Gravity perfusion versus high-pressure perfusion in kidney transplantation: results from a prospective randomized study

Normothermic and hypothermic machine perfusion preservation versus static cold storage for deceased donor kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for kidney failure. Donation, transport and transplant of kidney grafts leads to significant ischaemia reperfusion injury. Static cold storage (SCS), whereby the kidney is stored on ice after removal from the donor until the time of implantation, represents the simplest preservation method. However, technology is now available to perfuse or "pump" the kidney during the transport phase ("continuous") or at the recipient centre ("end-ischaemic"). This can be done at a variety of temperatures and using different perfusates. The effectiveness of these treatments manifests as improved kidney function post-transplant.

OBJECTIVES

To compare machine perfusion (MP) technologies (hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) and (sub) normothermic machine perfusion (NMP)) with each other and with standard SCS.

SEARCH METHODS

We contacted the information specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies until 15 June 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing machine perfusion techniques with each other or versus SCS for deceased donor kidney transplantation were eligible for inclusion. All donor types were included (donor after circulatory death (DCD) and brainstem death (DBD), standard and extended/expanded criteria donors). Both paired and unpaired studies were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The results of the literature search were screened, and a standard data extraction form was used to collect data. Both of these steps were performed by two independent authors. Dichotomous outcome results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Survival analyses (time-to-event) were performed with the generic inverse variance meta-analysis of hazard ratios (HR). Continuous scales of measurement were expressed as a mean difference (MD). Random effects models were used for data analysis. The primary outcome was the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF). Secondary outcomes included graft survival, incidence of primary non-function (PNF), DGF duration, economic implications, graft function, patient survival and incidence of acute rejection. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies (4007 participants) were included. The risk of bias was generally low across all studies and bias domains. The majority of the evidence compared non-oxygenated HMP with standard SCS (19 studies). The use of non-oxygenated HMP reduces the rate of DGF compared to SCS (16 studies, 3078 participants: RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.88; P < 0.0001; I2 = 31%; high certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis revealed that continuous (from donor hospital to implanting centre) HMP reduces DGF (high certainty evidence). In contrast, this benefit over SCS was not seen when non-oxygenated HMP was not performed continuously (low certainty evidence). Non-oxygenated HMP reduces DGF in both DCD and DBD settings in studies performed in the 'modern era' and when cold ischaemia times (CIT) were short. The number of perfusions required to prevent one episode of DGF was 7.69 and 12.5 in DCD and DBD grafts, respectively. Continuous non-oxygenated HMP versus SCS also improves one-year graft survival (3 studies, 1056 participants: HR 0.46, 0.29 to 0.75; P = 0.002; I2 = 0%; high certainty evidence). Assessing graft survival at maximal follow-up confirmed a benefit of continuous non-oxygenated HMP over SCS (4 studies, 1124 participants (follow-up 1 to 10 years): HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.77; P = 0.0005; I2 = 0%; high certainty evidence). This effect was not seen in studies where HMP was not continuous. The effect of non-oxygenated HMP on our other outcomes (PNF, incidence of acute rejection, patient survival, hospital stay, long-term graft function, duration of DGF) remains uncertain. Studies performing economic analyses suggest that HMP is either cost-saving (USA and European settings) or cost-effective (Brazil). One study investigated continuous oxygenated HMP versus non-oxygenated HMP (low risk of bias in all domains); the simple addition of oxygen during continuous HMP leads to additional benefits over non-oxygenated HMP in DCD donors (> 50 years), including further improvements in graft survival, improved one-year kidney function, and reduced acute rejection. One large, high-quality study investigated end-ischaemic oxygenated HMP versus SCS and found end-ischaemic oxygenated HMP (median machine perfusion time 4.6 hours) demonstrated no benefit compared to SCS. The impact of longer periods of end-ischaemic HMP is unknown. One study investigated NMP versus SCS (low risk of bias in all domains). One hour of end ischaemic NMP did not improve DGF compared with SCS alone. An indirect comparison revealed that continuous non-oxygenated HMP (the most studied intervention) was associated with improved graft survival compared with end-ischaemic NMP (indirect HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.92; P = 0.03). No studies investigated normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) or included any donors undergoing NRP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Continuous non-oxygenated HMP is superior to SCS in deceased donor kidney transplantation, reducing DGF, improving graft survival and proving cost-effective. This is true for both DBD and DCD kidneys, both short and long CITs, and remains true in the modern era (studies performed after 2008). In DCD donors (> 50 years), the simple addition of oxygen to continuous HMP further improves graft survival, kidney function and acute rejection rate compared to non-oxygenated HMP. Timing of HMP is important, and benefits have not been demonstrated with short periods (median 4.6 hours) of end-ischaemic HMP. End-ischaemic NMP (one hour) does not confer meaningful benefits over SCS alone and is inferior to continuous HMP in an indirect comparison of graft survival. Further studies assessing NMP for viability assessment and therapeutic delivery are warranted and in progress.

