Long-term results of biopsy-guided selection and allocation of kidneys from older donors in older recipients

Dual Kidney Transplantation: Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Dual and en bloc kidney transplantation are strategies used to mitigate the disparity between a reduced organ pool and an ever-increasing need for organ procurement. En bloc refers to the implantation of 2 kidneys from a pediatric donor, compensating for small renal mass, whereas dual expanded criteria donor (DECD) transplantation refers to older donors with grafts otherwise rejected for single transplant, including expanded. This study describes one center's experience with dual and en bloc transplantation.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of dual kidney transplants (en bloc and DECD) from 1990 through 2021. The analysis included demographic, clinical, and survival analysis.

RESULTS

Of 46 patients who underwent dual kidney transplantation, 17 (37 %) received en-bloc transplantation. The overall mean recipient age was 49.4 ± 13.9 years old, younger in the en-bloc subgroup (39.2 vs 59.8 years old, P < .01). The mean time on dialysis was 37 ± 25 months. Delayed graft function was present in 17.4 % and primary nonfunction in 6.4 %, all from the DECD group. The estimated glomerular filtration rates at 1 and 5 years were 76.7 ± 28.7 and 80.4 ± 24.8 mL/min/1.73 m2, lower in the DECD group (65.9 vs 88.7 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.02). Eleven recipients lost their graft during the study period: 63.6% from death with a functioning graft, 27.3% due to chronic graft dysfunction (a mean of 76.3 months after transplantation), and 9.1% due to vascular complications. Subgroup comparison found no differences regarding cold ischemia time or length of hospitalization. Kaplan-Meier estimates, censored for death with a functioning graft, resulted in a mean graft survival of 21.3 ± 1.3 years, with survival rates of 93.5, 90.5, and 84.1% at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively, without significant differences between subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both DECD and en bloc strategies provide safe and effective options to further expand the use of otherwise rejected kidneys. Neither of the 2 techniques was superior to the other.

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.

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.

The Relationship between Timing of Pretransplant Kidney Biopsy, Graft Loss, and Survival in Kidney Transplantation: An Italian Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Kidney biopsy is performed to assess if an extended criteria graft can be used for transplantation. It may be performed before or after cross-clamping during organ procurement. This study aims to evaluate whether the timing of biopsy may modify cold ischemia times (CIT) and/or graft outcomes.

METHODS

Kidney transplants performed in our center from January 2007 to December 2017 were analyzed. Grafts with preimplantation kidney biopsy were included. Biopsies were performed during surgical back table (ex situ kidney biopsy [ESKB]) until 2012 and since then before the aortic cross-clamping (in situ kidney biopsy [ISKB]). To overcome biases owing to different distributions, a propensity score model was developed. The study population consists in 322 patients, 115 ESKB, and 207 ISKB.

RESULTS

CIT was significantly lower for ISKB (730 min ISKB vs. 840 min ESKB, p value = 0.001). In both crude (OR 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.12-0.60; p value = 0.002) and adjusted analyses (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.14-0.94; p value = 0.039), ISKB was associated with a reduced odd of graft loss when compared to ESKB.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Performing preimplantation kidney biopsy during the recovery, prior to the aortic cross-clamping, may be a strategy to reduce CIT and improve transplant outcomes.

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.

Should kidney allografts from old donors be allocated only to old recipients?

In several deceased donor kidney allocation systems, organs from elderly donors are allocated primarily to elderly recipients. The Eurotransplant Senior Program (ESP) was implemented in 1999, and since then, especially in Europe, the use of organs from elderly donors has steadily increased. The proportion of ≥60-year-old donors reported to the Collaborative Transplant Study (CTS) by European centers has doubled, from 21% in 2000-2001 to 42% in 2016-2017. Therefore, in the era of organ shortage it is a matter of debate whether kidney organs from elderly donors should only be allocated to elderly recipients or whether <65-year-old recipients can also benefit from these generally as "marginal" categorized organs. To discuss this issue, a European Consensus Meeting was organized by the CTS on April 12, 2018, in Heidelberg, in which 36 experts participated. Based on available evidence, it was unanimously concluded that kidney organs from 65- to 74-year-old donors can also be allocated to 55- to 64-year-old recipients, especially if these organs are from donors with no history of hypertension, no increased creatinine, no cerebrovascular death, and no other reasons for defining a marginal donor, such as diabetes or cancer.

