Half of kidney transplant candidates who are older than 60 years now placed on the waiting list will die before receiving a deceased-donor transplant

Single-center Experience with Live Kidney Donors 60 Years of Age or Older

Live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) with elderly donors is a controversial topic. The purpose of this study was to evaluate donor and recipient outcomes involving live donors 60 years of age or older. All LDKTs performed at our institution from January 2000 to January 2011 were evaluated. Statistical analysis included t test, uni- and multivariate regression analyses, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Forty-seven LDKTs were performed with donors 60 years of age or older. Median donor age was 65 years. Fifty-seven per cent were female. Forty-one recipients received their first KT (seven pre-emptive). Initial graft function was documented in 45 patients (96%). After a median follow-up of 69 months, 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft and patient survival rates were 98, 98, and 95 per cent and 96, 94, and 87 per cent, respectively. Univariate Cox proportional hazard analysis showed donor body mass index and previous KT to be predictors of graft survival. Recipient comorbidity index, HLA-B mismatches, and creatinine level at 2 years post-KT were predictors of patient survival. None of these variables remained significant by multivariate analysis. Female gender was the only positive predictor of donor postoperative creatinine levels. Satisfactory long-term donor and recipient outcomes can be achieved with live kidney donors 60 years of age or older. Careful evaluation and selection remain key to success. The role of female gender in donor long-term kidney function should be further investigated.

Predictors of graft failure and death in elderly kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The upper age limit to receive a kidney transplant has progressively risen, but the outcomes of elderly (ages ≥65 years) transplant recipients remain understudied. We therefore evaluated mortality, graft failure, and predictors of these outcomes in this population.

METHODS

Three cohorts of recipients transplanted between 1963 and 2012 (ages <50 years [n=2900], 50-64 years [n=1218], and ≥65 years [n=364] at transplantation) were compared for allograft and patient outcomes. Three similar age cohorts transplanted after 2000 (n=1410) were studied separately to address era effect.

RESULTS

Death-censored graft survival was higher in recipients ages ≥65 years: 5, 10, and 15 years was 90.7%, 80.4%, and 73.7%; for ages 50-64 years, it was 87.2%, 77.6%, and 71.5%; and for ages <50 years was 79.8%, 70.3%, and 60.8%. Risk factors for graft failure in those ages ≥65 years included panel-reactive antibody >10%, congestive heart failure (CHF), delayed graft function, and cellular rejection. The 5-, 10-, and 15-year patient survival rate was 69.7%, 36.0%, and 14.0% for those ages ≥65 years; 76.4%, 54.8%, and 34.0% for those ages 50-64 years; and 81.7%, 66.7%, and 52.2% for those ages <50 years. For the entire cohort of elderly recipients, coronary artery disease and CHF were associated with mortality, and in those recipients transplanted after 2000, the risk factors for mortality were coronary artery disease, graft failure, peripheral vascular disease, and cause of end-stage renal disease listed as other. For graft failure, only CHF and cellular rejection were associated with this outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall outcomes of transplantation in elderly kidney transplant recipients ages ≥65 years are excellent, but the risk factors for mortality and graft failure are distinctly different than those observed in younger recipients.

Eligibility for the kidney transplant wait list: a model for conceptualizing patient risk

Background

Determining eligibility for a kidney transplant is one of the most important decisions facing nephrologists. It is assumed that the harm of kidney transplantation is minimal and most will benefit. The purpose of this study was to quantify the probability of ‘no benefit’ as defined by death on the wait list; ‘harm’, defined by the probability that a transplanted patient would live less than the average wait listed patient; and ‘benefit’ for the probability a transplanted patient would outlive the average wait listed patient.

Methods

A computerized model was developed to replicate observed patient survival outcomes in deceased donor kidney transplantation. Three sequential periods of risk for the transplanted recipient compared to the wait listed cohort (increased, equivalent and reduced risk) were modeled.

Results

The model predicted that wait listed patients with a baseline mortality of 28 deaths per 100 patient years were equally likely to benefit or be harmed with a transplant. However if 20% of patients on the wait list were on hold (assuming a 2.2-fold higher mortality than those who were transplanted), then the baseline mortality rate for equal harm or benefit decreases to 22 deaths per 100 patient years (equivalent life expectancy 4.5 years).

Conclusion

Patients with limited life expectancies are more likely to suffer some harm than derive benefit from kidney transplantation.

Ethical and legal issues related to the donation and use of nonstandard organs for transplants

Transplantation of nonstandard or expanded criteria donor organs creates several potential ethical and legal problems in terms of consent and liability, and new challenges for research and service development; it highlights the need for a system of organ donation that responds to an evolving ethical landscape and incorporates scientific innovation to meet the needs of recipients, but which also safeguards the interests and autonomy of the donor. In this article, the use of deceased donor organs for transplants that fail to meet standard donor criteria and the legitimacy of interventions and research aimed at optimizing their successful donation are discussed.

