Outcome of Third Renal Allograft Retransplants Versus Primary Transplants from Paired Donors

How to Deal With Kidney Retransplantation-Second, Third, Fourth, and Beyond

Kidney transplantation is the best health option for patients with end-stage kidney disease. Ideally, a kidney transplant would last for the lifetime of each recipient. However, depending on the age of the recipient and details of the kidney transplant, there may be a need for a second, third, fourth, or even more kidney transplants. In this overview, the outcome of multiple kidney transplants for an individual is presented. Key issues include surgical approach and immunologic concerns. Included in the surgical approach is an analysis of transplant nephrectomy, with indications, timing, and immunologic impact. Allograft thrombosis, whether related to donor or recipient factors merits investigation to prevent it from happening again. Other posttransplant events such as rejection, viral illness (polyomavirus hominis type I), recurrent disease (focal segmental glomerulosclerosis), and posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease may lead to the need for retransplantation. The pediatric recipient is especially likely to need a subsequent kidney transplant. Finally, noncompliance/nonadherence can affect both adults and children. Innovative approaches may reduce the need for retransplantation in the future.

Comparing outcomes of third and fourth kidney transplantation in older and younger patients

Performing third or fourth kidney transplantation (3KT and 4KT) in older patients is rare due to surgical and immunologic challenges. We aimed to analyze and compare the outcomes of younger (18-64 years) and older (≥65 years) recipients of 3KT and 4KT. Between 1990 and 2016, we identified 5816 recipients of 3KTs (153 were older) and 886 recipients of 4KTs (18 were older). The incidences of delayed graft function (24.3% vs. 24.8%, p = .89), primary non-function (3.2% vs. 1.3%, p = .21), 1-year acute rejection (18.6% vs. 14.8%, p = .24), and 5-year death censored graft failure (DCGF) (24.8% vs. 17.9%, p = .06) were not different between younger and older recipients of 3KT. However, 5-year mortality was higher in older recipients (14.0% vs. 33.8%, p < .001) which remained significant after adjustment (aHR = 3.21, 95% CI: 2.59-3.99). Similar patterns were noted in the 4KT cohort. When compared with waitlisted patients, 3KT and 4KT are associated with a lower risk of mortality; aHR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.33-0.41 and aHR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.24-0.41, respectively. This survival benefit did not differ by recipient age (younger vs. older, p for interaction = 3KT: .49 and 4KT: .58). In the largest cohort described to date, we report that there is a survival benefit of 3KT and 4KT even among older patients. Although a highly selected cohort, our results support improving access to 3KT and 4KT.

Outcomes of first versus third kidney transplantations: propensity score matching and paired subgroup analysis-a single-centre experience

Background

In the Eurotransplant, 12.6% of kidney transplantations are a repeat procedure. Third transplants are significantly more complex than first and second ones. We compared the results of first (PRT) versus third (TRT) transplantations.

Methods

Between 2011 and 2016, we performed 779 deceased donor adult kidney transplantations, 14.2% out of them were second, 2.6% (20) third, and 0.3% fourth. We compared the pre-, intra-, and postoperative data, kidney function, and survival rate.

Results

Recipients of TRT were younger (53.4 vs. 47.3 p = 0.02). HCV infection rate (20%, p = 0.00) is ten times higher. The operation time is longer (132 vs. 152 min, p = 0.02), and delayed graft function is much more frequent (22.4% vs. 60%, p = 0.00). Induction therapy was given to every TRT (7.9% vs.100%), but as a result, the rejection rate was the same (~ 15%). Hospital stay is a week longer. Patient’s survival at 1, 3, and 5 years for PRT is 96.4%, 93.9%, and 91.2% and for TRT is 90%, 85%, and 78.4%, respectively (p = 0.023). TRT’s odds ratio of fatal outcome is 4.35 (1.5–12.5). Graft survival at 1, 3, and 5 years for PRT is 93.1%, 91.4%, and 90.3% and for TRT is 75%, 75%, and 75%, respectively (p = 0.020). TRT’s odds ratio of graft loss is 3.14 (1.1–8.9). Of PRT 85.76%, out of PRT 85.76%, while out of TRT 60% live with a functioning graft, p=0.00149.