Expanded criteria donors in deceased donor kidney transplantation - An Asian perspective

There is an increasing gulf between demand and supply for kidneys in end-stage renal failure patients worldwide, especially Asia. Renal transplantation is often the treatment of choice for long-suffering patients who have to undergo dialysis on a regular basis. The utilization of expanded criteria donors (ECDs) to address the donor pool shortage has been proven to be a legitimate solution. Metzger first described the classification of standard criteria donor and ECD in 2002. Since then, the criterion has undergone various modifications, with the key aims of optimizing organ procurement rate while minimizing discard and rejection rates. We review the methods to improve selection, characterization of risks, and surgical techniques. Although the ECD kidneys have a higher risk of impaired donor and recipient outcome than the "standard criteria" transplants, it may be justified by the improved overall survival of these patients compared to those who remained on dialysis. It is, therefore, crucial that we perform meticulous selection, along with state of the art surgical techniques to maximize the use of this scarce resource. In this article, we review the pre-procurement and post-procurement processes implemented to preserve outcomes.

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.

Renal transplants from older deceased donors: Is pre-implantation biopsy useful? A monocentric observational clinical study

AIM

To compare survival of kidney transplants from deceased extended criteria donors (ECD) according to: (1) donor graft histological score; and (2) allocation of high score grafts either to single (SKT) or dual (DKT) transplant.

METHODS

Renal biopsy was performed as part of either a newly adopted DKT protocol, or of surveillance protocol in the past. A total 185 ECD graft recipients were categorized according to pre-implantation graft biopsy into 3 groups: SKT with graft score 1 to 4 [SKT_(1-4), n = 102]; SKT with donor graft score 5 to 8 [SKT_{(> 4)}, n = 30]; DKT with donor graft score 5 to 7 (DKT, n = 53). Graft and patient survival were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves and compared by log-rank test. Mean number of functioning graft years by transplant reference, and mean number of dialysis-free life years by donor reference in recipients were also calculated at 1, 3 and 6 years from transplantation.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in graft and patient survival between SKT_(1-4) and SKT_{(> 4)}, and between SKT_{(> 4)} and DKT. Recipient renal function (plasma creatinine and creatinine clearance) at 1 years did not differ in SKT_(1-4) and SKT_{(> 4)} (plasma creatinine 1.71 ± 0.69 and 1.69 ± 0.63 mg/dL; creatinine clearance 49.6 + 18.5 and 52.6 + 18.8 mL/min, respectively); DKT showed statistically lower plasma creatinine (1.46 ± 0.57, P < 0.04) but not different creatinine clearance (55.4 + 20.4). Due to older donor age in the DKT group, comparisons were repeated in transplants from donors older than 70 years, and equal graft and patient survival in SKT and DKT were confirmed. Total mean number of functioning graft years by transplant reference at 1, 3 and 6 post-transplant years were equal between the groups, but mean number of dialysis-free life years by donor reference were significantly higher in SKT (mean difference compared to DKT at 6 years: 292 [IQR 260-318] years/100 donors in SKT_(1-4) and 292.5 [(IQR 247.8-331.6) in SKT_{(> 4)}].

CONCLUSION

In transplants from clinically suitable ECD donors, graft survival was similar irrespective of pre-implantation biopsy score and of allocation to SKT or DKT. These results suggest use of caution in the use of histology as the only decision criteria for ECD organ allocation.

Procurement Biopsy Findings Versus Kidney Donor Risk Index for Predicting Renal Allograft Survival

BACKGROUND

Efforts to maximize transplantation by matching organ quality to recipient longevity require reliable tools. The US kidney allocation system uses the Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) for this purpose, and many centers additionally rely on donor biopsies. The Leuven score combines donor age with procurement histology (glomerulosclerosis and interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy) to predict allograft survival.

METHODS

We compared KDRI with Leuven scores for associations with kidney discard, delayed graft function, and allograft function and survival. We used Cox, modified Poisson, and linear regression to calculate risks based on KDRI and (separately) Leuven scores, adjusting for important transplant and recipient variables.

