Outcomes of adult dual kidney transplants by KDRI in the United States

Relationship of hemoglobin levels with outcomes in deceased donor kidney transplant: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Anemia is frequent in patients undergoing replacement therapy for kidney failure. Anemia in the pre- and post-transplantation period might be related to kidney transplant outcomes. The current study therefore sought to assess the relationship between anemia, delayed allograft function (DGF), chronic kidney allograft dysfunction (CAD), and death from any cause following kidney transplantation from a deceased donor.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study with 206 kidney transplant patients of deceased donors. We analyzed deceased donors' and kidney transplant patients' demographic data. Moreover, we compared biochemical parameters, anemia status, and medicines between DGF and non-DGF groups. Afterward, we performed a multivariate analysis. We also evaluated outcomes, such as CAD within one year and death in ten years.

RESULTS

We observed a lower frequency of pre-transplant hemoglobin concentration (Hb) but higher frequency of donor-serum creatinine and red blood transfusion within one week after transplantation in the group with DGF. In addition, there was an independent association between Hb concentration before transplantation and DGF [OR 0.252, 95%CI: 0.159-0.401; p < 0.001]. There was also an association between Hb concentration after six months of kidney transplantation and both CAD [OR 0.798, 95% CI: 0.687-0.926; p = 0.003] and death from any cause.

CONCLUSION

An association was found between pre-transplantation anemia and DGF and between anemia six months after transplantation and both CAD and death by any cause. Thus, anemia before or after transplantation affects the outcomes for patients who have undergone kidney transplantation from a deceased donor.

Survival Benefit of Solid-Organ Transplantation: 10-Year Update

IMPORTANCE

Transplantation has transformed into a burgeoning field that is rapidly evolving to optimize organ distribution and survival outcomes. The years since 2012 (the last comprehensive study) have seen changes in transplantation, such as advances in immunotherapy and novel indices, that necessitate an updated analysis of survival benefit.

DESIGN

Our goal was to determine the survival benefit for solid-organ transplants in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database for a three decade period and provide updates on advancements since 2012. Our retrospective analysis examined data containing U.S. patient records from September 1, 1987, to September 1, 2021.

RESULTS

We found that 3,430,272 life-years were saved over our transplant period (4.33 life-years saved per patient); kidney-1,998,492 life-years; liver -767,414; heart-435,312; lung-116,625; pancreas-kidney-123,463; pancreas-30,575; intestine-7901. After matching, 3,296,851 life-years were saved. Life-years saved and median survival increased for all organs between 2012 and 2021. Compared to 2012, median survival increased in kidney (from 12.4 to 14.76 years), liver (from 11.6 to 14.59), heart (9.5 to 11.73), lung (5.2 to 5.63), pancreas-kidney (from 14.5 to 16.88), pancreas (from 13.3 to 16.10). When compared to 2012, the percent transplanted increased in kidney, liver, heart, lung, and intestine, while pancreas-kidney and pancreas show decreased percent transplanted.

CONCLUSION

Our study underscores the tremendous survival benefits of solid organ transplantation (over 3.4 million life-years saved) and shows improvements since 2012. Our study also highlights areas of transplantation, notably pancreas transplants, that may necessitate reinvigorated attention.

Clinical Phenotypes of Dual Kidney Transplant Recipients in the United States as Identified through Machine Learning Consensus Clustering

Background and Objectives: Our study aimed to cluster dual kidney transplant recipients using an unsupervised machine learning approach to characterize donors and recipients better and to compare the survival outcomes across these various clusters. Materials and Methods: We performed consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 2821 dual kidney transplant recipients from 2010 to 2019 in the OPTN/UNOS database. We determined the important characteristics of each assigned cluster and compared the post-transplant outcomes between clusters. Results: Two clinically distinct clusters were identified by consensus cluster analysis. Cluster 1 patients was characterized by younger patients (mean recipient age 49 ± 13 years) who received dual kidney transplant from pediatric (mean donor age 3 ± 8 years) non-expanded criteria deceased donor (100% non-ECD). In contrast, Cluster 2 patients were characterized by older patients (mean recipient age 63 ± 9 years) who received dual kidney transplant from adult (mean donor age 59 ± 11 years) donor with high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) score (59% had KDPI ≥ 85). Cluster 1 had higher patient survival (98.0% vs. 94.6% at 1 year, and 92.1% vs. 76.3% at 5 years), and lower acute rejection (4.2% vs. 6.1% within 1 year), when compared to cluster 2. Death-censored graft survival was comparable between two groups (93.5% vs. 94.9% at 1 year, and 89.2% vs. 84.8% at 5 years). Conclusions: In summary, DKT in the United States remains uncommon. Two clusters, based on specific recipient and donor characteristics, were identified through an unsupervised machine learning approach. Despite varying differences in donor and recipient age between the two clusters, death-censored graft survival was excellent and comparable. Broader utilization of DKT from high KDPI kidneys and pediatric en bloc kidneys should be encouraged to better address the ongoing organ shortage.