Protocol of a cluster randomized trial of an educational intervention to increase knowledge of living donor kidney transplant among potential transplant candidates

Background

The best treatment option for end-stage renal disease is usually a transplant, preferably a live donor kidney transplant (LDKT). The most effective ways to educate kidney transplant candidates about the risks, benefits, and process of LDKT remain unknown.

Methods/design

We report the protocol of the Enhancing Living Donor Kidney Transplant Education (ELITE) Study, a cluster randomized trial of an educational intervention to be implemented during initial transplant evaluation at a large, suburban U.S. transplant center. Five hundred potential transplant candidates are cluster randomized (by date of visit) to receive either: (1) standard-of-care (“usual”) transplant education, or (2) intensive education that is based upon the Explore Transplant series of educational materials. Intensive transplant education includes viewing an educational video about LDKT, receiving print education, and meeting with a transplant educator. The primary outcome consists of knowledge of the benefits, risks, and process of LDKT, assessed one week after the transplant evaluation. As a secondary outcome, knowledge and understanding of LDKT are assessed 3 months after the evaluation. Additional secondary outcomes, assessed one week and 3 months after the evaluation, include readiness, self-efficacy, and decisional balance regarding transplant and LDKT, with differences assessed by race. Although the unit of randomization is the date of the transplant evaluation visit, the unit of analysis will be the individual potential transplant candidate.

Discussion

The ELITE Study will help to determine how education in a transplant center can best be designed to help Black and non-Black patients learn about the option of LDKT.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT01261910

Access to renal transplantation for the elderly in the face of new allocation policy: a review of contemporary perspectives on "older" issues

The benefits of renal transplantation have been demonstrated to extend to the elderly. As a result, more seniors have been placed on the kidney transplant wait list and have received renal allografts in recent years. In June 2013 significant amendments to deceased donor kidney allocation policy were approved to be instituted in 2014 with the goal of increasing overall life years and graft years achieved compared to the current system. Going forward, it is conceivable that transplant centers may perceive a need to adjust practice patterns and modify evaluation and listing criteria for the elderly as the proportion of kidneys distributed to this segment of the wait list would potentially decrease under the new system, further increasing wait times. This review examines contemporary perspectives on access to transplantation for seniors and pertinent issues for this subgroup such as wait time, comorbidity, and evaluation and listing practices. Potential approaches to improve the evaluation of elderly patients being considered for transplant and to increase availability of expanded criteria donor (or higher kidney donor profile index) and living donor organ transplant opportunities while maintaining acceptable outcomes for seniors are explored.

Comorbidity burden and perioperative complications for living kidney donors in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Since 1998, 35% of kidney transplants in the United States have been derived from living donors. Research suggests minimal long-term health consequences after donation, but comprehensive studies are limited. The primary objective was to evaluate trends in comorbidity burden and complications among living donors.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used to identify donors from 1998 to 2010 (n=69,117). Comorbid conditions, complications, and length of stay during hospitalization were evaluated. Outcomes among cohorts undergoing appendectomies, cholecystectomies and nephrectomy for nonmetastatic carcinoma were compared, and sample characteristics were validated with the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). Survey regression models were used to identify risk factors for outcomes.

RESULTS

The NIS captured 89% (69,117 of 77,702) of living donors in the United States. Donor characteristics were relatively concordant with those noted in SRTR (mean age, 40.1 versus 40.3 years [P=0.18]; female donors, 59.0% versus 59.1% [P=0.13]; white donors, 68.4% versus 69.8% [P<0.001] for NIS versus SRTR). Incidence of perioperative complications was 7.9% and decreased from 1998 to 2010 (from 10.1% to 7.6%). Men (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 1.56) and donors with hypertension (AOR, 3.35; 95% CI, 2.24 to 5.01) were more likely to have perioperative complications. Median length of stay declined over time (from 3.7 days to 2.5 days), with longer length of stay associated with obesity, depression, hypertension, and pulmonary disorders. Presence of depression (AOR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.12), hypothyroidism (AOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.11), hypertension (AOR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.49), and obesity (AOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.11) increased over time. Complication rates and length of stay were similar for patients undergoing appendectomies and cholecystectomies but were less than those with nephrectomies for carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

The NIS is a representative sample of living donors. Complications and length of stay after donation have declined over time, while presence of documented comorbid conditions has increased. Patients undergoing appendectomy and cholecystectomy have similar outcomes during hospitalization. Monitoring the health of living donors remains critically important.

