Böbrek Naklinde Alıcı ve Vericinin Demografik ve Klinik Özelliklerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 3, 68 - 74, 31.12.2025

Aziz Bulut , Aliye Bulut

https://doi.org/10.58651/jomtu.1758173

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, böbrek naklinde alıcı ve vericinin demografik ve klinik özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesidir.
Materyal ve Metot: Araştırmanın evrenini Türkiye’deki bir organ nakli merkezine başvuran böbrek nakil alıcı ve vericileri oluşturmuştur. Ulaşılan kişi sayısı 71 olmuştur. Araştırmada kullanılan anket formu araştırıcılar tarafından oluşturulmuştur. Formda; katılımcının alıcı/verici, canlı/kadavra olup olmadığı, bazı sosyodemografik özellikleri, transplantasyon öncesi immünosüpresif tedavi alıp almadığı, diyalize girip girmediği, nakil sonrası izlem bulguları (BUN/Kreatin, eGFR, kronik böbrek hastalığı evresi, hemoglobin/beyazküre/trombosit gibi) bilgileri araştırılmıştır.
Bulgular: Katılımcıların yaş ortalaması 37.42 ± 15.41’dir. Fark yaratan değişkenlerden olan “medeni durum” açısından bakıldığında organ vericisi pozisyonunda olanların büyük kısmı (%82.9) evlidir (p = 0.007). Bu araştırmadaki katılımcıların büyük kısmının (%91.7) sigara kullanmayan nakil alıcıları olduğu görülmüştür (p = 0.000). Hastaların nakil öncesi BUN değerleri ile kreatin değerleri arasında pozitif yönlü ve orta düzeyde ilişki bulunmaktadır.
Sonuç: Böbrek naklinde alıcı ve vericinin demografik ve klinik özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesini amaçladığımız çalışmamızda elde ettiğimiz sonuçlar, hem demografik ve hem klinik özellikler açısından literatürle uyumludur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Böbrek nakli , sosyo-demografik , klinik özellikler

Assessment of Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Donor and Recipient in Kidney Transplantation

Öz

Objective: This study aims to assess demographic and clinical characteristics of the donor and recipient in kidney transplantation.
Materials and Methods: The population was composed of kidney transplant recipients and donors who applied to an organ transplant centre in Turkey. A total of 71 people were reached. The researcher prepared the questionnaire used in the study. The form included information on whether or not the participant was a recipient or donor, living or cadaveric, some socio-demographic characteristics, whether or not the participant was treated with immunosuppressive therapy before transplantation, whether or not the participant was undergoing dialysis, and follow-up findings after transplantation (Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) /creatinine, eGFR, chronic kidney disease stage, haemoglobin/ white blood cell/platelet).
Results: The mean age of the participants was 37.42± 15.41. 50.7% of the participants were recipients, and 49.3% of them were donors. A great majority (82.9%) of those who were organ donors were married (p=0.007) when looking at “marital status”, one of the variables that made a difference. A great majority of the participants (91.7%) were transplant recipients who did not smoke (p=0.000). A moderate positive correlation was found between BUN values and creatinine values in patients before transplantation.
Conclusions: The results of this study are compatible with the literature in terms of both demographic and clinical characteristics of the donor and recipient

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kidney transplantation , socio-demographic , clinical characteristics