Outcomes of Dual Kidney Transplants from High KDPI Kidneys are Superior Compared to Single Kidney High KDPI Transplants at One-Year

Dual kidney transplantation (DKT), utilizing two adult kidneys from the same donor for one recipient, has been used as way to expand the available donor pool. These kidneys often come from high Kidney Donor Profile Index donors (KDPI >85%). Data comparing outcomes between high KDPI DKT and single kidney transplants (SKT) remain limited. We assessed outcomes of 336 high KDPI kidney transplants performed at our center; 11.0% (n = 37) were DKT. Recipients of DKT were older (p = 0.02) and donors had a higher KDPI score (median 96% vs. 91%, p<0.0001). DKT operative time was higher compared to SKT (+1.4 hours, p<0.0001). There were no differences in delayed graft function (54.1% vs. 51.5%, p = 0.77) and hospital length of stay (median 4.0 vs. 3.0 days, p = 0.21) between DKT and SKT. Grade I Clavien-Dindo complications occurred in 8.1% of DKT and 13.7% of SKT (p = 0.008). There were no grade IVa, IVb or V complications in either group. DKT had more glomerulosclerosis (p = 0.04), interstitial fibrosis (p = 0.02), tubular atrophy (p = 0.01), and arterial thickening (p = 0.03) on one-year protocol biopsies. Estimated glomerular filtration was higher for DKT at one- (p = 0.004) and two-years post-transplant (p = 0.01). There were no differences in patient (HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.5-3.3, p = 0.58) or graft (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.5-2.3, p = 0.83) survival. Good outcomes can be achieved with DKT using high KDPI kidneys with moderate chronic changes. DKT is a good option to help further utilize high KDPI kidneys and minimize discard. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The use of marginal kidneys in dual kidney transplantation to expand kidney graft utilization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to chronicle the history of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) and identify opportunities to improve utilization of marginal deceased donor (MDD) kidneys through DKT.

RECENT FINDINGS

The practice of DKT from adult MDDs dates back to the mid-1990s, at which time the primary indication was projected insufficient nephron mass from older donors. Multiple subsequent studies of short- and long-term success have been reported focusing on three major aspects: Identifying appropriate selection criteria/scoring systems based on pre- and postdonation factors; refining technical aspects; and analyzing longer-term outcomes. The number of adult DKTs performed in the United States has declined in the past decade and only about 60 are performed annually. For adult deceased donor kidneys meeting double allocation criteria, >60% are ultimately not transplanted. MDDs with limited renal functional capacity represent a large proportion of potential kidneys doomed to either discard or nonrecovery.

SUMMARY

DKT may reduce organ discard and optimize the use of kidneys from MDDs. New and innovative technologies targeting ex vivo organ assessment, repair, and regeneration may have a major impact on the decision whether or not to use recovered kidneys for single or DKT.

Dual kidney transplants from adult marginal donors: Review and perspective

The practice of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) from adult marginal deceased donors (MDDs) dates back to the mid-1990s with initial pioneering experiences reported by the Stanford and Maryland groups, at which time the primary indication was estimated insufficient nephron mass from older donors. Multiple subsequent studies of short and long-term success have been reported focusing on three major aspects of DKT: Identifying appropriate selection criteria and developing scoring systems based on pre- and post-donation factors; refining technical aspects; and analyzing mid-term outcomes. The number of adult DKTs performed in the United States has declined in the past decade and only about 60 are performed annually. For adult deceased donor kidneys meeting double allocation criteria, >60% are ultimately not transplanted. Deceased donors with limited renal functional capacity represent a large proportion of potential kidneys doomed to either discard or non-recovery. However, DKT may reduce organ discard and optimize the use of kidneys from MDDs. In an attempt to promote utilization of MDD kidneys, the United Network for Organ Sharing introduced new allocation guidelines pursuant to DKT in 2019. The purpose of this review is to chronicle the history of DKT and identify opportunities to improve utilization of MDD kidneys through DKT. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Long-term survival benefit from dual kidney transplantation using kidneys from donors with very extended criteria - A French cohort between 2002 and 2014

BACKGROUND

This national multicenter retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the long-term outcomes of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) and compare them with those obtained from single kidney transplantation (SKT).