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

UNOS guidelines provide inadequate discriminatory criteria for kidneys that should be transplanted as single (SKT) versus dual (DKT). We evaluated the utility of the kidney donor risk index (KDRI) to define kidneys with better outcomes when transplanted as dual. Using SRTR data from 1995 to 2010 of de novo KTX recipients of adult deceased-donor kidneys, we examined outcomes of SKT and DKT stratified by KDRI group ≤1.4 (n = 49 294), 1.41-1.8 (n = 15 674), 1.81-2.2 (n = 6523) and >2.2 (n = 2791). DKT of kidneys with KDRI >2.2 was associated with significantly better overall graft survival [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-0.96] compared to single kidneys with KDRI >2.2. DKT was associated with significantly decreased odds of delayed graft function (top 2 KDRI categories) and significantly decreased odds of 1-year serum creatinine level >2 mg/dL (top 3 KDRI categories). Among SKT and DKT from KDRI >2.2 there were 16.1 and 13.9 graft losses per 100 patient follow-up years, respectively. KDRI >2.2 is a useful discriminatory cut-off for the determination of graft survival benefit with the use of DKT; however, the benefit of increased graft years was less than half of single kidneys from donors in the same KDRI range.

Prominent impact of community risk factors on kidney transplant candidate processes and outcomes

Numerous factors impact patients' health beyond traditional clinical characteristics. We evaluated the association of risk factors in kidney transplant patients' communities with outcomes prior to transplantation. The primary exposure variable was a community risk score (range 0-40) derived from multiple databases and defined by factors including prevalence of comorbidities, access and quality of healthcare, self-reported physical and mental health and socioeconomic status for each U.S. county. We merged data with the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) and utilized risk-adjusted models to evaluate effects of community risk for adult candidates listed 2004-2010 (n = 209 198). Patients in highest risk communities were associated with increased mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.22, 1.16-1.28), decreased likelihood of living donor transplantation (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.90, 0.85-0.94), increased waitlist removal for health deterioration (AHR = 1.36, 1.22-1.51), decreased likelihood of preemptive listing (AOR = 0.85, 0.81-0.88), increased likelihood of inactive listing (AOR = 1.49, 1.43-1.55) and increased likelihood of listing for expanded criteria donor kidneys (AHR = 1.19, 1.15-1.24). Associations persisted with adjustment for rural-urban location; furthermore the independent effects of rural-urban location were largely eliminated with adjustment for community risk. Average community risk varied widely by region and transplant center (median = 21, range 5-37). Community risks are powerful factors associated with processes of care and outcomes for transplant candidates and may be important considerations for developing effective interventions and measuring quality of care of transplant centers.

The prognostic value of kidney transplant center report cards

SRTR report cards provide the basis for quality measurement of US transplant centers. There is limited data evaluating the prognostic value of report cards, informing whether they are predictive of prospective patient outcomes. Using national SRTR data, we simulated report cards and calculated standardized mortality ratios (SMR) for kidney transplant centers over five distinct eras. We ranked centers based on SMR and evaluated outcomes for patients transplanted the year following reports. Recipients transplanted at the 50th, 100th and 200th ranked centers had 18% (AHR = 1.18, 1.13-1.22), 38% (AHR = 1.38, 1.28-1.49) and 91% (AHR = 1.91, 1.64-2.21) increased hazard for 1-year mortality relative to recipients at the top-ranked center. Risks were attenuated but remained significant for long-term outcomes. Patients transplanted at centers meeting low-performance criteria in the prior period had 40% (AHR = 1.40, 1.22-1.68) elevated hazard for 1-year mortality in the prospective period. Centers' SMR from the report card was highly predictive (c-statistics > 0.77) for prospective center SMRs and there was significant correlation between centers' SMR from the report card period and the year following (ρ = 0.57, p < 0.001). Although results do not mitigate potential biases of report cards for measuring quality, they do indicate strong prognostic value for future outcomes. Findings also highlight that outcomes are associated with center ranking across a continuum rather than solely at performance margins.

Trends in the inactive kidney transplant waitlist and implications for candidate survival

In November 2003, OPTN policy was amended to allow kidney transplant candidates to accrue waiting time while registered as status 7, or inactive. We evaluated trends in inactive listings and the association of inactive status with transplantation and survival, studying 262,824 adult first-time KT candidates listed between 2000 and 2011. The proportion of waitlist candidates initially listed as inactive increased from 2.3% prepolicy change to 31.4% in 2011. Candidates initially listed as inactive were older, more often female, African American, and with higher body mass index. Postpolicy change, conversion from initially inactive to active status generally occurred early if at all: at 1 year after listing, 52.7% of initially inactive candidates had been activated; at 3 years, only 66.3% had been activated. Inactive status was associated with a substantially higher waitlist mortality (aHR 2.21, 95%CI:2.15-2.28, p<0.001) and lower rates of eventual transplantation (aRR 0.68, 95%CI:0.67-0.70, p<0.001). In summary, waitlist practice has changed significantly since November 2003, with a sharp increase in the number of inactive candidates. Using the full waitlist to estimate organ shortage or as a comparison group in transplant outcome studies is less appropriate in the current era.

