Background. There is a scarcity of data on the consequences of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) infections in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) from emerging countries. Methods. Here, we present a cohort study of 13 transplant centers in India including 250 KTR (226 living and 24 deceased donors) with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 positivity from March 23, 2020, until September 15, 2020. We detailed demographics, immunosuppression regimen, clinical profile, treatment, and outcomes. Results. Median age of transplant recipients was 43 years, and recipients presented at a median of 3.5 years after transplant. Most common comorbidities (94%) included arterial hypertension (84%) and diabetes (32%); presenting symptoms at the time of COVID-19 included fever (88%), cough (72%), and sputum production (52%). Clinical severity ranged from asymptomatic (6%), mild (60%), and moderate (20%) to severe (14%). Strategies to modify immunosuppressants included discontinuation of antimetabolites without changes in calcineurin inhibitors and steroids (60%). Risk factors for mortality included older age; dyspnea; severe disease; obesity; allograft dysfunction before COVID-19 infection; acute kidney injury; higher levels of inflammatory markers including C-reactive protein, interleukin-6 level, and procalcitonin; chest X-ray abnormality, and intensive care unit/ventilator requirements. Overall patient mortality was 11.6% (29 of 250), 14.5% (29 of 200) in hospitalized patients, 47% (25 of 53) in intensive care unit patients, and 96.7% (29 of 30) in patients requiring ventilation. KTRs with mild COVID-19 symptoms (n = 50) were managed as outpatients to optimize the utilization of scarce resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions. Mortality rates in COVID-19-positive KTR appear to be higher than those in nonimmunosuppressed patients, and high mortality was noted among those requiring intensive care and those on ventilator.

Coronavirus disease (COVID 19), which was started in Wuhan, China in December 2019 has become a pandemic, leading to unprecedented risk to the human race. However, fear wave accelerating ahead of pandemic worldwide is driven by prejudice or erroneous information. This has been termed as “infodemics” by WHO considering its fake nature, which triggered discrimination and stigma of disease along with the failure of rapid response policies. Additionally, the lack of adequate pandemic preparedness plans identified in many countries may be responsible for infodemics. NonCOVID medical illnesses have taken a back seat at many places while implementing COVID 19 control strategies and patients are diverted to COVID 19 screening hospitals leading to a potential health crisis. Now, we also have to focus on mitigating infodemics and its implications at the social front while strategic planning to control current and future pandemics.

Purpose of Review As the prevalence of individuals with recovered coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) increases, determining if and when organs from these donors can be safely used is an important priority. We examined current knowledge of outcomes of transplant using donors with recovered COVID-19. Recent Findings A literature search of PubMed and Google scholar databases was conducted to identify articles with terms “SARS-CoV2,” “COVID-19,” “donor recovered,” and “transplantation” published through 08/10/2021. We identified 25 reports detailing 94 recipients of both abdominal and thoracic transplants from donors with both prior and active COVID-19 infection. Rates of transmission to the recipient and of transplanted organ dysfunction were low among reports of donors with prior COVID-19 infection. End organ dysfunction and transmission were more common with active infection, although few reports are available. Standardized reporting is needed to better assess the impact of donor symptomatology, cycle thresholds, and individual recipient risk factors on postoperative outcomes. Summary Available reports suggest that transplantation from COVID-19 donors may be feasible and safe, at least in short term follow-up. Nevertheless, there is a need for standardized testing and management protocols which should be tailored for available resources. While increased availability of COVID-19 vaccinations will mitigate risks of donor-derived COVID-19 and simplify management, continued vigilance is warranted during the ongoing public health emergency.

In a living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) dominated transplant programme, kidney paired donation (KPD) may be a cost-effective and valid alternative strategy to increase LDKT in countries with limited resources where deceased donation kidney transplantation (DDKT) is in the initial stages. Here, we report our experience of 300 single-centre KPD transplantations to increase LDKT in India. Between January 2000 and July 2016, 3616 LDKT and 561 DDKT were performed at our transplantation centre, 300 (8.3%) using KPD. The reasons for joining KPD among transplanted patients were ABO incompatibility (n = 222), positive cross-match (n = 59) and better matching (n = 19). A total of 124 two-way (n = 248), 14 three-way (n = 42), one four-way (n = 4) and one six-way exchange (n = 6) yielded 300 KPD transplants. Death-censored graft and patient survival were 96% (n = 288) and 83.3% (n = 250), respectively. The mean serum creatinine was 1.3 mg/dl at a follow-up of 3 ± 3 years. We credit the success of our KPD programme to maintaining a registry of incompatible pairs, counselling on KPD, a high-volume LDKT programme and teamwork. KPD is legal, cost effective and rapidly growing for facilitating LDKT with incompatible donors. This study provides large-scale evidence for the expansion of single-centre LDKT via KPD when national programmes do not exist.

Transplant centers seeking to increase coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccine coverage may consider requiring vaccination for healthcare workers or for candidates. The authors summarize current data to inform an ethical analysis of the harms, benefits, and individual and societal impact of mandatory vaccination, concluding that vaccine requirements for healthcare workers and transplant candidates are ethically justified by beneficence, net utility, and fiduciary duty to patients and public health. Implementation strategies should mitigate concerns about respect for autonomy and transparency for both groups. We clarify how the same arguments might be applied to related questions of caregiver vaccination, allocation of other healthcare resources, and mandates for non‐COVID‐19 vaccines. Finally, we call for effort to achieve global equity in vaccination as soon as possible.