RESULTS

From 890 donors, 1729 kidneys were procured and biopsied. Five hundred eighty-five (34%) kidneys were discarded. Median donor age was 53 years (interquartile range [IQR], 44-61 years). Median KDRI and Leuven scores were 1.56 (IQR, 1.28-1.90) and 59 (IQR, 49-69). Relative risk for discard was 1.21 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17-1.24) per 0.2-unit increase in KDRI and 1.38 (1.31-1.46) per 10-unit increase in Leuven score. Adjusted relative risks for delayed graft function were 0.98 (95% CI, 0.94-1.02) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.90-0.99), adjusted hazard ratios for graft failure were 1.10 (95% CI, 1.04-1.16) and 1.11 (95% CI, 1.02-1.21), and adjusted linear regression coefficients for 3-year estimated glomerular filtration rate were -3.88 (-4.63 to -3.13) and -5.18 (-6.19 to -4.18).

CONCLUSIONS

In kidneys clinically selected for procurement biopsy, the Leuven score was more strongly associated with discard but performed similarly to KDRI for predicting transplant outcomes, suggesting the need to reevaluate current procurement biopsy practices. Given modest associations for both tools; however, neither KDRI nor the Leuven score should be used in isolation for individual organ acceptance decisions.

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.

Advances in the Knowledge about Kidney Decellularization and Repopulation

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is characterized by the progressive deterioration of renal function that may compromise different tissues and organs. The major treatment indicated for patients with ESRD is kidney transplantation. However, the shortage of available organs, as well as the high rate of organ rejection, supports the need for new therapies. Thus, the implementation of tissue bioengineering to organ regeneration has emerged as an alternative to traditional organ transplantation. Decellularization of organs with chemical, physical, and/or biological agents generates natural scaffolds, which can serve as basis for tissue reconstruction. The recellularization of these scaffolds with different cell sources, such as stem cells or adult differentiated cells, can provide an organ with functionality and no immune response after in vivo transplantation on the host. Several studies have focused on improving these techniques, but until now, there is no optimal decellularization method for the kidney available yet. Herein, an overview of the current literature for kidney decellularization and whole-organ recellularization is presented, addressing the pros and cons of the actual techniques already developed, the methods adopted to evaluate the efficacy of the procedures, and the challenges to be overcome in order to achieve an optimal protocol.

Strategies for an Expanded Use of Kidneys From Elderly Donors

The old-for-old allocation policy used for kidney transplantation (KT) has confirmed the survival benefit compared to remaining listed on dialysis. Shortage of standard donors has stimulated the development of strategies aimed to expand acceptance criteria, particularly of kidneys from elderly donors. We have systematically reviewed the literature on those different strategies. In addition to the review of outcomes of expanded criteria donor or advanced age kidneys, we assessed the value of the Kidney Donor Profile Index policy, preimplantation biopsy, dual KT, machine perfusion and special immunosuppressive protocols. Survival and functional outcomes achieved with expanded criteria donor, high Kidney Donor Profile Index or advanced age kidneys are poorer than those with standard ones. Outcomes using advanced age brain-dead or cardiac-dead donor kidneys are similar. Preimplantation biopsies and related scores have been useful to predict function, but their applicability to transplant or refuse a kidney graft has probably been overestimated. Machine perfusion techniques have decreased delayed graft function and could improve graft survival. Investing 2 kidneys in 1 recipient does not make sense when a single KT would be enough, particularly in elderly recipients. Tailored immunosuppression when transplanting an old kidney may be useful, but no formal trials are available.Old donors constitute an enormous source of useful kidneys, but their retrieval in many countries is infrequent. The assumption of limited but precious functional expectancy for an old kidney and substantial reduction of discard rates should be generalized to mitigate these limitations.

