Living Donor Renal Transplantation: Prognostic Factors on Graft Survival

Use of Intraoperative Duplex Ultrasound and Resistance Index Reduces Complications in Living Renal Donor Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The treatment of choice in end-stage renal disease is transplantation. Hemodynamic disturbances can evoke graft loss, while early ultrasound identification of vascular problems improves outcome. The aim of this study was to identify differences in postoperative complications with and without systematic intraoperative Doppler ultrasound use.

METHODS

The primary outcome was the postoperative rate of complications and the secondary aim was to find a predictive resistance index cut-off value, which would show where surgical reintervention was necessary. Over a 10-year period, 108 renal transplants were performed from living donors at our institution. In group 1 (n = 67), intraoperative duplex ultrasound and intraparenchymatous resistance index measurements assessed patients, while in group 2 (n = 41), no ultrasound was performed.

RESULTS

There were no intergroup differences in the overall postoperative complication rate or in benefit to graft or patient survival with Doppler use. However, significantly more vascular complications (10% vs 0%, P = .02) and more acute rejections (37% vs 10%) occurred in group 2 than in group 1. Therefore, an intraoperative cut-off value of the resistance index 0.5 was proposed to justify immediate surgical revision.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first report demonstrating benefits of systematic intraoperative Doppler ultrasound on postoperative complications in renal transplantation from living donors. Our results support surgical revision with a resistance index <0.5.

Identification of patients at risk for renal impairment after living donor kidney transplantation

PURPOSE

Outcome after living donor kidney transplantation is highly relevant, since recipient and donor were exposed to notable harm. Reliable identification of risk factors is necessary.

METHODS

Three hundred sixty-six living donor kidney transplants were included in this observational retrospective study. Relevant risk factors for renal impairment 1 year after transplantation and delayed graft function were identified with univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression and ordinal regression analysis.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients (26.6 %) suffered from renal impairment KDIGO stage ≥4 1 year post-transplant; median estimated glomerular filtration rate was 35.3 ml/min. In multivariable ordinal regression, male recipient sex (p < 0.001), recipient body mass index (p = 0.006), donor age (p = 0.002) and high percentages of panel reactive antibodies (p = 0.021) were revealed as independent risk factors for higher KDIGO stages. After adjustment for post-transplant data, recipient male sex (p < 0.001), donor age (p = 0.026) and decreased early renal function at the first post-transplant outpatient visit (p < 0.001) were identified as independent risk factors. Delayed graft function was independently associated with long stay on the waiting list (p = 0.011), high donor body mass index (p = 0.043), prolonged warm ischemic time (p = 0.016) and the presence of preformed donor-specific antibodies (p = 0.043).

CONCLUSIONS

Broadening the donor pool with non-blood related donors seems to be legitimate, although with respect to careful medical selection, since donor age in combination with male recipient sex were shown to be risk factors for decreased graft function. Warm ischemic time and waiting time need to be kept as short as possible to avoid delayed graft function. Transplantation across HLA and ABO borders did not affect outcome significantly.

Impact of donor kidney function and donor age on poor outcome of living-unrelated kidney transplantation (KT) in comparison with living-related KT

Living-unrelated donors (LURD) have been widely used for kidney transplantation (KT). We retrospectively reviewed 779 patients who underwent living-donor KT from 2000 to 2012, to compare outcomes of 264 KT from LURD and 515 from living-related donors (LRD), and to identify risk factors for living KT. Median follow-up was 67 months. Mean donor age, total human leukocyte antigen (HLA) mismatches, and HLA-DR mismatches were higher, and mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower in LURD. Acute rejection (AR)-free survival (p = 0.018) and graft survival (p = 0.025) were lower for LURD than LRD, whereas patient survival rate was comparable. Cox regression analysis showed HLA-DR mismatches (OR 1.75 for one mismatch; OR 2.19 for two mismatches), recipient age ≤ 42 yr, and donor age > 50 yr were significant risk factors for acute rejection. For graft survival, AR and donor eGFR (OR 1.90, p = 0.035) were significant. We also identified significant impact of recipient age > 50 yr and diabetes for patient survival. However, KT from LURD was not a significant risk factor for AR (p = 0.368), graft survival (p = 0.205), and patient survival (p = 0.836). Our data suggest that donor eGFR and donor age are independent risk factors for clinical outcomes of living KT, which can be related with poor outcome of KT from LURD.

