When should expanded criteria donor kidneys be used for single versus dual kidney transplants?

The use of marginal kidneys in dual kidney transplantation to expand kidney graft utilization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to chronicle the history of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) and identify opportunities to improve utilization of marginal deceased donor (MDD) kidneys through DKT.

RECENT FINDINGS

The practice of DKT from adult MDDs dates back to the mid-1990s, at which time the primary indication was projected insufficient nephron mass from older donors. Multiple subsequent studies of short- and long-term success have been reported focusing on three major aspects: Identifying appropriate selection criteria/scoring systems based on pre- and postdonation factors; refining technical aspects; and analyzing longer-term outcomes. The number of adult DKTs performed in the United States has declined in the past decade and only about 60 are performed annually. For adult deceased donor kidneys meeting double allocation criteria, >60% are ultimately not transplanted. MDDs with limited renal functional capacity represent a large proportion of potential kidneys doomed to either discard or nonrecovery.

SUMMARY

DKT may reduce organ discard and optimize the use of kidneys from MDDs. New and innovative technologies targeting ex vivo organ assessment, repair, and regeneration may have a major impact on the decision whether or not to use recovered kidneys for single or DKT.

Dual kidney transplants from adult marginal donors: Review and perspective

The practice of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) from adult marginal deceased donors (MDDs) dates back to the mid-1990s with initial pioneering experiences reported by the Stanford and Maryland groups, at which time the primary indication was estimated insufficient nephron mass from older donors. Multiple subsequent studies of short and long-term success have been reported focusing on three major aspects of DKT: Identifying appropriate selection criteria and developing scoring systems based on pre- and post-donation factors; refining technical aspects; and analyzing mid-term outcomes. The number of adult DKTs performed in the United States has declined in the past decade and only about 60 are performed annually. For adult deceased donor kidneys meeting double allocation criteria, >60% are ultimately not transplanted. Deceased donors with limited renal functional capacity represent a large proportion of potential kidneys doomed to either discard or non-recovery. However, DKT may reduce organ discard and optimize the use of kidneys from MDDs. In an attempt to promote utilization of MDD kidneys, the United Network for Organ Sharing introduced new allocation guidelines pursuant to DKT in 2019. The purpose of this review is to chronicle the history of DKT and identify opportunities to improve utilization of MDD kidneys through DKT. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Utilization and Outcomes of Single and Dual Kidney Transplants from Older Deceased Donors in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Kidneys from elderly deceased donors are often discarded after procurement if the expected outcomes from single kidney transplantation are considered unacceptable. An alternative is to consider them for dual kidney transplantation. We aimed to examine the utilization of kidneys from donors aged ≥60 years in the United Kingdom and compare clinical outcomes of dual versus single kidney transplant recipients.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Data from the United Kingdom Transplant Registry from 2005 to 2017 were analyzed. We examined utilization rates of kidneys retrieved from deceased donors aged ≥60 years, and 5-year patient and death-censored graft survival of recipients of dual and single kidney transplants. Secondary outcomes included eGFR. Multivariable analyses and propensity score analysis were used to correct for differences between the groups.

RESULTS

During the study period, 7841 kidneys were procured from deceased donors aged ≥60 years, of which 1338 (17%) were discarded; 356 dual and 5032 single kidneys were transplanted. Donors of dual transplants were older (median, 73 versus 66 years; P<0.001) and had higher United States Kidney Donor Risk Indices (2.48 versus 1.98; P<0.001). Recipients of dual transplants were also older (64 versus 61 years; P<0.001) and had less favorable human leukocyte antigen matching (P<0.001). After adjusting for confounders, dual and single transplants had similar 5-year graft survival (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12). No difference in patient survival was demonstrated. Similar findings were observed in a matched cohort with a propensity score analysis method. Median 12-month eGFR was significantly higher in the dual kidney transplant group (40 versus 36 ml/min per 1.73 m²; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Recipients of kidneys from donors aged ≥60 years have similar 5-year graft survival and better graft function at 12 months with dual compared with single deceased donor kidney transplants.

[Evaluation of single kidney graft outcome in patients initially programmed for a dual kidney graft transplantation]

INTRODUCTION

Kidney transplantation is championed as the gold standard treatment for patients with end-stage kidney disease. According to the biomedical agency, there is an increasing number of patients waiting for kidney transplantation. Faced with organ shortage, the use of marginal grafts may well increase the number of available kidney grafts. Occasionally, during dual kidney graft transplantation, the poor quality of one of the two grafts, or other specific circumstances, may lead to transplantation of only one of the two grafts. We have compared patient outcome concerning single kidney transplantation from an initial dual kidney graft with respect to dual kidney graft transplantation.