Long-Term Outcomes and Discard Rate of Kidneys by Decade of Extended Criteria Donor Age

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Extended criteria donors represent nowadays a main resource for kidney transplantation, and recovery criteria are becoming increasingly inclusive. However, the limits of this approach are not clear as well as the effects of extreme donor ages on long-term kidney transplantation outcomes. To address these issues, we performed a retrospective study on extended criteria donor kidney transplantation.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

In total, 647 consecutive extended criteria donor kidney transplantations performed over 11 years (2003-2013) were included. Donor, recipient, and procedural variables were classified according to donor age decades (group A, 50-59 years old [n=91]; group B, 60-69 years old [n=264]; group C, 70-79 years old [n=265]; and group D, ≥80 years old [n=27]). Organs were allocated in single- or dual-kidney transplantation after a multistep evaluation including clinical and histologic criteria. Long-term outcomes and main adverse events were analyzed among age groups and in either single- or dual-kidney transplantation. Kidney discard rate incidence and causes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 4.9 years (25th; 75th percentiles: 2.7; 7.6 years); patient and graft survival were comparable among age groups (5-year patient survival: group A, 87.8%; group B, 88.1%; group C, 88.0%; and group D, 90.1%; P=0.77; graft survival: group A, 74.0%; group B, 74.2%; group C, 75.2%; and group D, 65.9%; P=0.62) and between dual-kidney transplantation and single-kidney transplantation except for group D, with a better survival for dual-kidney transplantation (P=0.04). No difference was found analyzing complications incidence or graft function over time. Kidney discard rate was similar in groups A, B, and C (15.4%, 17.7%, and 20.1%, respectively) and increased in group D (48.2%; odds ratio, 5.1 with A as the reference group; 95% confidence interval, 2.96 to 8.79).

CONCLUSIONS

Discard rate and long-term outcomes are similar among extended criteria donor kidney transplantation from donors ages 50-79 years old. Conversely, discard rate was strikingly higher among kidneys from octogenarian donors, but appropriate selection provides comparable long-term outcomes, with better graft survival for dual-kidney transplantation.

Aging has small effects on initial ischemic acute kidney injury development despite changing intrarenal immunologic micromilieu in mice

Inflammatory process mediated by innate and adaptive immune systems is a major pathogenic mechanism of renal ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI). There are concerns that organ recipients may be at increased risk of developing IRI after receiving kidneys from elder donors. To reveal the effects of aging on the development of renal IRI, we compared the immunologic micromilieu of normal and postischemic kidneys from mice of three different ages (9 wk, 6 mo, and 12 mo). There was a higher number of total T cells, especially effector memory CD4/CD8 T cells, and regulatory T cells in the normal kidneys of old mice. On day 2 after IRI, the proportion of necrotic tubules and renal functional changes were comparable between groups although old mice had a higher proportion of damaged tubule compared with young mice. More T cells, but less B cells, trafficked into the postischemic kidneys of old mice. The infiltration of NK T cells was similar across the groups. Macrophages and neutrophils were comparable between groups in both normal kidneys and postischemic kidneys. The intrarenal expressions of TNF-α and VEGF were decreased in normal and postischemic kidneys of aged mice. These mixed effects of aging on lymphocytes and cytokines/chemokines were not different between the two groups of old mice. Our study demonstrates that aging alters the intrarenal micromilieu but has small effects on the development of initial renal injury after IRI. Further study investigating aging-dependent differences in the repair process of renal IRI may be required.

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.

Successful transplantation of kidneys from elderly circulatory death donors by using microscopic and macroscopic characteristics to guide single or dual implantation

Most kidneys from potential elderly circulatory death (DCD) donors are declined. We report single center outcomes for kidneys transplanted from DCD donors over 70 years old, using preimplantation biopsy Remuzzi grading to inform implantation as single or dual transplants. Between 2009 and 2012, 43 single transplants and 12 dual transplants were performed from elderly DCD donors. Remuzzi scores were higher for dual than single implants (4.4 vs. 3.4, p < 0.001), indicating more severe baseline injury. Donor and recipient characteristics for both groups were otherwise similar. Early graft loss from renal vein thrombosis occurred in two singly implanted kidneys, and in one dual-implanted kidney; its pair continued to function satisfactorily. Death-censored graft survival at 3 years was comparable for the two groups (single 94%; dual 100%), as was 1 year eGFR. Delayed graft function occurred less frequently in the dual-implant group (25% vs. 65%, p = 0.010). Using this approach, we performed proportionally more kidney transplants from elderly DCD donors (23.4%) than the rest of the United Kingdom (7.3%, p < 0.001), with graft outcomes comparable to those achieved nationally for all deceased-donor kidney transplants. Preimplantation biopsy analysis is associated with acceptable transplant outcomes for elderly DCD kidneys and may increase transplant numbers from an underutilized donor pool.

Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?

INTRODUCTION

Renal transplantation is the best treatment for end-stage renal disease, including when using expanded criteria donors (ECD) kidneys. However, these suboptimal kidneys should be evaluated rigorously to meet their usefulness. Opinions differ about the best way to evaluate them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed kidneys from ECD harvested by a single academic institution between January 2008 and September 2013. Needle biopsies were performed at the time of the harvest when considered relevant by the transplant team. Two pathologists where responsible for their analysis; the Remuzzi classification has been used in all cases.

RESULTS

We evaluated 560 ECD kidneys. Biopsies were made in 197 (35.2%) organs, 20 of which were considered not usable and 36 good only for double transplantation. Sixty-three kidneys (11.3%) were discarded by the transplant team based on the biopsy result and clinical criteria. Donors who underwent a biopsy were older (P < .001) and had a worse glomerular filtration rate (GFR; P = .001). Comparing donors approved and rejected by the biopsy, the rejected donors were heavier (P = .003) and had a lower GFR (P = .002). Cold ischemia time was longer for the biopsy group (P < .001). Regarding graft function, the biopsy overall score correlated with the transplant outcome in the short and long term. Separately, glomeruli and interstitium scores were correlated with recipient's GFR in the earlier periods (3 months; P = .025 and .037), and the arteries and tubules correlated with GFR in the longer term (at 3 years P = .004 and .010).

CONCLUSION

The decision on the usability of ECD grafts is complex. At our center, we chose a mixed approach based on donor risk. Low-risk ECD do not require biopsy. In more complex situations, especially older donors or those with a lower GFR, prompted a pretransplant biopsy. The biopsy results proved to be useful as they relate to subsequent transplant outcomes, thereby allowing us to exclude grafts whose function would most probably be less than optimal.

Baseline donor chronic renal injury confers the same transplant survival disadvantage for DCD and DBD kidneys

Histological assessment of baseline chronic kidney injury may discriminate kidneys that are suitable for transplantation, but has not been validated for appraisal of donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidneys. 'Time-zero' biopsies for 371 consecutive, solitary, deceased-donor kidneys transplanted at our center between 2006 and 2010 (65.5% DCD, 34.5% donation after brain death [DBD]) were reviewed and baseline chronic degenerative injury scored using Remuzzi's classification. High scores correlated with donor age and extended criteria donors (42% of donors), but the spectrum of scores was similar for DCD and DBD kidneys. Transplant outcomes for kidneys scoring from 0 to 4 were comparable (1 and 3 year graft survival 95% and 92%), but were much poorer for kidneys scoring ≥5, with 1 year graft survival only 73%, and 12.5% suffering primary nonfunction. Critically, high Remuzzi scores conferred the same survival disadvantage for DCD and DBD kidneys. On multi-variable regression analysis, time-zero biopsy score was the only independent predictor for graft survival, whereas one-year graft estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) correlated with donor age and biopsy score. In conclusion, the relationship between severity of chronic kidney injury and transplant outcome is similar for DCD and DBD kidneys. Kidneys with Remuzzi scores of ≤4 can be implanted singly with acceptable results.

Can only histological evaluation determine the allocation of ECD kidneys?

INTRODUCTION

There is a recent debate on the "transplantability" of ECD (Expanded Criteria Donors) kidneys and the selection criteria used to allocate them to single or double transplantation. Remuzzi et al. have defined a protocol incorporating pre-transplant donor biopsy to guide the use of older donor organs. They allocated organs as single or double transplants on the basis of histological findings. We aim to show the pros and cons of the only histological evaluation in the allocation of ECD kidneys, to compare the different experiences in United States and Europe and thus to discuss whether this tool should be used alone or included in a comprehensive clinical and histopathological evaluation.