METHODS

Our first analysis concerned all first transplants performed between May 2002 and December 2014, from marginal donors, defined as brain death donors older than 65, with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) lower than 90 ml/min/1.73m². The second analysis was restricted to transplants adequately allocated according to the French DKT program based on donor eGFR: DKT for eGFR between 30 and 60, SKT for eGFR between 60 and 90 ml/min/1.73m². Recipients younger than 65 years or with a panel-reactive antibody percentage ≥ 25% were excluded.

RESULTS

The first analysis included 461 DKT and 1131 SKT. DKT donors were significantly older (77.6 versus 74 years), had a more frequent history of hypertension and a lower eGFR (55.1 versus 63.6 ml/min/1.73m²). While primary nonfunction and delayed graft function did not differ between SKT and DKT, 1-year eGFR was lower in SKT recipients (39 vs. 49 ml/min/1.73m², P < 0.001). Graft survival was significantly better in DKT, even after adjustment for recipient and donor risk factors. Nevertheless, patient survival did not differ between these groups. The second analysis included 293 DKT and 687 SKT adequately allocated with donor eGFR and displayed similar results but with a smaller benefit in terms of graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In a context of organ shortage, DKT is a good option for optimizing the use of kidneys from very expanded criteria donors.

Determining the Level of Importance of Variables in Predicting Kidney Transplant Survival Based on a Novel Ranking Method

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the best alternative treatment for end-stage renal disease. To optimal use of donated kidneys, graft predicted survival can be used as a factor to allocate kidneys. The performance of prediction techniques is highly dependent on the correct selection of predictors. Hence, the main objective of this research is to propose a novel method for ranking the effective variables for predicting the kidney transplant survival.

METHODS

Five classification models were used to classify kidney recipients in long- and short-term survival classes. Synthetic minority oversampling and random undersampling were used to overcome the imbalanced class problem. In dealing with missing values, 2 approaches were used (eliminating and imputing them). All variables were categorized into 4 levels. The ranking was evaluated using the sensitivity analysis approach.

RESULTS

Thirty-four of the 41 variables were identified as important variables, of which, 5 variables were categorized in very important level ("Recipient creatinine at discharge," "Recipient dialysis time," "Donor history of diabetes," "Donor kidney biopsy," and "Donor cause of death"), 17 variables in important level, and 12 variables in the low important level.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we identify new variables that have not been addressed in any of the previous studies (eg, AGE_DIF and MATCH_GEN). On the other hand, in kidney allocation systems, 2 main criteria are considered: equity and utility. One of the utility subcriteria is the graft survival. Our study findings can be used in the design of systems to predict the graft survival.

Patient and Graft Survival After Dual Kidney Transplantation With Marginal Donors in Comparison to Matched Control Groups

BACKGROUND

Postmortal organ donor rates remain low in Germany, whereas donor age has been increasing considerably in the last decades. As a consequence of low donation rates older and more marginal donor kidneys are accepted for transplantation. However, procured kidneys from very old a/o marginal donors may be considered as not suitable for transplantation as a single organ and subsequently be discarded. However, dual transplantation of both kidneys from such donors may provide an opportunity to nevertheless use these organs for renal transplantation, thereby providing the twofold nephron mass as a single kidney transplantation.

METHODS

We compared in this retrospective analysis the outcome of 10 recipients of a dual kidney transplantation (DKT) with 40 matched recipients of a single kidney transplantation (SKT). Recipients were matched for donor and recipient age (ie, a maximum age difference of ±10 years in a ratio of 1:4 for DKT vs SKT recipients). In addition, a second SKT control group of 10 SKT recipients being transplanted immediately before each DKT recipient with a kidney from a donor aged ≥65 years was used for comparison. All renal transplant recipients were observed for up to 3 years or until July 31, 2020.

RESULTS

Mean donor and recipient age was 77.2 ± 4.6/75.1 ± 6.6/82.1 ± 7.9 and 66.4 ± 5.8/66.1 ± 6.0/64.8 ± 8.4 for SKT group 1/SKT group 2/DKT, respectively. Procurement serum creatinine concentrations were significantly higher in the DKT group in comparison to the SKT control group 1 (P = .019) as was the rate of transplant artery atherosclerosis (P = .021). Furthermore, Kidney Donor Profile Index, and Kidney Donor Risk Index were significantly higher (P = .0138/P = .064, and P < .001/P = .038) in the DKT group than in SKT group 1 and 2. Rates of acute rejection and delayed graft function were not significantly different between groups, though biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically higher in the SKT groups. Patient survival and overall and death-censored graft survival rates were also not significantly different between groups, although they tended to be higher after DKT.

