. Pooled estimate for eGFR was in favour of allopurinol with a mean difference (MD) of 3.2 ml/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI 0.16-6.2 ml/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.039 and this was consistent with results for serum creatinine. Statistically significant reductions in serum uric acid, systolic and diastolic blood pressure were found, favouring allopurinol. There were insufficient data on adverse events, incidence of ESRD and cardiovascular disease for analysis.ConclusionsAdequately powered RCTs are needed to establish whether treatments that lower urate have beneficial renal and cardiovascular effects.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12882-015-0047-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.