DISCUSSION

In the United States many Authors stated that the biopsy actually increases the percentage of kidney discarded and they raised questions about the importance of the biopsy in evaluating ECD kidneys for transplantation. On the other hand, the experiences of the majority of european transplant centers showed that allocating kidneys as single or dual transplant based on biopsy findings may achieve good graft and patient outcomes. Moreover, the experience of some centers as ours showed that kidneys allocated as DKT (Dual Kidney Transplant) on the basis of Remuzzi's score could have been suitable for single transplantation suggesting the need of an adjustment of the Remuzzi Score System. Many Authors, who are in favor of histological evaluation, actually believe that a comprehensive clinical and histopathological assessment before transplantation remains necessary. We lack precise national- or international-based selection criteria to guide clinicians. An adjustment of the Remuzzi Score System could be taken into consideration such as narrowing the indication for DKT from those ECD kidneys with higher scores and including the histological evaluation in a multifactor score.

The Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) of marginal donors allocated by standardized pretransplant donor biopsy assessment: distribution and association with graft outcomes

Pretransplant donor biopsy (PTDB)-based marginal donor allocation systems to single or dual renal transplantation could increase the use of organs with Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) in the highest range (e.g. >80 or >90), whose discard rate approximates 50% in the United States. To test this hypothesis, we retrospectively calculated the KDPI and analyzed the outcomes of 442 marginal kidney transplants (340 single transplants: 278 with a PTDB Remuzzi score<4 [median KDPI: 87; interquartile range (IQR): 78-94] and 62 with a score=4 [median KDPI: 87; IQR: 76-93]; 102 dual transplants [median KDPI: 93; IQR: 86-96]) and 248 single standard transplant controls (median KDPI: 36; IQR: 18-51). PTDB-based allocation of marginal grafts led to a limited discard rate of 15% for kidneys with KDPI of 80-90 and of 37% for kidneys with a KDPI of 91-100. Although 1-year estimated GFRs were significantly lower in recipients of marginal kidneys (-9.3, -17.9 and -18.8 mL/min, for dual transplants, single kidneys with PTDB score<4 and =4, respectively; p<0.001), graft survival (median follow-up 3.3 years) was similar between marginal and standard kidney transplants (hazard ratio: 1.20 [95% confidence interval: 0.80-1.79; p=0.38]). In conclusion, PTDB-based allocation allows the safe transplantation of kidneys with KDPI in the highest range that may otherwise be discarded.

Spanish consensus document for acceptance and rejection of kidneys from expanded criteria donors

In the recent years, more than 60% of available deceased donors are either older than 50 yr or have significant vascular comorbidities. This makes the acceptance and rejection criteria of renal allografts very rigorous, especially in cases of younger recipients, and at the same time encourages live donations. In our country, there is a lack of homogeneity in the percentages of use of expanded criteria donor (ECD) allografts between the different autonomous communities. Furthermore, the criteria vary greatly, and in some cases, great importance is given to the biopsy while in others very little. In this study, we present a unified and homogenous criteria agreed upon by consensus of a 10-member Panel representing major scientific societies related to renal transplantation in Spain. The criteria are to be used in accepting and/or rejecting kidneys from the so-called ECDs. The goal was to standardize the use of these organs, to optimize the results, and most importantly to provide for the maximum well being of our patients. Finally, we believe that after taking into account the Panel's thorough review of specific scientific literature, this document will be adaptable to other national renal transplant programmes.

Evaluation of the reasons for nonacceptance of kidneys retrieved or offered in Rio Grande do Sul and Pais Vasco

In Rio Grande do Sul (RS), as in Pais Vasco (PV), some kidneys are retrieved or offered and not accepted for transplantation. This study aimed to evaluate the profile of the available kidneys and the reasons for them not being accepted in the 2 regions, and to compare the characteristics of the organs and reasons for refusal. All of the kidneys retrieved or offered in RS in December 2012 and in PV from September to December 2012 were evaluated. Data were collected from each local donation registry. There were 61 kidneys available in RS and 61 in PV in the study period. Of these, 16 kidneys (26%) in RS and 27 (44%) in PV were not implanted. The age of the donors was higher in PV (59 years) than in RS (45 years; P = .000), as was the age of the donors of accepted kidneys (62 and 41 years old, respectively; P = .000). The proportion of donors considered to be "extended criteria" was higher in PV (78%) than in RS (47%; P = .001), and the refusal rate of the kidneys from these donors was the same in the 2 regions. The reasons for not using the kidneys in RS and in PV were similar and absolute. It is concluded that there is no organ waste in the 2 regions, but that the offer of kidneys can be expanded in RS by considering elderly donors for evaluation, even if this means a higher number of refused organs.