The effect of depression on physician-patient communication among Hispanic end-stage renal disease patients

End-stage renal disease is associated with increased level of depression. Depression is associated with a reduction in the ability of people to effectively communicate in interpersonal settings. The interaction between end-stage renal disease patients and their physicians has important implications for the course of the treatment of this disease; however, there is limited research examining the influence of depression on general patient-physician communication. This study examines the association between depression and physician-patient communication in a sample of Hispanic end-stage renal disease patients. Participating patients filled out the Beck Depression Inventory and self-reported their feelings about meeting with physicians. Patients then met with a physician, and a nurse practitioner observed the interaction. Results indicate that depression was negatively associated with patients' self-reported perceptions of their readiness for the appointment (r =-.20) and with self-reported communication efficacy (r =-.19). Moreover, the nurse practitioner rated patients with depression as being significantly less likely (a) to ask for clarification (r =-.40), (b) to be engaged in the conversation (r =-.46), and (c) to be forthcoming with the physician (r =-.37). Results of this study have significant implications for communication between physicians and end-stage renal disease patients and for the influence of depression on patient-physician communication.

Quantification of the early risk of death in elderly kidney transplant recipients

To inform decision making regarding transplantation in patients ≥ 65 years, we quantified the early posttransplant risk of death by determining the time to equal risk and equal survival between transplant recipients and wait-listed dialysis patients in the United States between 1995 and 2007 (total n = 25 468). Survival was determined using separate multivariate nonproportional hazards analyses in low-, intermediate- and high-risk cardiovascular risk patients. Compared to wait-listed patients with similar cardiovascular risk, standard criteria (SCD) and expanded criteria (ECD) recipients had a higher risk of death in the perioperative and early-posttransplant period. In contrast, low and intermediate risk living donor (LD) recipients had an immediate survival advantage compared to similar risk wait-listed patients. In all risk groups, transplantation was associated with a long-term survival advantage compared to dialysis, but there were marked differences in time to equal risk of death, and time to equal survival by donor type. For example, survival in high-risk recipients of an LD, SCD and ECD transplant became equal to that in similar risk wait-listed patients 130, 368 and 521 days after transplantation. Early posttransplant mortality risk is eliminated in low- and intermediate-risk patients, and markedly reduced in high-risk patients with LD transplantation.

Access to kidney transplantation: outcomes of the non-referred

BACKGROUND

There is a concern that some, especially older people, are not referred and could benefit from transplantation.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined consecutive incident end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients at our center from January 2006 to December 2009. At ESRD start, patients were classified into those with or without contraindications using Canadian eligibility criteria. Based on referral for transplantation, patients were grouped as CANDIDATE (no contraindication and referred), NEITHER (no contraindication and not referred) and CONTRAINDICATION. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was used to assess comorbidity burden.

RESULTS

Of the 437 patients, 133 (30.4%) were CANDIDATE (mean age 50 and CCI 3.0), 59 (13.5%) were NEITHER (age 76 and CCI 4.4), and 245 (56.1%) were CONTRAINDICATION (age 65 and CCI 5.5). Age was the best discriminator between NEITHER and CANDIDATES (c-statistic 0.96, P <0.0001) with CCI being less discriminative (0.692, P <0.001). CANDIDATES had excellent survival whereas those patients designated NEITHER and CONTRAINDICATION had high mortality rates. NEITHER patients died or developed a contraindication at very high rates. By 1.5 years 50% of the NEITHER patients were no longer eligible for a transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

There exists a relatively small population of incident patients not referred who have no contraindications. These are older patients with significant comorbidity who have a small window of opportunity for kidney transplantation.

Time trend in access to the waiting list and renal transplantation: a comparison of four European countries

BACKGROUND

To examine the time trend and international differences in access to the waiting list and renal transplantation of patients with end-stage kidney disease.

METHODS

We included all patients (n = 30 961) from Austria, Norway, the Netherlands and Scotland who started renal replacement therapy (RRT) between 1995 and 2003 with their kidney transplant waiting list data (until 31 December 2005) and follow-up data on RRT and mortality (until 31 December 2007). The outcome measure was access to the waiting list within 2 years and to a first renal transplant within 4 years from the start of RRT, expressed as incidence per million age-related population (p.m.a.r.p.) per year. To estimate trends over time, mean percentage annual change (MPAC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

In each country, the number of patients starting RRT > 65 years increased significantly over time, whereas the number of renal transplants did not increase to the same extent. Only in Norway were almost all patients on the waiting list transplanted within 4 years of RRT start if they were < 65 years. In patients who started RRT > 65 years, the access to renal transplantation was high in Norway (49 p.m.a.r.p.) and low in Austria ( < 26 p.m.a.r.p.), the Netherlands and Scotland (both < 10 p.m.a.r.p.) but increased significantly in Austria (MPAC = 9.8%; 95% CI = 3.9-16.9) and the Netherlands (MPAC = 9.0%; 95% CI = 3.2-15.0).

CONCLUSION

Only in Norway, virtually all patients on the waiting list < 65 years received a transplant within 4 years after the start of RRT and, remarkably, also most of those > 65 years of age.