Comparison of Perfusion Pressure in Aorta Using High-Pressure Perfusion and Gravity Perfusion During the Kidney Transplant Procedure

Organ perfusion is an element of organ donation aimed at cooling the organ, washing out morphotic elements, and creating favorable conditions for the storage and transport of organs. Depending on the method used, perfusion is performed under gravity perfusion (GP) or perfusion under high pressure (HPP). This study aimed to measure the pressure of the perfusion fluid in the abdominal aorta during the use of GP and HPP. The study was performed during 35 organ procurements from deceased donors. The direct proportional increase of pressure in the aorta, depending on the applied perfusion method, was observed. GP was on average 37.8 mm Hg; using a pressure of 50 mm Hg in the HPP, an average of 57 mm Hg was obtained, and using a pressure of 200 mm Hg, 99.4 mm Hg was obtained. The study found that during the application of GP, the pressure generated in the abdominal aorta is low, which may lead to inadequate perfusion of organs. HPP is a faster method that leads to a proper perfusion of the procured organs and is also a safe method because, despite the use of high pressure, no damage to the transplanted kidneys was observed.

Machine perfusion preservation versus static cold storage for deceased donor kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease. Retrieval, transport and transplant of kidney grafts causes ischaemia reperfusion injury. The current accepted standard is static cold storage (SCS) whereby the kidney is stored on ice after removal from the donor and then removed from the ice box at the time of implantation. However, technology is now available to perfuse or "pump" the kidney during the transport phase or at the recipient centre. This can be done at a variety of temperatures and using different perfusates. The effectiveness of treatment is manifest clinically as delayed graft function (DGF), whereby the kidney fails to produce urine immediately after transplant.

OBJECTIVES

To compare hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) and (sub)normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) with standard SCS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies to 18 October 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing HMP/NMP versus SCS for deceased donor kidney transplantation were eligible for inclusion. All donor types were included (donor after circulatory (DCD) and brainstem death (DBD), standard and extended/expanded criteria donors). Both paired and unpaired studies were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The results of the literature search were screened and a standard data extraction form was used to collect data. Both of these steps were performed by two independent authors. Dichotomous outcome results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous scales of measurement were expressed as a mean difference (MD). Random effects models were used for data analysis. The primary outcome was incidence of DGF. Secondary outcomes included: one-year graft survival, incidence of primary non-function (PNF), DGF duration, long term graft survival, economic implications, graft function, patient survival and incidence of acute rejection.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies reported on NMP, however one ongoing study was identified.Sixteen studies (2266 participants) comparing HMP with SCS were included; 15 studies could be meta-analysed. Fourteen studies reported on requirement for dialysis in the first week post-transplant (DGF incidence); there is high-certainty evidence that HMP reduces the risk of DGF when compared to SCS (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.90; P = 0.0006). HMP reduces the risk of DGF in kidneys from DCD donors (7 studies, 772 participants: RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.87; P = 0.0002; high certainty evidence), as well as kidneys from DBD donors (4 studies, 971 participants: RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.93; P = 0.006; high certainty evidence). The number of perfusions required to prevent one episode of DGF (number needed to treat, NNT) was 7.26 and 13.60 in DCD and DBD kidneys respectively. Studies performed in the last decade all used the LifePort machine and confirmed that HMP reduces the incidence of DGF in the modern era (5 studies, 1355 participants: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.91; P = 0.002; high certainty evidence). Reports of economic analysis suggest that HMP can lead to cost savings in both the North American and European settings.Two studies reported HMP also improves graft survival however we were not able to meta-analyse these results. A reduction in incidence of PNF could not be demonstrated. The effect of HMP on our other outcomes (incidence of acute rejection, patient survival, hospital stay, long-term graft function, duration of DGF) remains uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

HMP is superior to SCS in deceased donor kidney transplantation. This is true for both DBD and DCD kidneys, and remains true in the modern era (studies performed in the last decade). As kidneys from DCD donors have a higher overall DGF rate, fewer perfusions are needed to prevent one episode of DGF (7.26 versus 13.60 in DBD kidneys).Further studies looking solely at the impact of HMP on DGF incidence are not required. Follow-up reports detailing long-term graft survival from participants of the studies already included in this review would be an efficient way to generate further long-term graft survival data.Economic analysis, based on the results of this review, would help cement HMP as the standard preservation method in deceased donor kidney transplantation.RCTs investigating (sub)NMP are required.

