Kidney Transplantation With Organs From Donors After Circulatory Death Type 3: A Prospective Multicentric Spanish Study (GEODAS 3)

Early outcomes of kidney transplantation from elderly donors after circulatory death (GEODAS study)

Background

Spain has dramatically increased the number of controlled circulatory death donors (cDCD). The initial selection criteria for considering cDCD for kidney transplantation (KT) have been expanded progressively, with practically no limits in donor age during the last years. We aimed to analyze the early clinical outcomes using expanded (> 65 years) cDCD in comparison with standard ones.

Methods

Observational multicenter study including 19 transplant centers in Spain. We performed a systematic inclusion in a central database of every KT from expanded cDCD at each participant unit from January-2012 to January-2017. Surgical procedures and immunosuppressive protocols were based on local practices. Data was analyzed in the central office using logistic and Cox regression or competitive-risk models for multivariate analysis. Median time of follow-up was 18.1 months.

Results

561 KT were performed with kidneys from cDCD, 135 from donors older than 65 years. As expected, recipients from older cDCD were also older (65.8 (SD 8.8) vs 53.7 (SD 11.4) years; p < 0.001) and with higher comorbidity. At 1 year, no differences were found amongst older and younger cDCD KT recipients in terms of serum creatinine (1.6 (SD 0.7) vs 1.5 (SD 0.8) mg/dl; p = 0.29). Non-death censored graft survival was inferior, but death-censored graft survival was not different (95.5 vs 98.2% respectively; p = 0.481). They also presented a trend towards higher delayed graft function (55.4 vs 46.7%; p = 0.09) but a similar rate of primary non-function (3.7 vs 3.1%; p = 0.71), and acute rejection (3.0 vs 6.3%; p = 0.135). In the multivariate analysis, in short follow-up, donor age was not related with worse survival or poor kidney function (eGFR < 30 ml/min).

Conclusions

The use of kidneys from expanded cDCD is increasing for older and comorbid patients. Short-term graft outcomes are similar for expanded and standard cDCD, so they constitute a good-enough source of kidneys to improve the options of KT wait-listed patients.

Kidney transplant from controlled donors following circulatory death: Results from the GEODAS-3 multicentre study

INTRODUCTION

Many European countries have transplant programmes with controlled donors after cardiac death (cDCD). Twenty-two centres are part of GEODAS group. We analysed clinical results from a nephrological perspective.

METHODS

Observational, retrospective and multicentre study with systematic inclusion of all kidney transplant recipients from cDCD, following local protocols regarding extraction and immunosuppression.

RESULTS

A total of 335 cDCD donors (mean age 57.2 years) whose deaths were mainly due to cardiovascular events were included. Finally, 566 recipients (mean age 56.5 years; 91.9% first kidney transplant) were analysed with a median of follow-up of 1.9 years. Induction therapy was almost universal (thymoglobulin 67.4%; simulect 32.8%) with maintenance with prednisone-MMF-tacrolimus (91.3%) or combinations with mTOR (6.5%). Mean cold ischaemia time (CIT) was 12.3h. Approximately 3.4% (n=19) of recipients experienced primary non-function, essentially associated with CIT (only CIT ≥ 14 h was associated with primary non-function). Delayed graft function (DGF) was 48.8%. DGF risk factors were CIT ≥ 14 h OR 1.6, previous haemodialysis (vs. peritoneal dialysis) OR 2.1 and donor age OR 1.01 (per year). Twenty-one patients (3.7%) died with a functioning graft, with a recipient and death-censored graft survival at 2-years of 95% and 95.1%, respectively. The estimated glomerular filtration rate at one year of follow-up was 60.9 ml/min.

CONCLUSIONS

CIT is a modifiable factor for improving the incidence of primary non-function in kidney transplant arising from cDCD. cDCD kidney transplant recipients have higher delayed graft function rate, but the same patient and graft survival compared to brain-dead donation in historical references. These results are convincing enough to continue fostering this type of donation.