CONCLUSIONS

DKT provides an opportunity to successfully use postmortal kidneys even from donors aged >80 years and a Kidney Donor Profile Index ≥95% for renal transplantation. DKT may thereby increase the available pool of donors to better serve patients with end-stage renal disease on the waiting list.

Quality Assessment of Donor Kidneys and the Tendency of Kidney Acceptance: A Single-Center Experience

PURPOSE

The increasing age of donors and the increasing tendency of comorbidities requires an extension in acceptance criteria. In this review, the tendency for acceptance and refusal was analyzed by examining reasons for declining donor kidneys at the kidney transplantation center in Debrecen. This analysis aimed to assess the quality of donor kidneys and indicate why two-thirds of donated organs were refused.

METHOD

Our center in Debrecen received 535 kidney offers (based on exclusion criteria) between November 2016 and August 2019, which were retrospectively analyzed. Donor kidneys were evaluated using expanded criteria donor, kidney donor profile index (KDPI), and kidney donor risk index criteria systems.

RESULTS

Thirty-five percent (n = 189) of the kidneys offered to the center in Debrecen had been approved in advance, and later 63% (n = 119) were transplanted. Using the KDPI system, 41% of donors had a KDPI above 85, of which 23% were accepted, while acceptance of kidneys with a KDPI of 0 to 35 was around 70%. When examining causes of donor kidney refusal, 90% of the organs had donor quality problems, 13% had logistical cause (long cold ischemic time, large age difference between donor and recipient), and 10.5% had immunologic cause. In 13% of cases, the refusal of donor organs was due to the coexistence of several problems.

CONCLUSION

Our data showed that high-risk donor organs were being refused in our center; however, they are being transplanted at a higher rate in other Eurotransplant centers. The decision to refuse or accept donor organs depends on several factors, including expected waiting time, patient's clinical characteristics, and quality of life.

Utilization and Outcomes of Single and Dual Kidney Transplants from Older Deceased Donors in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Kidneys from elderly deceased donors are often discarded after procurement if the expected outcomes from single kidney transplantation are considered unacceptable. An alternative is to consider them for dual kidney transplantation. We aimed to examine the utilization of kidneys from donors aged ≥60 years in the United Kingdom and compare clinical outcomes of dual versus single kidney transplant recipients.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Data from the United Kingdom Transplant Registry from 2005 to 2017 were analyzed. We examined utilization rates of kidneys retrieved from deceased donors aged ≥60 years, and 5-year patient and death-censored graft survival of recipients of dual and single kidney transplants. Secondary outcomes included eGFR. Multivariable analyses and propensity score analysis were used to correct for differences between the groups.

RESULTS

During the study period, 7841 kidneys were procured from deceased donors aged ≥60 years, of which 1338 (17%) were discarded; 356 dual and 5032 single kidneys were transplanted. Donors of dual transplants were older (median, 73 versus 66 years; P<0.001) and had higher United States Kidney Donor Risk Indices (2.48 versus 1.98; P<0.001). Recipients of dual transplants were also older (64 versus 61 years; P<0.001) and had less favorable human leukocyte antigen matching (P<0.001). After adjusting for confounders, dual and single transplants had similar 5-year graft survival (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12). No difference in patient survival was demonstrated. Similar findings were observed in a matched cohort with a propensity score analysis method. Median 12-month eGFR was significantly higher in the dual kidney transplant group (40 versus 36 ml/min per 1.73 m²; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Recipients of kidneys from donors aged ≥60 years have similar 5-year graft survival and better graft function at 12 months with dual compared with single deceased donor kidney transplants.

Identification and weighting of kidney allocation criteria: a novel multi-expert fuzzy method

Background

Kidney allocation is a multi-criteria and complex decision-making problem, which should also consider ethical issues in addition to the medical aspects. Leading countries in this field use a point scoring system to allocate kidneys. Hence, the purpose of this study is to identify and weight the kidney allocation criteria considering the balance between utility and equity.

Methods

To do this, a new fuzzy hybrid approach is proposed, which consists of two steps: In the first step, Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) is used to identify the effective criteria in the kidney allocation algorithm. In the second step, Intuitionistic Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (IF-AHP) is employed to determine the weight of the criteria.