Conclusion

In a third transplant, both graft and patient survival are significantly inferior to primer ones. Careful selection is required to minimize the patient risk and graft loss.

A Single-Center Experience With Third and Fourth Kidney Transplants and Second Kidney Transplant After Pancreas-Kidney Transplant: Surgical Aspects and Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Overall, 25% to 33% of patients on kidney transplant wait lists present with prior graft loss. In addition, the number of patients who require a retransplant seems to be increasing. Here, we describe our experience with patients who had a second kidney transplant after a previous pancreas-kidney transplant or a third or fourth kidney transplant. We focused specifically on the technical aspects and outcomes related to this patient group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center retrospective study was performed. The cohortincluded 15 patients > 18 years old who had received a second kidney graft after pancreas-kidney transplant or a second or greater kidney graft between 2013 and 2019.

RESULTS

Median age of recipients was 45 years (range, 20-58 y). In 10 patients, the transperitoneal approach was selected. In 5 patients, the retroperitoneal heterotopic kidney retransplant technique was used. Early surgical complications (≤ 30 days posttransplant) were reported in 4 patients. Three patients had late ureteral stenosis (> 90 days posttransplant). All grafts were functioning at time of patient discharge. Mean creatinine level was 2.69 mg/dL (range, 1.23-6.26 mg/dL). The 1-year and 2-year graft survivalrates were 85% and 75%, respectively. No grafts were lost because of surgical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Retransplant of a second graft after pancreas-kidney transplant or retransplant of a third or fourth renal graft is challenging but feasible, with evidence of reasonably positive outcomes after retransplant.

Outcomes in Third and Fourth Kidney Transplants Based on the Type of Donor

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of patients are requiring multiple retransplants. We assessed outcomes of third and fourth kidney transplants, to aid decision making on the most suitable donor type.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively for 2561 transplants, including 69 third and 8 fourth, performed from 2000 to 2017. Demographics and outcomes for the combined third/fourth group were compared to first and second transplants. Within the third/fourth kidney transplant group, comparisons were made between deceased donors (n = 39), live donor HLA-compatible (n = 23) and -incompatible (n = 13) transplants, as well as between standard (n = 25) and extended-criteria (n = 14) deceased donor transplants.

RESULTS

Patient survival did not differ significantly by transplant number (P = 0.532), whereas death-censored graft survival declined progressively, from 89% at 5 years in first, 85% in second and 74% in the third/fourth transplant group (P < 0.001). Within the combined third/fourth transplant subgroup, 5-year graft survival was found to be 100% in recipients of HLA-compatible live donors, compared to 75% in deceased donors and 53% in HLA-incompatible live donors, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.083). No significant difference in patient survival (P = 0.356) or complication rates (P = 0.757) were detected between these groups. For recipients of deceased donors in the third/fourth transplant group, there were no significant differences between standard versus extended-criteria donors for any of the outcomes considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite variable functional outcomes, third and fourth kidney transplant recipients experience comparable patient survival rates to first and second transplants, regardless of the donor type. In selected patients, HLA-incompatible live donors and extended-criteria deceased donors should be considered.

Re-transplants compared to primary kidney transplants recipients: a mate kidney paired analysis of the OPTN/UNOS database

Outcomes of kidney re-transplant recipients (RTR) were compared to primary recipients (FTR) from paired donor kidneys. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database was used to identify deceased donors (n = 6266) who donated one kidney to an RTR and the mate kidney to an FTR between January 2000 to December 2010. As compared to FTR, RTR were younger (45 vs. 52 yr, p < 0.001) and had higher proportion of plasma reactive antibody >80 (25% vs 7%, p < 0.001). There were higher 0 mismatches in RTR (19% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). There were more pre-emptive transplants in RTR (24% vs. 21%, p = 0.002). Delayed graft function (28% vs. 25%, p = 0.007) was higher in RTR. Patient survival was similar in FTR and RTR groups at one, three, and five yr (95.7%, 90.2%, and 82.5% vs. 95.2%, 89.8% and 82.7%). Allograft survival rates were higher in FTR group compared to RTR group at one, three, and five yr (91.1%, 82.4%, and 70.9% vs. 87.8%, 77.4%, and 66.1% p < 0.001). Death-censored allograft survival rates were higher in FTR group at one, three, and five yr (91.3%, 82.7% and 71.4% vs. 88%, 77.7% and 66.5% p < 0.001). In today's era of modern immunosuppression, graft survival in RTR has improved but remains inferior to FTR when controlling for donor factors.