With respect to elderly patients: finding kidneys in the context of new allocation concepts

The elderly have benefited from increased access to renal transplantation in recent years. New allocation concepts would shift distribution of kidneys to younger recipients, making expanded criteria and living donor kidneys more relevant for seniors. Current issues impacting expanded criteria donor kidney availability and living donor transplant opportunities for the elderly are explored. It is hoped that the kidney donor profile index will improve risk assessment and utilization of marginal kidneys. The usefulness of procurement biopsy remains controversial. Dual kidney transplantation and machine perfusion appear to be effective mechanisms to increase organ availability. "Old-for-old" allocation systems, donation service area variation and regulatory and reimbursement issues highlight disparities and disincentives affecting expanded criteria donor organ utilization, and considerations for the way forward are discussed. Living donor transplantation, even with older donors, may provide the best option for elderly recipients, and careful expansion of the living donor pool appears appropriate. In light of new allocation concepts, it will be important to understand issues pertinent to seniors and develop effective strategies to maintain or improve their access to the benefits of transplantation.

Outcomes of ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation in the United States

BACKGROUND

ABO incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation is an important modality to facilitate living donor transplant for incompatible pairs. To date, reports of the outcomes from this practice in the United States have been limited to single-center studies.

METHODS

Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified 738 patients who underwent live-donor ABOi kidney transplantation between January 1, 1995, and March 31, 2010. These were compared with matched controls that underwent ABO compatible live-donor kidney transplantation. Subgroup analyses among ABOi recipients were performed according to donor blood type, recipient blood type, and transplant center ABOi volume.

RESULTS

When compared with ABO compatible-matched controls, long-term patient survival of ABOi recipients was not significantly different between the cohorts (P=0.2). However, graft loss was significantly higher, particularly in the first 14 days posttransplant (subhazard ratio, 2.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-3.84; P=0.001), with little to no difference beyond day 14 (subhazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.54; P=0.058). In subgroup analyses among ABOi recipients, no differences in survival were seen by donor blood type, recipient blood type, or transplant center ABOi volume.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the use and dissemination of ABOi transplantation when a compatible live donor is not available, but caution that the highest period of risk is immediately posttransplant.

The aggressive phenotype: center-level patterns in the utilization of suboptimal kidneys

Despite the fact that suboptimal kidneys have worse outcomes, differences in waiting times and wait-list mortality have led to variations in the use of these kidneys. It is unknown whether aggressive center-level use of one type of suboptimal graft clusters with aggressive use of other types of suboptimal grafts, and what center characteristics are associated with an overall aggressive phenotype. United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data from 2005 to 2009 for adult kidney transplant recipients was aggregated to the center level. An aggressiveness score was assigned to each center based on usage of suboptimal grafts. Deceased-donor transplant volume correlated with aggressiveness in lower volume, but not higher volume centers. Aggressive centers were mostly found in regions 2 and 9. Aggressiveness was associated with wait-list size (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.20-2.34, p = 0.002), organ shortage (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.57-3.37, p < 0.001) and waiting times (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.20-2.57, p = 0.004). No centers in single-center OPOs were classified as aggressive. In cluster analysis, the most aggressive centers were aggressive in all metrics and vice versa; however, centers with intermediate aggressiveness had phenotypic patterns in their usage of suboptimal kidneys. In conclusion, wait-list size, waiting times, geographic region and OPO competition seem to be driving factors in center-level aggressiveness.

Declining rates of deceased donor renal transplantation in the United States over successive years of listing

OBJECTIVE

Renal transplantation is the best treatment for end-stage renal disease. However, limited availability of donor organs is a problem. We analyzed the changing trends of transplantation and mortality in subjects listed for deceased donor renal transplantation over successive years.

METHODS

By using US Renal Data System data, we identified Medicare patients receiving dialysis who were listed for their first deceased donor renal transplant between January 1996 and December 2005. Subjects were followed to the first occurrence of transplant, death, or September 30, 2007. The effect of the year of listing was analyzed adjusting for age, sex, race, vintage, panel reactive antibody, and cause of end-stage renal disease.

RESULTS

There were 70,891 subjects (mean age 50.1 ± 14.3 years, 59.9% were men, 54% were white, average duration of dialysis 2 ± 2.2 years). Multivariate analysis revealed that compared with patients listed in 1996, for patients listed in subsequent years the cumulative incidence of death remained within a narrow boundary and the cumulative incidence of transplant progressively declined. For example, for subjects listed in 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004, the cumulative incidence of death relative to 1996 was 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.03), 1.02 (CI, 1.01-1.03), 0.99 (CI, 0.98-0.99), and 0.94 (CI, 0.93-0.94), respectively, 12 months after listing. However, correspondingly for these subjects at the 12-month follow-up time point, the cumulative incidence of transplant relative to 1996 was 0.85 (CI, 0.84-0.86), 0.73 (CI, 0.71-0.74), 0.63 (CI, 0.62-0.64), and 0.58 (CI, 0.57-0.59), respectively.