Results

The results showed that the highest weight belongs to “Medical emergency” criterion and the lowest weight to “5 HLA mismatches”, which is similar to Euro-transplant kidney allocation system (ETKAS). The developed method is evaluated in two steps. First, the proposed model is implemented using a real case study from the Iranian Kidney Allocation System. It was shown that the proposed model has the potential to improve allocation outcome. Second, the proposed model’s superiority to the current model is approved by the experts using the results display in the profile matrix. Finally, sensitivity analysis is performed to check the robustness of the proposed model.

Conclusions

This paper contributes to the kidney allocation literature by doing the following: (a) developing a comprehensive framework for identification and weightings of criteria for kidney allocation, (b) using, for the first time, the IF-AHP technique to consider hesitancy of decision makers and uncertainty in organ allocation, and (c) proposing an appropriate framework for the countries that intend to improve or modify their organ allocation system.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12911-019-0892-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Dual Kidney Transplantation from Donors at the Extremes of Age

BACKGROUND

The study purpose was to analyze outcomes in recipients of pediatric dual en bloc (PEB) kidneys from small pediatric donors (SPDs, age ≤ 3 years) and dual kidney transplants (KTs) from adult marginal deceased donors (DDs) in the context of the Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI).

STUDY DESIGN

This was a single center retrospective review. Recipient selection included primary transplant, low BMI, low immunologic risk, and informed consent. All patients received antibody induction with FK/MPA/± prednisone.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2015, we performed 34 PEB and 73 adult dual KTs. Mean donor ages were 17 months for the PEB and 59 years for the dual KTs; mean KDPIs were 73% for PEB and 83% for dual KT, and mean cold ischemia times were 21.0 hours for PEB and 26.5 hours for dual KT. Adult dual KT recipients were older (mean age 38 years for PEB and 60 years for dual KT) and had shorter waiting times (mean 25 months for PEB and 12 months for dual KT). With a mean follow-up of 7.6 years, actual patient survival (88% for PEB and 62% for dual KT) and graft survival (71% for PEB and 44% for dual KT) rates were higher in PEB compared with dual KT. Death-censored kidney graft survival rates were 77% for PEB and 58% for dual KT. Delayed graft function (DGF) rates were 15% for PEB and 23% for dual KT; incidences of DGF in single kidney transplantations from SPDs and adult nonmarginal DDs were 20% and 32%, respectively. Based on actual 5-year graft survival rates, the adjusted KDPIs for dual PEB and dual KTs were 3% and 60%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptable mid-term outcomes are associated with PEB and adult dual KTs, which may expand the donor pool and prevent kidney discard. The KDPI is inaccurate for predicting outcomes from either PEB from SPDs or dual KT from adult marginal DDs, which may prevent acceptance of these organs.

Hard-to-place kidney offers: Donor- and system-level predictors of discard

Understanding risk factors for deceased-donor kidney nontransplantation is important since discard rates remain high. We analyzed DonorNet^® data of consecutive deceased-donor nonmandatory share primary kidney-only offers to adult candidates at our center and beyond between July 1, 2015 and March 31, 2016 for donor- and system-level risk factors of discard, defined as nontransplantation at our or subsequent transplant centers. Exclusions were hepatitis C virus/hepatitis B virus core antibody status, blood type AB, and donor <1 year based on low candidate waitlist size. Of 456 individual kidney offers, from 296 donors, 73% were discarded. Most were national (93%) offers from Kidney Donor Profile Index 35-85% (n = 233) or >85% (n = 208) donors late in the allocation sequence with prior refusals logged for numerous candidates. On multivariate regression, factors significantly associated with discard were donor cerebrovascular accident (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.32), cancer transmission concern (aOR: 6.5), renal artery luminal compromise (aOR: 3.97), biopsy score ≥3 (aOR: 5.09), 2-hour pump resistive index >0.4 (aOR: 3.27), absence of pump (aOR: 2.58), nonspecific kidney abnormality (aOR: 2.76), increasing offer cold ischemia time category 11-15, 16-20, and >21 hours (aOR: 2.07, 2.33, 2.82), nighttime notification (aOR: 2.19), and neither kidney placed at time of offer (aOR: 2.74). Many traditional determinants of discard lack discriminatory value when granular factors are assessed. System-level factors also influence discard and warrant further study.