The marginal kidney donor

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current era of organ shortage has necessitated a widening of criteria for donation, considering donors who would have been considered unsuitable before. This review summarizes the recent advances in strategies to maximize the use of marginal kidneys without compromising the outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Various strategies have been studied and implemented to optimize procurement and allocation of marginal kidneys, and to preserve their function. In particular, a growing number of transplant centers are using donors after circulatory death. Whereas normothermic ex-vivo and postmortem perfusion are promising procedures to improve the outcomes of marginal grafts in the future, dual-kidney transplantation is a viable approach which is at present potentially underutilized. Despite active research on new strategies to evaluate organ quality, pretransplant biopsy assessment currently remains the most reliable method. The practice of using living donors with advanced age is supported by available evidence, whereas the use of young living donors with minor medical abnormalities needs further investigation.

SUMMARY

Progress has been made in the recent years, clarifying the best criteria for evaluating, recovering, and allocating marginal kidney donors. However, further research is needed, with special regards to the criteria for using marginal living-kidney donors.

Dual kidney transplant: a single-center experience and review of the literature

OBJECTIVES

Adult dual kidney transplant is a strategy to overcome the imbalance between limited nephron mass supplied from an older donor and a recipient with a metabolic request.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In our report, we review the literature and present our single-center experience. From June 2007 until July 2012, nine hundred twenty-eight single and seventeen dual kidney transplants from deceased donors were performed.

RESULTS

The average donor was 71.5 ± 3.6 years of age with an average serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, and an average number of sclerotic glomeruli, 106.1 ± 44.2 μmol/L, 0.97 ± 0.37 mL/s, and 22.4 ± 14.2. Immediate graft function and acute rejection episodes were observed in 75% and 6% of patients. The overall patient survival rates at 1 and 2 years after transplant were 93%. The overall graft survival rates at 1 and 2 years were 88%.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous studies and our single-center experience suggest that the dual transplant procedure may help improve results of kidney transplants from expanded criteria donors and extend the donor pool by using kidneys that would be discarded otherwise.

Expanding the use of expanded criteria donors in kidney transplantation

PURPOSE

Although the use of kidney allografts from expanded criteria donors (ECD) has increased in recent years, the reported discard rates are also growing. The influence of ECD characteristics on transplant outcomes is still underevaluated.

METHODS

This retrospective study investigated the influence of preimplantation biopsy findings and delayed graft function (DGF) on patient and graft survivals and renal function at 36 months in a cohort of 372 ECD kidney transplant recipients.

RESULTS

Patient and graft survivals were 91.6 and 68.9 %. The incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection was 31 %. There were no differences in patient (88.6 vs. 91.1 vs. 94.7 vs. 78.6 %, p = 0.10) or graft (78.1 vs. 72.2 vs. 60.5 vs. 62.6 %, p = 0.14) survivals and renal function (41.7 ± 25.6 vs. 39.9 ± 29.9 vs. 38.1 ± 30.6 vs. 37.4 ± 29.2 mL/min, p = 0.79) comparing ECD kidneys with mild, moderate, and severe histological changes or with no preimplantation biopsy, respectively. However, severe scored transplants had the worst death-censored graft survival (OR 3.1, 95 % CI 1.4-6.9, p = 0.007). No significant differences in patient (86.2 vs. 83.4 %, p = 0.17) or graft (73.7 vs. 65.9 %, p = 0.06) survivals and renal function (38.9 ± 28.6 vs. 39.9 ± 28.4 mL/min, p = 0.72) were observed comparing patients with or without DGF. Multivariable analysis found diabetes history as the only independent risk factor for graft loss (OR 2.1, 95 % CI 1.3-3.3, p = 0.003) or patient death (OR 3.1, 95 % CI 1.5-5.8, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of sample size and short follow-up time, in this cohort of ECD kidney transplant recipients the severity of histological changes observed in preimplantation biopsies was independently associated with graft loss.