CONCLUSION

There is a progressive unfavorable pattern of declining transplantation rates with each successive year of listing in patients listed for deceased donor renal transplantation.

Optimizing renal replacement therapy in older adults: a framework for making individualized decisions

It is often difficult to synthesize information about the risks and benefits of recommended management strategies in older patients with end-stage renal disease since they may have more comorbidity and lower life expectancy than patients described in clinical trials or practice guidelines. In this review, we outline a framework for individualizing end-stage renal disease management decisions in older patients. The framework considers three factors: life expectancy, the risks and benefits of competing treatment strategies, and patient preferences. We illustrate the use of this framework by applying it to three key end-stage renal disease decisions in older patients with varying life expectancy: choice of dialysis modality, choice of vascular access for hemodialysis, and referral for kidney transplantation. In several instances, this approach might provide support for treatment decisions that directly contradict available practice guidelines, illustrating circumstances when strict application of guidelines may be inappropriate for certain patients. By combining quantitative estimates of benefits and harms with qualitative assessments of patient preferences, clinicians may be better able to tailor treatment recommendations to individual older patients, thereby improving the overall quality of end-stage renal disease care.

Living kidney donors ages 70 and older: recipient and donor outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The profound organ shortage has resulted in longer waiting times and increased mortality for those awaiting kidney transplantation. Consequently, patients are turning to older living donors. It is unclear if an upper age limit for donation should exist, both in terms of recipient and donor outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

In the United States, 219 healthy adults aged ≥70 have donated kidneys at 80 of 279 transplant centers. Competing risks models with matched controls were used to study the independent association between older donor age and allograft survival, accounting for the competing risk of recipient mortality as well as other transplant factors.

RESULTS

Among recipients of older live donor allografts, graft loss was significantly higher than matched 50-to 59-year-old live donor allografts (subhazard ratio [SHR] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16 to 2.28, P = 0.005) but similar to matched nonextended criteria 50-to 59-year-old deceased donor allografts (SHR 1.19, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.63, P = 0.3). Mortality among living kidney donors aged ≥70 was no higher than healthy matched controls drawn from the NHANES-III cohort; in fact, mortality was lower, probably reflecting higher selectivity among older live donors than could be captured in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES-III; HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.65, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support living donation among older adults but highlight the advantages of finding a younger donor, particularly for younger recipients.

Renal transplantation is also an option for patients over 70

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is generally regarded as the best treatment option for patients with end-stage renal disease. Because of an increase in the elderly population, the number of elderly patients with end-stage renal disease is expected to increase. The scope of this paper is to present existing knowledge about the survival after kidney transplantation of patients over 70 years of age at the time of transplantation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The paper is based on existing literature retrieved through a systematic search in MEDLINE as well as on the authors' own experience and research.

RESULTS

Among patients who fulfill the established medical criteria, kidney transplantation results in better survival than lifelong dialysis treatment. The best prognosis is achieved if time on dialysis prior to transplantation is reduced and acute rejection episodes are avoided after transplantation.

INTERPRETATION

Kidney transplantation is a safe treatment for selected elderly patients with end-stage renal disease. Given a sufficient supply of organs, selected patients over 70 years of age with end-stage renal disease should be offered kidney transplantation following a standard medical assessment.

Opportunities and challenges of expanded criteria organs in liver and kidney transplantation as a response to organ shortage

In 1989, there were 19,000 patients on the UNOS (United Network of Organ Sharing) wait list for organs compared to 110,000 today. Without an equivalent increase in donors, the patients awaiting these organs for transplant face increasing severity of illness and risk of dying without receiving a transplant. This disparity in supply and demand has led to acceptance of organs with lower than expected success rates compared to previous standard donors variously defined as extended criteria donors in order to increase transplantation. The reluctance to wider use of these types of organs is based on the less than expected transplant center graft and patient survival results associated with their use, as well as the increased resources required to care for the patients who receive these organs. The benefits need to be compared to the survival of not receiving a transplant and remaining on the waiting list rather than on outcomes of receiving a standard donor. A lack of a systematic risk outcomes adjustment is one of the most important factors preventing more extensive utilization as transplant centers are held to patient and graft survival statistics as a performance measure by multiple regulatory organizations and insurers. Newer classification systems of such donors may allow a more systematic approach to analyzing the specific risks to individualized patients. Due to changes in donor policies across the country, there has been an increase in Extended Criteria Donors (ECD) organs procured by organ procurement organizations (OPO) but their uneven acceptance by the transplant centers has contributed to an increase in discards and organs not being used. This is one of the reasons that wider sharing of organs is currently receiving much attention. Transplanting ECD organs presents unique challenges and innovative approaches to achieve satisfactory results. Improved logistics and information technology combined strategies for improving donor quality with may prevent discards while insuring maximal benefit. Transplant centers, organ procurement organizations, third party payers and government agencies all must be involved in maximizing the potential for ECD organs.

