German recommendations for pretransplantation donor kidney biopsies

Performance of Scores Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Procurement Kidney Biopsies From Deceased Donors With Organs of Lower-Than-Average Quality

Several scores have been devised for providing a prognosis of outcomes after kidney transplantation. This study is a comprehensive test of these scores in a cohort of deceased donors with kidneys of lower-than-average quality and procurement biopsies. In total, 15 scores were tested on a retrospective cohort consisting of 221 donors, 223 procurement biopsies, and 223 recipient records for performance on delayed graft function, graft function, or death-censored graft loss. The best-performing score for DGF was the purely clinical Chapal score (AUC 0.709), followed by the Irish score (AUC 0.684); for graft function, the Nyberg score; and for transplant loss, the Snoeijs score (AUC 0.630) and the Leuven scores (AUCs 0.637 and 0.620). The only score with an acceptable performance was the Chapal score. Its disadvantage is that knowledge of the cold ischemia time is required, which is not known at allocation. None of the other scores performed acceptably. The scores fared better in discarded kidneys than in transplanted kidneys. Our study shows an unmet need for practical prognostic scores useful at the time of a decision about discarding or accepting deceased donor kidneys of lower-than-average quality in the Eurotransplant consortium.

Short-term outcomes after transplantation of deceased donor kidneys with acute kidney injury: a retrospective analysis of a multicenter cohort of marginal donor kidneys with post-explantation biopsies

BACKGROUND

Deceased donor kidneys with acute kidney injury (AKI) are often discarded because of concerns about inferior transplant outcomes. A means of grading the quality of such kidneys is the performance of procurement biopsies.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 221 brain death donors with marginal kidneys transplanted in 223 recipients in Germany. Marginal kidneys were defined as kidneys with procurement biopsies done exceptionally to assess suitability for transplantation in otherwise potentially discarded organs. The impact of deceased donor AKI on patient survival and death-censored graft survival at 1, 3 and 5 years and graft function at 1 and 3 years after transplantation was investigated.

RESULTS

Recipients of kidneys with stage 3 AKI had a greater incidence of delayed graft function [DGF; ORStage 1: 1.435 (95% CI 0.438-0.702), ORStage 2: 2.463 (95% CI 0.656-9.245), ORStage 3: 4.784 (95% CI 1.421-16.101)] but a similar graft and patient survival compared to recipients of donors without AKI and with AKI stage 1 and 2 as well. The coexistence of recipient DGF and donor AKI was associated with the lowest graft survival and function rates.

CONCLUSION

The transplantation of deceased donor marginal kidneys with AKI confers a higher risk for DGF but is associated with acceptable graft and patient outcomes, which do not differ in comparison with marginal donor kidneys without AKI. Graft prognosis is especially poor if donor AKI and recipient DGF concur. Donor AKI was a risk factor independent of the histological lesions of procurement biopsies.

Histological and clinical evaluation of marginal donor kidneys before transplantation: Which is best?

Organ shortage represents one of the major limitations to the development of kidney transplantation. To increase the donor pool and to answer the ever increasing kidney request, physicians are recurring to marginal kidneys as kidneys from older donors, from hypertensive or diabetic donors and from non-heart beating donors. These kidneys are known to have frequently a worse outcome in the recipients. To date major problem is to evaluate such kidneys in order to use or to discard them before transplantation. The use of such kidneys create other relevant question as whether to use them as single or dual transplant and to allocate them fairly according transplant programs. The pre-transplant histological evaluation, the clinical evaluation of the donor or both the criteria joined has been used and according the time each criterion prevailed over the others. Aim of this review has been to examine the advantages and the drawbacks of any criterion and how they have changed with time. To date any criterion has several limitations and several authors have argued for the development of new guidelines in the field of the kidney evaluation for transplantation. Several authors argue that the use of omic technologies should improve the organ evaluation and studies are ongoing to evaluate these technologies either in the donor urine or in the biopsies taken before transplantation.

Critical Appraisal of International Clinical Practice Guidelines in Kidney Transplantation Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Education II Tool: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Although clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are used for the development of local protocols in kidney transplantation (Ktx), the quality of their methodology is variable. This systematic review aimed to critically appraise international CPGs in all aspects of Ktx using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool.

METHODS

Clinical Practice Guidelines in Ktx and donation published between 2010 and 2017 were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, National Guideline Clearinghouse, National Health Service and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Evidence Searches, and the websites of transplant societies. Using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II, 3 appraisers assessed the quality of CPGs. Interrater reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

Searches identified 3168 records, and 115 CPGs were included. The highest scoring Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II domain was "scope and purpose" (80%; range, 30%-100%), followed by "clarity of presentation" (77%; range, 43%-98%), "editorial independence" (52%; range, 0%-94%), "rigor of development" (47%; range 6%-97%) and "stakeholder involvement" (41%; range, 11%-85%). The poorest scoring domain was "applicability" (31%; range, 3%-74%). Most CPGs were recommended for future use either with (63%) or without (18%) modifications. A small number (14%) were not recommended for future use or reviewers (5%) did not agree on recommending the CPG. The overall mean CPG quality score was 4 of 7 (range, 2-7). The mean ICC of 0.74 indicated substantial agreement between reviewers.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of international CPGs in Ktx was variable, and most CPGs lacked key aspects of methodological robustness and transparency. Improvements in methodology, patient involvement, and strategies for implementation are required.