MATERIAL

Among 67 patients enrolled for a dual kidney graft, 39 dual kidney grafts (group 1) were compared with 12 grafts performed with only one of the two kidneys of a dual kidney graft (group 2) as well as 15 grafts performed following a classic kidney graft protocol (group 3).

RESULTS

The survival of grafts was respectively for groups 1, 2 and 3 of 100%, 72,5% and 75,4% (P=0.17). The survival of patients was respectively for groups 1, 2 and 3 of 78.3%, 89.9% and 87.8% (P=0.47).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that transplantation of a single kidney, initially proposed as dual kidney graft candidate, has satisfying results in terms of graft survival and patient mortality at the expense of poorer renal function in comparison to dual kidney graft. Indeed, there was no significant difference in the survival of patients and grafts. This seems promising taking into consideration that the aim of transplantation in elderly recipients is primarily to avoid dialysis, rather than having optimal post-transplantation kidney function.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Dual Kidney Transplantation from Donors at the Extremes of Age

BACKGROUND

The study purpose was to analyze outcomes in recipients of pediatric dual en bloc (PEB) kidneys from small pediatric donors (SPDs, age ≤ 3 years) and dual kidney transplants (KTs) from adult marginal deceased donors (DDs) in the context of the Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI).

STUDY DESIGN

This was a single center retrospective review. Recipient selection included primary transplant, low BMI, low immunologic risk, and informed consent. All patients received antibody induction with FK/MPA/± prednisone.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2015, we performed 34 PEB and 73 adult dual KTs. Mean donor ages were 17 months for the PEB and 59 years for the dual KTs; mean KDPIs were 73% for PEB and 83% for dual KT, and mean cold ischemia times were 21.0 hours for PEB and 26.5 hours for dual KT. Adult dual KT recipients were older (mean age 38 years for PEB and 60 years for dual KT) and had shorter waiting times (mean 25 months for PEB and 12 months for dual KT). With a mean follow-up of 7.6 years, actual patient survival (88% for PEB and 62% for dual KT) and graft survival (71% for PEB and 44% for dual KT) rates were higher in PEB compared with dual KT. Death-censored kidney graft survival rates were 77% for PEB and 58% for dual KT. Delayed graft function (DGF) rates were 15% for PEB and 23% for dual KT; incidences of DGF in single kidney transplantations from SPDs and adult nonmarginal DDs were 20% and 32%, respectively. Based on actual 5-year graft survival rates, the adjusted KDPIs for dual PEB and dual KTs were 3% and 60%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptable mid-term outcomes are associated with PEB and adult dual KTs, which may expand the donor pool and prevent kidney discard. The KDPI is inaccurate for predicting outcomes from either PEB from SPDs or dual KT from adult marginal DDs, which may prevent acceptance of these organs.

Dual Kidney Transplantation: A Review of Past and Prospect for Future

Kidney transplantation (KT) is one of the treatment options for patients with chronic kidney disease. The number of patients waiting for kidney transplantation is growing day by day. Various strategies have been put in place to expand the donor pool. Extended criteria donors are now accepted more frequently. Increasing number of elderly donors with age > 60 years, history of diabetes or hypertension, and clinical proteinuria are accepted as donor. Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) is also more frequently done and experience with this technique is slowly building up. DKT not only helps to reduce the number of patients on waiting list but also limits unnecessary discard of viable organs. Surgical complications of DKT are comparable to single kidney transplantation (SKT). Patient and graft survivals are also promising. This review article provides a summary of evidence available in the literature.

Dual kidney transplants from adult marginal donors successfully expand the limited deceased donor organ pool

BACKGROUND

The need to expand the organ donor pool remains a formidable challenge in kidney transplantation (KT). The use of expanded criteria donors (ECDs) represents one approach, but kidney discard rates are high because of concerns regarding overall quality. Dual KT (DKT) may reduce organ discard and optimize the use of kidneys from marginal donors.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a single-center retrospective review of outcomes in adult recipients of DKTs from adult marginal deceased donors (DD) defined by limited renal functional capacity. If the calculated creatinine clearance in an adult DD was <65 mL/min, then the kidneys were transplanted as a DKT.