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.

The reproducibility and predictive value on outcome of renal biopsies from expanded criteria donors

Reproducibility and predictive value on outcome are the main criteria to evaluate the utility of histological scores. Here we analyze the reproducibility of donor biopsy assessment by different on-call pathologists and the retrospective evaluation by a single renal pathologist blinded to clinical outcomes. We also evaluate the predictive value on graft outcome of both evaluations. A biopsy was performed in donors with any of the following: age≥55 years, hypertension, diabetes, creatinine>1.5 mg/dl, or stroke. Glomerulosclerosis, interstitial fibrosis, tubular atrophy, intimal thickening, and arteriolar hyalinosis evaluated according to the Banff criteria were added to obtain a chronic score. Biopsies were classified as mild (≥3), intermediate (4-5), or advanced (6-7) damage, and unacceptable (≥8) for transplantation of 127 kidneys biopsied. Weighted κ value between both readings was 0.41 (95% CI: 0.28-0.54). Evaluation of biopsies by the renal pathologist was significantly and independently associated with estimated 12-month glomerular filtration rate and a significant composite outcome variable, including death-censored graft survival and time to reach an estimated glomerular filtration rate<30 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Thus, there was no association between readings of on-call pathologists and outcome. The lack of association between histological scores obtained by the on-call pathologists and graft outcome suggests that a specific training on renal pathology is recommended to optimize the use of kidneys retrieved from expanded criteria donors.

Assessment of donor biopsies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an up-to-date overview about the assessment of donor biopsies and to discuss the current problems and chances of preimplantation biopsies for transplant allocation with a focus on the technical work up and the histological variables scored.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preimplantation biopsy results are the major reason for discarding procured extended donor criteria kidneys in the USA. There is neither a consensus on the work up, nor the reporting of preimplantation donor biopsies, nor the importance of the biopsy findings in the process of allocation. The best available data have been collected in the context of single vs. double kidney transplantation. A clinical risk factor score may help to define kidneys when a preimplantation biopsy is warranted. Punch biopsies using a skin punch device appear to be a reasonable alternative for surgeons fearing needle biopsies.

SUMMARY

Donor biopsies are very useful as zero-hour biopsies establishing baseline information for comparison with subsequent transplant biopsies. As none of the histological variables and scores provides perfect prediction, preimplantation biopsy results have to be interpreted in the context of all available donor and recipient information.

Optimizing utilization of kidneys from deceased donors over 60 years: five-year outcomes after implementation of a combined clinical and histological allocation algorithm

This 5 year observational multicentre study conducted in the Nord Italian Transplant programme area evaluated outcomes in patients receiving kidneys from donors over 60 years allocated according to a combined clinical and histological algorithm. Low-risk donors 60-69 years without risk factors were allocated to single kidney transplant (LR-SKT) based on clinical criteria. Biopsy was performed in donors over 70 years or 60-69 years with risk factors, allocated to Single (HR-SKT) or Dual kidney transplant (HR-DKT) according to the severity of histological damage. Forty HR-DKTs, 41 HR-SKTs and 234 LR-SKTs were evaluated. Baseline differences generally reflected stratification and allocation criteria. Patient and graft (death censored) survival were 90% and 92% for HR-DKT, 85% and 89% for HR-SKT, 88% and 87% for LR-SKT. The algorithm appeared user-friendly in daily practice and was safe and efficient, as demonstrated by satisfactory outcomes in all groups at 5 years. Clinical criteria performed well in low-risk donors. The excellent outcomes observed in DKTs call for fine-tuning of cut-off scores for allocation to DKT or SKT in high-risk patients.

[Kidney and smoking: literature review and focus]

Smoking remains a major public health problem. It is associated with a considerable number of deaths in the world's population. Smoking is just like high blood pressure, an independent predictor of progression to any primary renal disease and renal transplant patients. It seems that smoking cessation slows the progression of kidney disease in smokers. The literature data are sometimes contradictory about it because of some methodological weaknesses. However, experimental models highlight the harmful effects of tobacco by hemodynamic and non-hemodynamic factors. The conclusion is that a major effort should be further produced by the nephrology community to motivate our patients to stop smoking.