Current trends and short-term outcomes of live donor nephrectomy: a population-based analysis of the nationwide inpatient sample

BACKGROUND

Recent United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data suggest that live kidney donation is stagnant. Current practices and trends in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) among the transplant community remain largely unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 1998 to 2006, patients undergoing LDN (n = 9,437) were identified.

RESULTS

Live kidney donation in the United States did not show an increase in the NIS. Of the live donor cases recorded, 58 (0.61%) were associated with a major short-term complication. The number of LDNs performed by transplant surgeons decreased over the study period from 76.5% in 1998 to 30.4% in 2006.

CONCLUSIONS

In the United Stares, LDNs are performed safely with a low short-term complication rate. Despite the use of laparoscopy and the increased need of donor organs, the rate of LDN in kidney transplantation has not increased proportionally.

Racial ethnic differences in rates and determinants of deceased donor kidney transplantation

Contemporary studies have not comprehensively compared waiting times and determinants of deceased donor kidney transplantation across all major racial ethnic groups in the Unites States. Here, we compared relative rates and determinants of waitlisting and deceased donor kidney transplantation among 503,090 nonelderly adults of different racial ethnic groups who initiated hemodialysis between1995 and 2006 with follow-up through 2008. Annual rates of deceased donor transplantation from the time of dialysis initiation were lowest in American Indians/Alaska Natives (2.4%) and blacks (2.8%), intermediate in Pacific Islanders (3.1%) and Hispanics (3.2%), and highest in whites (5.9%) and Asians (6.4%). Lower rates of deceased donor transplantation among most racial ethnic minority groups appeared primarily to reflect differences in time from waitlisting to transplantation, but this was not the result of higher rates of waitlist inactivity or removal from the waitlist. The fraction of the reduced transplant rates attributable to measured factors (e.g., demographic, clinical, socioeconomic, linguistic, and geographic factors) varied from 14% in blacks to 43% in American Indians/Alaska Natives compared with whites. In conclusion, adjusted rates of deceased donor kidney transplantation remain significantly lower among racial ethnic minorities compared with whites; generally, differences in time to waitlisting were not as pronounced as differences in time between waitlisting and transplantation. Determinants of delays in time to transplantation differed substantially by racial ethnic group. Area-based efforts targeted to address racial- and ethnic-specific delays in transplantation may help to reduce overall disparities in deceased donor kidney transplantation in the United States.

Enhancing the expanded criteria donor policy as an intervention to improve kidney allocation: is it actually a 'net-zero' model?

In the United States, relatively little progress has been made in recent years to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of deceased donor kidney allocation. Despite enactment of the Expanded Criteria Donor (ECD) Policy in 2002, known inequities and suboptimal utility of donated kidneys persist. In contrast with dialysis patients with shorter predicted life expectancies, those with longer predicted lifetimes can often improve their survival by waiting longer for a Standard Criteria Donor (SCD) kidney. Yet, a substantial fraction of these candidates accept ECD kidneys, often poorly HLA matched. Meanwhile, waitlist mortality continues to rise, particularly among older transplant candidates. Despite required consent processes for candidates to list for ECD kidneys, centers appear to interpret and implement ECD policy differently—some list candidates selectively while others list nearly their entire candidate pool. To ensure more efficient and effective implementation of ECD policy across centers, we advocate for (1) more oversight and guidance in directing patients to the ECD list who stand to benefit the most from receipt of an ECD kidney; and (2) enhanced transparency of center-level ECD consent and listing practices. More uniform implementation of ECD policy could improve efficiency and effectiveness of deceased donor kidney allocation without deleteriously impacting equity.

Access to kidney transplantation among the elderly in the United States: a glass half full, not half empty

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Few elderly ESRD patients are ever wait-listed for deceased-donor transplantation (DDTX), and waiting list outcomes may not reflect access to transplantation in this group. Our objective was to determine longitudinal changes in access to transplantation among all elderly patients with ESRD, not just those wait-listed for DDTX.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Using data from the US Renal Data System, we determined changes in the adjusted likelihood of transplantation from any donor source as an indicator of access to transplantation among all incident ESRD patients aged 60 to 75 years between 1995 and 2006.

RESULTS

Access to transplantation doubled between 1995 and 2006 despite an apparent decrease in the likelihood of DDTX after wait-listing. A threefold increase in the likelihood of living-donor transplantation, including a 1.5-fold increase in living-donor transplantation after wait-listing, was a key factor that led to increased access to transplantation. When a lead-time bias related to the increased practice of placing patients on the waiting list before dialysis initiation in more recent years was accounted for, there was no decrease in the likelihood of DDTX after wait-listing. The likelihood of receiving a DDTX after placement on the waiting list was maintained by a threefold increase in expanded-criteria-donor transplantation and a 26% reduction in the risk for death on the waiting list.

CONCLUSIONS

Although transplantation remains infrequent, elderly patients were twice as likely to undergo transplantation in 2006 versus 1995. Elderly patients with ESRD should not be dissuaded from pursuing transplantation.