R Open Source Programming Code for Calculation of the Kidney Donor Profile Index and Kidney Donor Risk Index

BACKGROUND

The Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) and Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) were developed by the United States Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). They may influence the clinical decision whether to accept or discard a donor kidney, but still there are debates about KDPI/KDRI applicability and its consequences. To further evaluate these indexes in different populations, more data should be analyzed, and a universally applicable program code would facilitate it. Currently, KDPI/KDRI calculation could be readily done only on the OPTN website that is convenient for a single donor, but not suitable for processing data sets with many records.

SUMMARY

A universally applicable program algorithm in widely used R language for calculating KDPI and KDRI was developed according to donor factors and coefficients described in the OPTN guide.

KEY MESSAGES

The open R code permits to calculate KDPI/KDRI either for a single donor or for an unlimited number of records in large data sets. The presented software code would save substantial time to research groups all over the world and help to clarify the KDPI/KDRI role in global settings.

Dual Kidney Transplantation: A Single-Center Experience in Thailand

BACKGROUND

Dual kidney transplants (DKTs) from expanded criteria donors (ECDs) have been performed in our hospital since 2014. We needed to review our clinical outcome and update criteria to selected ECDs for DKTs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2014 and December 2016, 4 DKTs and 269 deceased donor kidney transplants were performed. The outcome of DKTs was reviewed. The literature was reviewed for surgical technique and indication for DKT.

RESULTS

Four DKTs were performed between 2014 and 2016. One-year graft survival rate was 100%. One patient developed delayed graft function. No morbidity or mortality occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

DKTs in our center were safe and had good outcome with optimized selected criteria. DKT can improve the rate of kidney transplant in a developing country.

Renal Transplants from Older Deceased Donors: Use of Preimplantation Biopsy and Differential Allocation to Dual or Single Kidney Transplant according to Histological Score Has No Advantages over Allocation to Single Kidney Transplant by Simple Clinical Indication

BACKGROUND

Grafts from elderly donors (ECD) are increasingly allocated to single (SKT) or dual (DKT) kidney transplantation according to biopsy score. Indications and benefits of either procedure lack universal agreement.

METHODS

A total of 302 ECD-transplants in period from Jan 1, 2000, to Dec 31, 2015, were allocated to SKT (SKTpre) on clinical grounds alone (before Dec 2010, pre-DKT era, n = 170) or according to a clinical-histological protocol (after Dec 2010, DKT era, n = 132) to DKT (n = 48), SKT biopsy-based protocol ("high-risk", SKThr, n = 51), or SKT clinically based protocol ("low-risk", SKTlr, n = 33). Graft and patient survival were compared between the two periods and between different transplant categories.

RESULTS

Graft and overall survival in recipients from ECD in pre-DKT and DKT era did not differ (5-year graft survival 87.7% and 84.2%, resp.); equal survival in the 2 ECD periods was shown in both donor age ranges of 60-69 and >70-years, and in low-risk or high-risk ECD categories. Within the DKT protocol SKThr showed worst graft and overall survival in the 60-69 donor age range; DKT did not result in significantly better outcome than SKT from ECD in either era. One-year posttransplant creatinine clearance in recipients did not differ between any ECD transplant category. At 3 and 5 years after transplantation there were significantly higher total dialysis-free recipient life years from an equal donor number in the pre-DKT era than in the DKT protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a biopsy-based protocol to allocate grafts from aged donors to SKT or DKT did not result in better short term graft survival than a clinically based protocol with allocation only to SKT and reduced overall recipient dialysis-free life years in time.

Is prolonged cold ischemia a contraindication to using kidneys from acute kidney injury donors?

To determine the impact of prolonged cold ischemia time (CIT) on the outcome of acute kidney injury (AKI) renal grafts, we therefore performed a single-center retrospective analysis in adult patients receiving kidney transplantation (KT) from AKI donors. Outcomes were stratified according to duration of CIT. A total of 118 patients receiving AKI grafts were enrolled. Based on CIT, patients were stratified as follows: (i) <20 hours, 27 patients; (ii) 20-30 hours, 52 patients; (iii) 30-40 hours, 30 patients; (iv) ≥40 hours, nine patients. The overall incidence of delayed graft function DGF was 41.5%. According to increasing CIT category, DGF rates were 30%, 42%, 40%, and 78%, respectively (P = .03). With a mean follow-up of 48 months, overall patient and graft survival rates were 91% and 81%. Death-censored graft survival (DCGS) rates were 84% and 88% for patients with and without DGF (P = NS). DCGS rates were 92% in patients with CIT <20 hours compared to 85% with CIT >20 hours (P = NS). In the nine patients with CIT >40 hours, the 4-year DCGS rate was 100%. We conclude that prolonged CIT in AKI grafts may not adversely influence outcomes and so discard of AKI kidneys because of projected long CIT is not warranted when donors are wisely triaged.