Consideration of donor age and human leukocyte antigen matching in the setting of multiple potential living kidney donors

BACKGROUND

Defining living donor (LD)-related risk factors affecting kidney transplant outcome will allow better donor selection and more educated informed consent when there is more than one potential donor. We studied risk factors in a large cohort at a single institution.

METHODS

We reviewed 1632 recipients who underwent LD kidney transplantation at the University of Minnesota between January 1, 1990, and October 1, 2009. Using Cox regression, we studied the effect of donor and recipient risk factors on patient and graft survival. We specifically examined the effect of donor age and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matching because these are variables that may help clinical decision making when multiple potential donors exist.

RESULTS

Mean donor age was 40.6 years for all transplants; 180 (11%) donors were 55 years or older, and 24 (1.5%) donors were older than 65 years. Mean number of HLA mismatches (per transplant) was 2.9 (29.2% of recipients had one to two HLA mismatches, 39.8% had three to four HLA mismatches, and 25% had five to six HLA mismatches). Donor age more than 65 years, five to six HLA mismatches, delayed graft function, and acute rejection were independent predictors of decreased patient and graft survival. When controlling for recipient age, donor age more than 65 years remained a risk factor for worse outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that advanced donor age (>65 years) and degree of HLA mismatch (≥5) are independent donor-related risk factors associated with worse outcome. When multiple potential LDs exist, it may be ideal to attempt to use a donor younger than 65 years and with less than five HLA mismatches.

Graft survival rate of renal transplantation: a single center experience, (1999-2009)

BACKGROUND

Renal transplantation is the best option for treatment of the end-stage renal diseases and has more advantages than dialysis. The objective of this study is to determine the ten-year graft survival rate of renal transplantation and its associated factors in patients who have been transplanted from March 1999 to March 2009 in Nemazee Hospital Transplantation Center.

METHODS

This is a historical cohort study of 1356 renal transplantation carried out during 1999 to 2009. Kaplan-Meier method was used to determine the survival rate, log rank test to compare survival curves, and Cox regression model to determine hazard ratios and for modeling of variables affecting survival.

RESULTS

The 1, 3, 5, 7 and 10 years graft survival rates were 96.6, 93.7, 88.9, 87.1 and 85.5 percent, respectively.Cox regression model revealed that the donor source and creatinine level at discharge were effective factors in graft survival rate in renal transplantation.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that 10 year graft survival rate for renal transplantation in Nemazee Hospital Transplantation Center was 85.5% and graft survival rate was significantly related to recipients and donor's age,donor source and creatinine level at discharge. Our experience in renal transplantation survival rate indicates asuccess rate comparable to those noted in other reports.

A systematic review of kidney transplantation from expanded criteria donors

BACKGROUND

During the past few years, there has been renewed interest in the use of expanded criteria donors (ECD) for kidney transplantation to increase the numbers of deceased donor kidneys available. More kidney transplants would result in shorter waiting times and limit the morbidity and mortality associated with long-term dialysis therapy.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review of the literature.

SETTING & POPULATION

Kidney transplantation population.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

Studies were identified by using a comprehensive search through MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Inclusion criteria were case series, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials assessing kidney transplantation in adult recipients using ECDs.

PREDICTOR

A special focus was given to studies comparing the evolution of kidney transplantation between standard criteria donors (defined as a donor who does not meet criteria for donation after cardiac death or ECD) and ECDs (defined as any brain-dead donor aged > 60 years or a donor aged > 50 years with 2 of the following conditions: history of hypertension, terminal serum creatinine level >or= 1.5 mg/dL, or death resulting from a cerebrovascular accident).

OUTCOMES

Criteria used to define and select ECDs, practice patterns, long-term outcomes, early complications, and some patient issues, such as selection criteria and immunosuppressive management.

RESULTS

ECD kidneys have worse long-term survival than standard criteria donor kidneys. The optimal ECD kidney for donation depends on adequate glomerular filtration rate and acceptable donor kidney histological characteristics, albeit the usefulness of biopsy is debated.

LIMITATIONS

This review is based mainly on data from observational studies, and varying amounts of bias could be present. We did not attempt to quantitatively analyze the effect of ECD kidneys on kidney transplantation because of the huge heterogeneity found in study designs and definitions of ECD.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, we conclude that patients younger than 40 years or scheduled for kidney retransplantation should not receive an ECD kidney. Patients 40 years or older, especially with diabetic nephropathy or nondiabetic disease, but a long expected waiting time for kidney transplantation, show better survival receiving an ECD kidney than remaining on dialysis therapy.