Barriers to living donor kidney transplantation among black or older transplant candidates

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Lower rates of living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) among transplant candidates who are black or older may stem from lower likelihoods of (1) recruiting potential living donors or (2) potential donors actually donating (donor "conversion").

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

A single-center, retrospective cohort study was performed to determine race, age, and gender differences in LDKT, donor recruitment, and donor conversion.

RESULTS

Of 1617 kidney transplant candidates, 791 (48.9%) recruited at least one potential living donor, and 452 (28.0%) received LDKTs. Black transplant candidates, versus non-blacks, were less likely to receive LDKTs (20.5% versus 30.6%, relative risk [RR] = 0.67), recruit potential living donors (43.9% versus 50.7%, RR = 0.86), and receive LDKTs if they had potential donors (46.8% versus 60.3%, RR = 0.78). Transplant candidates ≥60 years, versus candidates 18 to <40 years old, were less likely to receive LDKTs (15.1% versus 43.2%, RR = 0.35), recruit potential living donors (34.0% versus 64.6%, RR = 0.53), and receive LDKTs if they had potential donors (44.5% versus 66.8%, RR = 0.67). LDKT and donor recruitment did not differ by gender. Race and age differences persisted in multivariable logistic regression models. Among 339 candidates who recruited potential donors but did not receive LDKTs, blacks (versus non-blacks) were more likely to have potential donors who failed to donate because of a donor-related reason (86.9% versus 72.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Black or older kidney transplant candidates were less likely to receive LDKTs because of lower likelihoods of donor recruitment and donor conversion.

An emerging population: kidney transplant candidates who are placed on the waiting list after liver, heart, and lung transplantation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

ESRD has an adverse impact on patients who have had previous nonrenal solid-organ transplants (NRTxs; liver, heart, lung) and may be referred for a kidney transplant (KTx).

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data for all KTx candidates who had NRTx and were listed between 1995 and 2008, incidence of NRTx listings were compared with trends in KTx without NRTX. The efficacy of kidney transplantation relative to dialysis was measured in time-dependent Cox models that incorporated candidates with the applicable previous organ transplant as a reference group.

RESULTS

Overall, 4904 NRTx candidates were listed during the study period, growing from <1% of candidates before 1995 to 3.3% in 2008. A total of 38% of NRTx candidates were listed preemptively versus 21% of other candidates. NRTx candidates had dramatically shorter half-lives (≤ 4 years) after listing compared with previous KTx recipients (9.2 years). KTx demonstrated a survival advantage for each type of NRTx candidate relative to maintenance dialysis. Listing for expanded-criteria donor kidneys averaged 47% and did not differ significantly by previous transplant category.

CONCLUSIONS

KTx candidates who are placed on the waiting list after NRTx constitute a significant and more rapidly growing cohort compared with the general KTx candidate population. NRTx candidates are frequently listed preemptively but have rapid decline once placed on the waiting list. Targeted use of expanded-criteria donor and living-donor transplants in the NRTx population may be particularly important given their high mortality on the waiting list.

Long-term management of bilateral, multifocal, recurrent renal carcinoma

Patients with bilateral multifocal renal cell carcinoma are at increased risk of developing locally recurrent or de novo tumors after nephron-sparing procedures. When dealing with recurrent renal masses the options are limited to observation, total nephrectomy, ablation, or repeat surgical intervention. The main reason for recurrence after nephron-sparing surgery is likely to be the presence of multifocal disease, which is identified in 4.3-25.0% of radical nephrectomy specimen. Bilateral renal involvement is seen in almost 90% of cases of multifocal renal carcinoma, and conversely the majority of patients with bilateral disease will have multifocal tumors. Many patients who are treated for multifocal disease, therefore, require subsequent surgical interventions. The outcome data for repeat renal interventions demonstrate reasonable functional and oncologic outcomes despite higher rates of perioperative complications. Our own results support the use of reoperative renal surgery rather than total nephrectomy and renal replacement therapy.

Patient willingness to pay for a kidney for transplantation

While kidney transplantation is the most cost-effective treatment available for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and affords patients with the best quality of life, the current supply of kidneys does not meet the demand. A potential solution to increasing the supply is to compensate living donors for a kidney. The purpose of this study was to describe ESRD patient willingness to pay for a kidney. Using a self-administered survey, 107 patients in 31 U.S. states completed the survey. The quantitative method and descriptive survey design employed descriptive, correlational, nonparametric and multivariate statistical tests to evaluate the data. Of participants, 78.5% were willing to pay for a kidney; there were significant correlations between gender, health status, household income, preferred source of a kidney and willingness to pay. Men, patients with poor and fair health status and those with household incomes > or =$50,000 were more willing to pay. Step-wise regression analysis found price and doctor's influence accounting for 52% of variance in willingness to pay. As price increased and doctor's opinion mattered, willingness to pay increased. This study supports development of additional studies with larger sample sizes and patients on kidney transplant waiting lists.