RESULTS

Over 11.5 yr, 72 DKTS were performed including 45 from ECDs, 17 from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors, and 10 from standard criteria donors (SCD). Mean adult DD and recipient ages were both 60 yr, including 29 DDs and 26 recipients ≥65 yr of age. Mean pre-DKT waiting and dialysis vintage times were 12 months and 25 months, respectively. Actual patient and graft survival rates were 84.7% and 70.8%, respectively, with a mean follow-up of 58 months. One yr and death-censored graft survival rates were 90% and 80%, respectively. Outcomes did not differ by DD category, recipient age, or presence of delayed graft function (DGF). Eleven patients died at a mean of 32 months post-DKT (eight with functioning grafts) and 13 other patients experienced graft losses at a mean of 33 months. The incidence of DGF was 25%; there were two cases (2.8%) of primary non-function. Mean length of initial hospital stay was 7.2 d. Mean serum creatinine and glomerular filtration rate levels at 12 and 24 months were 1.5 and 53 and 1.5 mg/dL and 51 mL/min/1.73 m(2) , respectively. DKT graft survival and function were superior to concurrent single ECD and similar to concurrent SCD KTs. Two patients underwent successful kidney retransplantation, so the dialysis-free rate in surviving patients was 87%. The proportion of total renal function transplanted from adult DD to DKT recipients was 77% compared to 56% for patients receiving single KTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual kidney transplantation using kidneys from adult marginal DDs that otherwise might be discarded offer a viable option to counteract the growing shortage of acceptable single kidneys. Excellent medium-term outcomes can be achieved and waiting times can be reduced in a predominantly older recipient population.

Dual kidney transplantation involving organs from expanded criteria donors: a review of our series and an update on current indications

BACKGROUND

Our purpose was to review our kidney transplantation program based on the use of expanded criteria donors, and to determine current indications for dual kidney transplantation (DKT). In 1996, a program was initiated to transplant kidneys from donors of over 60 years performing single or dual transplantation.

METHODS

In 1996, a program was initiated to transplant kidneys from donors of over 60 years performing single or dual transplantation. DKT were performed with donors >75 and donors between 60 and 74 years of age and glomerulosclerosis of >15%. The kidneys of donors between 60 and 74 years of age and with glomerulosclerosis of <15% were used for single kidney transplantation (SKT). In 2005, we started to perform SKT despite glomerulosclerosis being >15%, taking into account donor and recipient characteristics.

RESULTS

From 1996 to 2004, 222 SKTs and 88 DKTs were performed. Graft survival after 1 and 4 years was, respectively, 91% and 78% for SKT and 95% and 79% for DKT. In 2005, we started to perform SKT despite glomerulosclerosis being >15%, taking into account donor and recipient characteristics. From 2005 to 2011, 328 SKT and 32 DKT were performed. During this period most kidneys used for DKT were from female donors >75 years old, weighing <65 kg, with a creatinine of >1 mg/dL and glomerulosclerosis of >15%. The recipients for DKT were mostly male, <70 years old and whose weight was >75 kg.

CONCLUSION

DKT from expanded criteria donors shows good outcomes. However, in many cases SKT may fulfill the need of the recipient. The archetype for DKT is an older female weighing <65 kg and the most common recipient is an overweight male who is <70 years old.

Can only histological evaluation determine the allocation of ECD kidneys?

INTRODUCTION

There is a recent debate on the "transplantability" of ECD (Expanded Criteria Donors) kidneys and the selection criteria used to allocate them to single or double transplantation. Remuzzi et al. have defined a protocol incorporating pre-transplant donor biopsy to guide the use of older donor organs. They allocated organs as single or double transplants on the basis of histological findings. We aim to show the pros and cons of the only histological evaluation in the allocation of ECD kidneys, to compare the different experiences in United States and Europe and thus to discuss whether this tool should be used alone or included in a comprehensive clinical and histopathological evaluation.

DISCUSSION

In the United States many Authors stated that the biopsy actually increases the percentage of kidney discarded and they raised questions about the importance of the biopsy in evaluating ECD kidneys for transplantation. On the other hand, the experiences of the majority of european transplant centers showed that allocating kidneys as single or dual transplant based on biopsy findings may achieve good graft and patient outcomes. Moreover, the experience of some centers as ours showed that kidneys allocated as DKT (Dual Kidney Transplant) on the basis of Remuzzi's score could have been suitable for single transplantation suggesting the need of an adjustment of the Remuzzi Score System. Many Authors, who are in favor of histological evaluation, actually believe that a comprehensive clinical and histopathological assessment before transplantation remains necessary. We lack precise national- or international-based selection criteria to guide clinicians. An adjustment of the Remuzzi Score System could be taken into consideration such as narrowing the indication for DKT from those ECD kidneys with higher scores and including the histological evaluation in a multifactor score.