Dual Kidney Transplantation: A Review of Past and Prospect for Future

Kidney transplantation (KT) is one of the treatment options for patients with chronic kidney disease. The number of patients waiting for kidney transplantation is growing day by day. Various strategies have been put in place to expand the donor pool. Extended criteria donors are now accepted more frequently. Increasing number of elderly donors with age > 60 years, history of diabetes or hypertension, and clinical proteinuria are accepted as donor. Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) is also more frequently done and experience with this technique is slowly building up. DKT not only helps to reduce the number of patients on waiting list but also limits unnecessary discard of viable organs. Surgical complications of DKT are comparable to single kidney transplantation (SKT). Patient and graft survivals are also promising. This review article provides a summary of evidence available in the literature.

Increasing the Use of Kidneys From Unconventional and High-Risk Deceased Donors

In this paper, we have reviewed the literature and report on kidney donors that are currently used at relatively low rates. Kidneys from donors with acute kidney injury (AKI) seem to have outcomes equivalent to those from donors without AKI, provided one can rule out significant cortical necrosis. Kidneys from donors with preexisting diabetes or hypertension may have marginally lower aggregate survival but still provide patients with a significant benefit over remaining on the wait list. The Kidney Donor Profile Index derives only an aggregate association with survival with a very modest C statistic; therefore, the data indicated that this index should not be the sole reason to discard a kidney, except perhaps in patients with extremely low estimated posttransplant survival scores. It is important to note that the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients models of risk adjustment should allay concerns regarding regulatory issues for observed outcomes falling below expectations. The successful utilization of kidneys from donation after cardiac death over the past decade shows how expanding our thinking can translate into more patients benefiting from transplantation. Given the growing number of patients on the wait list, broadening our approach to kidney acceptance could have an important impact on the population with end-stage renal disease. Many lives could be prolonged by carefully considering use of kidneys that are often discarded.

Dual kidney transplants from adult marginal donors successfully expand the limited deceased donor organ pool

BACKGROUND

The need to expand the organ donor pool remains a formidable challenge in kidney transplantation (KT). The use of expanded criteria donors (ECDs) represents one approach, but kidney discard rates are high because of concerns regarding overall quality. Dual KT (DKT) may reduce organ discard and optimize the use of kidneys from marginal donors.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a single-center retrospective review of outcomes in adult recipients of DKTs from adult marginal deceased donors (DD) defined by limited renal functional capacity. If the calculated creatinine clearance in an adult DD was <65 mL/min, then the kidneys were transplanted as a DKT.

RESULTS

Over 11.5 yr, 72 DKTS were performed including 45 from ECDs, 17 from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors, and 10 from standard criteria donors (SCD). Mean adult DD and recipient ages were both 60 yr, including 29 DDs and 26 recipients ≥65 yr of age. Mean pre-DKT waiting and dialysis vintage times were 12 months and 25 months, respectively. Actual patient and graft survival rates were 84.7% and 70.8%, respectively, with a mean follow-up of 58 months. One yr and death-censored graft survival rates were 90% and 80%, respectively. Outcomes did not differ by DD category, recipient age, or presence of delayed graft function (DGF). Eleven patients died at a mean of 32 months post-DKT (eight with functioning grafts) and 13 other patients experienced graft losses at a mean of 33 months. The incidence of DGF was 25%; there were two cases (2.8%) of primary non-function. Mean length of initial hospital stay was 7.2 d. Mean serum creatinine and glomerular filtration rate levels at 12 and 24 months were 1.5 and 53 and 1.5 mg/dL and 51 mL/min/1.73 m(2) , respectively. DKT graft survival and function were superior to concurrent single ECD and similar to concurrent SCD KTs. Two patients underwent successful kidney retransplantation, so the dialysis-free rate in surviving patients was 87%. The proportion of total renal function transplanted from adult DD to DKT recipients was 77% compared to 56% for patients receiving single KTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual kidney transplantation using kidneys from adult marginal DDs that otherwise might be discarded offer a viable option to counteract the growing shortage of acceptable single kidneys. Excellent medium-term outcomes can be achieved and waiting times can be reduced in a predominantly older recipient population.

Allocation strategies for elderly kidney transplant recipients

In all modern societies, the percentage of elderly people is increasing. However, this does not necessary reflect the percentage of patients waiting for a new kidney and the availability of organs for this entity differs markedly between countries. Thus, allocation strategies for elderly kidney recipients should be based on the characteristics of the specific countries and take into account: access to the waiting list and availability of living as well as marginal and conventional post-mortem donors.