Recipient Criteria Predictive of Graft Failure in Kidney Transplantation

Several classifications systems have been developed to predict outcomes of kidney transplantation based on donor variables. This study aims to identify kidney transplant recipient variables that would predict graft outcome irrespective of donor characteristics. All U.S. kidney transplant recipients between October 25,1999 and January 1, 2007 were reviewed. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model time until graft failure. Death-censored and nondeath-censored graft survival models were generated for recipients of live and deceased donor organs. Recipient age, gender, body mass index (BMI), presence of cardiac risk factors, peripheral vascular disease, pulmonary disease, diabetes, cerebrovascular disease, history of malignancy, hepatitis B core antibody, hepatitis C infection, dialysis status, panel-reactive antibodies (PRA), geographic region, educational level, and prior kidney transplant were evaluated in all kidney transplant recipients. Among the 88,284 adult transplant recipients the following groups had increased risk of graft failure: younger and older recipients, increasing PRA (hazard ratio [HR],1.03-1.06], increasing BMI (HR, 1.04-1.62), previous kidney transplant (HR, 1.17-1.26), dialysis at the time of transplantation (HR, 1.39-1.51), hepatitis C infection (HR, 1.41-1.63), and educational level (HR, 1.05-1.42). Predictive criteria based on recipient characteristics could guide organ allocation, risk stratification, and patient expectations in planning kidney transplantation.

Risk-adjusted analysis of relevant outcome drivers for patients after more than two kidney transplants

Renal transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients suffering end-stage renal disease, but as the long-term renal allograft survival is limited, most transplant recipients will face graft loss and will be considered for a retransplantation. The goal of this study was to evaluate the patient and graft survival of the 61 renal transplant recipients after second or subsequent renal transplantation, transplanted in our institution between 1990 and 2010, and to identify risk factors related to inferior outcomes. Actuarial patient survival was 98.3%, 94.8%, and 88.2% after one, three, and five years, respectively. Actuarial graft survival was 86.8%, 80%, and 78.1% after one, three, and five years, respectively. Risk-adjusted analysis revealed that only age at the time of last transplantation had a significant influence on patient survival, whereas graft survival was influenced by multiple immunological and surgical factors, such as the number of HLA mismatches, the type of immunosuppression, the number of surgical complications, need of reoperation, primary graft nonfunction, and acute rejection episodes. In conclusion, third and subsequent renal transplantation constitute a valid therapeutic option, but inferior outcomes should be expected among elderly patients, hyperimmunized recipients, and recipients with multiple operations at the site of last renal transplantation.

Single-center experience with third and fourth kidney transplants

Kidney retransplantation is often associated with a higher immunological risk than is primary renal transplantation. Faced with increasing organ shortage and growing waiting lists, results of kidney retransplantation are of particular interest. Fifty-six third and fourth kidney transplants were analyzed retrospectively. Parameters included patient and donor demographics, operative details, incidence of surgical, immunological and infectious complications and patient and graft survival. Patients receiving third kidney grafts had 1- and 5-year patient/graft survival rates of 97.4%/72.9% and 88.9%/53.6%, respectively. Episodes of acute rejection and delayed graft function were observed in 44% and 49% of these patients. Fourth kidney transplantation was associated with 1- and 2-year patient/graft survival rates of 84.8%/68.5% and 63.6%/47%, respectively. Acute rejection and delayed graft function occurred in 33% and in 60% of cases. Acceptable patient and graft survival may be achieved after third and fourth kidney transplantation. Graft losses in this sensitized population are mainly because of rejection. Profound immunosuppression may lead to major infectious problems.