Etik Beyan

--

Destekleyen Kurum

--

Teşekkür

--

Kaynakça

• 1. Kara B. One of the priority issues in patients with end-stage renal failure undergoing hemodialysis: quality of life. TAF Brev Med Bull. 2012;11(5):631- 633.
• 2. Ersoy F, Camsarı T, Heybeli C. Peritoneal Anatomy, Physiology and Immune System. In:(eds), Peritoneal Dialysis Reference Book (updated 2nd Edition). Detail Printing Publishing and Printing, Ankara. 2019;25-30.
• 3. Fine RN, Martz K, Stablein D. What have 20 years of data from the North American Pediatric Renal Transplant Cooperative Study taught us about growth following renal transplantation in infants, children, and adolescents with end-stage renal disease? Pediatric Nephrology. 2010;25(4):739-46.
• 4. Gansevoort RT, Correa-Rotter R, Hemmelgarn BR, Jafar TH, Heerspink HJ, Mann JF, et al. Chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular risk: epidemiology, mechanisms, and prevention. Lancet. 2013;382(9889):339-52.
• 5. Fırat N DH, Akın E, Sipahi S, Altıntoprak F, Çelebi F, Akçay M. Renal tranplantation in living kidney donors: first experiences. Online Turkish Journal of Health Sciences. 2020;5(2):356-63.
• 6. Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation in Turkey. Joint Report of TR Ministry of Health and Turkish Society of Nephrology; 2022. http://www.nefroloji. org.tr/folders/file/2016_REGISTRY.pdf. 2016.
• 7. Başkent Üniversitesi Ankara Hastanesi, “Organ Naklinde Verici Ameliyatı”, Organ Nakli Merkezi, https://ankara.baskenthastaneleri.com/tr/tani-tedavibirimlerimiz/organ-nakli-merkezi/organ-naklinde-verici-ameliyati Erişim : 09.09.2025.
• 8. Knechtle SJ, Marson LP, Morris PJ. Kidney Transplantation-Principles and Practice: Elsevier Health Sciences. 2019.
• 9. Hatzinger M, Stastny M, Grutzmacher P, Sohn M. [The history of kidney transplantation]. Urologue A. 2016;55(10):1353-1359.
• 10. Harrison JH, Merrill JP, Murray JE. Renal homotransplantation in identical twins. Surg Forum. 1956;6:432-436.
• 11. Laupacis A, Keown P, Pus N, Krueger H, Ferguson B, Wong C, et al. A study of the quality of life and cost-utility of renal transplantation. Kidney Int 1996;50(1):235-242.
• 12. Van den Berg E, Geleijnse JM, Brink EJ, van Baak MA, Homan van der Heide JJ, Gans RO, et al. Sodium intake and blood pressure in renal transplant recipients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012;27(8):3352-3359.
• 13. Ghafari A, Noori-Majelan N. Anemia among long-term renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc. 2008;40(1):186-188.
• 14. Barutçu Ataş D, Arıkan H, Alışır Ecder S, Çiftçi H. Comparison of anxiety, depression and the quality of life between hemodialysis and renal transplantation patients. Turk Neph Dial Transpl. 2017;26(2):171-176.
• 15. Vanrenterghem Y, Ponticelli C, Morales JM, Abramowicz D, Baboolal K, Eklund B, et al. Prevalence and management of anemia in renal transplant recipients: a European survey. Am J Transplant. 2003;3(7):835-845.
• 16. Turgut F, Pandya S. Protect Your Kidneys: A Comprehensive Guide for Kidney Patients, Samarpan Kidney Foundation, Samarpan Hospital, Bhutkhama Chowk. 2018: pp. 35-93.
• 17. Santas G, Santas F. Current situation of organ donation in Turkey and the importance of strategic communication in organ donation. Suleyman Demirel University The Journal of Health Science. 2018;9(2):163-168.
• 18. Banerjee D, Popoola J, Shah S, et al. COVID-19 infection in kidney transplant recipients. Kidney Int. 2020;97:1076–1082.
• 19. Pereira MR, Mohan S, Cohen DJ, et al. COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients: initial report from the US epicenter. Am J Transplant. 2020;20:1800–
• 21. Yeditepe University Hospitals; 2023. http://www.yeditepehastanesi.com.tr/ bobrek-nakli-nakledilen-bobregin-omru-nekadardir.
• 22. Oh CK, BaeBang J, Kim SJ, HaHuh K. Improve-ment of medication adherence with simplified once-daily immunosuppressive regimen in stable kidney transplant recipients: A prospective cohort study. Asian Journal of Surgery. 2020;43(6):660-667.
• 23. Türkmen, A. Transplantation Nephrology Practice Advice, Turkish Journal of Nephrology, Ankara. 2016: pp:115-126.
• 24. Seyahi N. Posttransplant Cardiovascular Issues. Editor: Türkmen A, Transplantation Nephrology Practical Application Advice, Turkish Journal of Nephrology, Ankara. 2016: pp.116.
• 25. Titiz I. Renal Transplantasyona Pratik Yaklaşım. Astellas Publishing, İstanbul. 2010:21-27.
• 26. Tanaka R, Imafuku T, Suzuki Y, Nishida K, Matsusaka K, Shin T, et al. Changes in redox state of albumin before and after kidney transplantation in patients with end-stage renal disease. Clinical Biochemistry. 2020;81:20-26.
• 27. Akın B. “Post-Kidney Transplant Follow-up Program”, Kidney Transplant Türkiye, 2023. https://bobreknakliturkiye.com.tr/bobrek-nakli-sonrasi.
• 28. Hariharan S, McBride MA, Cherikh WS, Tolleris CB, Bresnahan BA, Johnson CP. Post-transplant renal function in the first year predicts long-term kidney transplant survival. Kidney Int. 2002;62(1):311-318.
• 29. Mallon DH, Summers DM, Bradley JA, Pettigrew GJ. Defining delayed graft function after renal transplantation: simplest is best. Transplantation. 2013;96(10):885-9.
• 30. Fehr T, Gaspert A. Antibody-mediated kidney allograft rejection: therapeutic options and their experimental rationale. Transpl Int. 2012;25(6):623-32.