Beyond poiseuille: preservation fluid flow in an experimental model

Poiseuille's equation describes the relationship between fluid viscosity, pressure, tubing diameter, and flow, yet it is not known if cold organ perfusion systems follow this equation. We investigated these relationships in an ex vivo model and aimed to offer some rationale for equipment selection. Increasing the cannula size from 14 to 20 Fr increased flow rate by a mean (SD) of 13 (12)%. Marshall's hyperosmolar citrate was three times less viscous than UW solution, but flows were only 45% faster. Doubling the bag pressure led to a mean (SD) flow rate increase of only 19 (13)%, not twice the rate. When external pressure devices were used, 100 mmHg of continuous pressure increased flow by a mean (SD) of 43 (17)% when compared to the same pressure applied initially only. Poiseuille's equation was not followed; this is most likely due to “slipping” of preservation fluid within the plastic tubing. Cannula size made little difference over the ranges examined; flows are primarily determined by bag pressure and fluid viscosity. External infusor devices require continuous pressurisation to deliver high flow. Future studies examining the impact of perfusion variables on graft outcomes should include detailed equipment descriptions.

Comparative analysis of in situ versus ex situ perfusion on flow and microcirculation in kidney procurement: research on a porcine model

Background

The first crucial step in transplantation appears to be the effective rinsing of the graft during organ procurement. Even though there is strong suspicion that ex situ perfusion results in better rinsing of the graft, there is no proof for this hypothesis. The aim of this study was to analyse the differences of in situ and ex situ kidney perfusion in a porcine model.

Methods

Standardised multiorgan procurement was performed in 15 German landrace pigs. Perfusion was carried out using histidine–tryptophan–ketoglutarate solution (HTK) under the application of pressure. In one kidney, in situ perfusion via the aorta was carried out while the second kidney received ex situ perfusion via the renal artery (RA). Perfusate flow inside the aorta and the RA was recorded at different pressure steps. In order to visualise the effect on the microcirculation, different coloured microparticles (MPs; 10 μm) were administered via the aorta or RA. Subsequently, frozen sections of the explanted kidneys were analysed histologically and MPs were evaluated quantitatively.

Results

Ex situ kidney perfusion resulted in significantly improved flow rates (P<0.0001) compared with in situ perfusion. By applying ex situ perfusion it was even possible to attain physiological flow levels on the RA under the application of external pressure of 150 to 200 mmHg. The amount of MPs was able to highlight the positive impact of ex situ perfusion on microcirculation of the kidney graft (P<0.0001).

Conclusions

The use of MPs represents a valuable tool for quantitative investigation and illustration of kidney perfusion in experimental setups. Additional ex situ perfusion is able to improve the quality of kidney perfusion.

Retrieval of abdominal organs for transplantation

BACKGROUND

Organ retrieval and donor management are not yet standardized. Different transplant centres apply various techniques, such as single or dual organ perfusion, dissection in the cold or warm, and single or en bloc organ removal. These different approaches may cause inconvenience, especially when more than one organ retrieval team is involved.

METHODS

Cochrane Library, Medline and PubMed were searched for publications on multiorgan donor/donation, retrieval technique and procurement. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendation were evaluated based on current advice from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

RESULTS

Multiorgan donation itself does not compromise the outcome of individual organ transplants. Dissection of abdominal organs for transplantation is best performed after cold perfusion. Abdominal organs should be removed rapidly, en bloc, and separated during back-table dissection in the cold, particularly if pancreas or intestine is included. Perfusion itself should be carried out after single cannulation of the aorta with an increased pressure.

CONCLUSION

Although the literature on organ retrieval is extensive, the level of evidence provided is mainly low. Nevertheless, optimized donor treatment and organ retrieval should increase the number and quality of cadaveric donor organs and improve graft function and survival.