Dual kidney transplantation involving organs from expanded criteria donors: a review of our series and an update on current indications

BACKGROUND

Our purpose was to review our kidney transplantation program based on the use of expanded criteria donors, and to determine current indications for dual kidney transplantation (DKT). In 1996, a program was initiated to transplant kidneys from donors of over 60 years performing single or dual transplantation.

METHODS

In 1996, a program was initiated to transplant kidneys from donors of over 60 years performing single or dual transplantation. DKT were performed with donors >75 and donors between 60 and 74 years of age and glomerulosclerosis of >15%. The kidneys of donors between 60 and 74 years of age and with glomerulosclerosis of <15% were used for single kidney transplantation (SKT). In 2005, we started to perform SKT despite glomerulosclerosis being >15%, taking into account donor and recipient characteristics.

RESULTS

From 1996 to 2004, 222 SKTs and 88 DKTs were performed. Graft survival after 1 and 4 years was, respectively, 91% and 78% for SKT and 95% and 79% for DKT. In 2005, we started to perform SKT despite glomerulosclerosis being >15%, taking into account donor and recipient characteristics. From 2005 to 2011, 328 SKT and 32 DKT were performed. During this period most kidneys used for DKT were from female donors >75 years old, weighing <65 kg, with a creatinine of >1 mg/dL and glomerulosclerosis of >15%. The recipients for DKT were mostly male, <70 years old and whose weight was >75 kg.

CONCLUSION

DKT from expanded criteria donors shows good outcomes. However, in many cases SKT may fulfill the need of the recipient. The archetype for DKT is an older female weighing <65 kg and the most common recipient is an overweight male who is <70 years old.

Poor organ quality and donor-recipient age mismatch rather than poor donation rates account for the decrease in deceased kidney transplantation rates in a Germany Transplant Center

Kidney transplantation is limited not by technical or immunological challenges but by lack of donor organs. Whereas the number of patients on waiting list increased, the transplantation rate decreased. We analyzed the development of decline rates and reasons as well as the fate of declined organs. In total, 1403 organs offered to 1950 patients between 2001 and 2010 were included. Of 440 organs offered between 2009 and 2011 that were declined, we investigated whether these organs were transplanted elsewhere and requested delayed graft function, creatinine, graft and patient survival. Data were compared to results of transplantations at the same time at our center. Decline rate increased from 47% to 87%. Main reasons were poor organ quality and donor-recipient age or size mismatch. Of the rejected organs, 55% were transplanted at other centers with function, graft and patient survival equivalent to patients transplanted at our center during that period. The number of decline has increased over time mainly due to a growing number of marginal donors accounting for poor organ quality or a mismatch of donor and recipient. If proper donor-recipient selection is performed, many organs that would otherwise be discarded can be transplanted successfully.

Donor Kidney Evaluation

In patients with end-stage renal disease, kidney transplantation is the best means to extend survival and offer a better quality of life. The current shortage of organs available for transplantation has led to an effort to expand the kidney donor pool, including the use of nonideal donor kidneys. Assessment of the quality of the donated kidney is essential, and would facilitate the decision to transplant a potential organ or discard it. Multiple clinical and histologic parameters have been examined to evaluate the donor kidney and relate the findings to the graft outcome, but clear-cut criteria are yet to be defined.

Kidneys at higher risk of discard: expanding the role of dual kidney transplantation

Half of the recovered expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys are discarded in the United States. A new kidney allocation system offers kidneys at higher risk of discard, Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI)>85%, to a wider geographic area to promote broader sharing and expedite utilization. Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) based on the KDPI is a potential option to streamline allocation of kidneys which otherwise would have been discarded. To assess the clinical utility of the KDPI in kidneys at higher risk of discard, we analyzed the OPTN/UNOS Registry that included the deceased donor kidneys recovered between 2002 and 2012. The primary outcomes were allograft survival, patient survival and discard rate based on different KDPI categories (<80%, 80-90% and >90%). Kidneys with KDPI>90% were associated with increased odds of discard (OR=1.99, 95% CI 1.74-2.29) compared to ones with KDPI<80%. DKTs of KDPI>90% were associated with lower overall allograft failure (HR=0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.89) and better patient survival (HR=0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98) compared to single ECD kidneys with KDPI>90%. Kidneys at higher risk of discard may be offered in the up-front allocation system as a DKT. Further modeling and simulation studies are required to determine a reasonable KDPI cutoff percentile.