The marginal kidney donor

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current era of organ shortage has necessitated a widening of criteria for donation, considering donors who would have been considered unsuitable before. This review summarizes the recent advances in strategies to maximize the use of marginal kidneys without compromising the outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Various strategies have been studied and implemented to optimize procurement and allocation of marginal kidneys, and to preserve their function. In particular, a growing number of transplant centers are using donors after circulatory death. Whereas normothermic ex-vivo and postmortem perfusion are promising procedures to improve the outcomes of marginal grafts in the future, dual-kidney transplantation is a viable approach which is at present potentially underutilized. Despite active research on new strategies to evaluate organ quality, pretransplant biopsy assessment currently remains the most reliable method. The practice of using living donors with advanced age is supported by available evidence, whereas the use of young living donors with minor medical abnormalities needs further investigation.

SUMMARY

Progress has been made in the recent years, clarifying the best criteria for evaluating, recovering, and allocating marginal kidney donors. However, further research is needed, with special regards to the criteria for using marginal living-kidney donors.

Use of two expanded-criteria-donor renal allografts in a single patient

The disparity between the number of available renal donors and the number of patients on the transplant waiting list has prompted the use of expanded-criteria-donor (ECD) renal allografts to expand the donor pool. ECD allografts have shown good results in appropriately selected recipients, yet a number of renal allografts are still discarded. The use of dual renal transplantation may lower the discard rate. Additionally, the use of perfusion systems may improve acute tubular necrosis rates with these allografts. We report a successful case of a dual transplant with ECD allografts using a perfusion system. The biopsy appearance and the pump characteristics were suboptimal for these kidneys, making them unsuitable for single transplantation; however, the pair of transplanted kidneys provided increased nephron mass and functioned well. We recommend that ECD kidneys that are individually nontransplantable be evaluated for potential dual renal transplantation. Biopsy criteria and perfusion data guidelines must be developed to improve the success rates with ECD dual renal allografts. Finally, recipient selection is of utmost importance.

Dual kidney transplantation from expanded criteria deceased donors: Initial experience from single center

Aim:

To evaluate results of dual kidney transplantation from expanded criteria deceased donors.

Materials and Methods:

Between January 2000 and December 2009, 23 dual kidney transplantations were performed from expanded criteria deceased donors; 11 were from non-heart-beating donors and 12 from brain-dead heart-beating donors. All transplantations were performed in monolateral iliac fossa.

Results:

Two perioperative deaths occurred due to sepsis and multiorgan failure in non-heart-beating group, and one in brain dead group. One- and five-year graft and patient survival in recipients having organs from brain-death heart-beating group were 91.67%. In non-heart-beating group, 1- and 5-year graft survival was 65.45% and 81.82%, and 1- and 5-year patient survival was 43.64% and 61.36%, respectively.

Conclusion:

Dual kidney transplantation from expanded criteria brain dead donors has better graft and patient survival than from non-heart-beating donors.

Clinical analysis of living related renal transplantation with donors older than 50 years in China

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate whether kidney grafts from living related donors older than 50 years were safe for the donors and recipients in the long term.

METHODS

One hundred seven living related donor kidney transplantations were performed in our center from April 1994 to December 2007. No prisoners or organs from prisoners were used in the collection of these data. Donors were divided into 2 groups: >50 years of age (range, 51-78 years), designated as the study group, and ≤50 years of age (range, 21-50 years), designated as the control groups. The mean time of follow-up was 49 months (range, 12-180 months). Clinical data were compared, including donor serum creatinine (Scr) levels, glomerular filtration rates (GFR) before and after the procedures operative complications, and postoperative short-term and long-term recovery of renal function in recipients as well as their complications and recipient and kidney survivals.

RESULTS

All operations were successfully performed. Before the operation, the mean Scr and GFR were 82.16 ± 10.86 umol/L and 85.82 ± 6.26 mL/min, respectively, in the study group versus 78.66 ± 10.41 umol/L and 88.74 ± 9.44 mL/min, respectively, in the control group. There were no significant differences in mean Scr or GFR values between the groups at various preoperative or postoperative times (P > .05). No severe perioperative complications occurred, and no subsequent renal function failure was observed upon long-term follow-up of donors in the 2 groups. Comparisons of recipient age, gender ratio, duration on dialysis, HLA matches, cold/warm ischemia times, and immunosuppression therapy showed a correlations between the 2 groups. Mean Scr levels of recipients, which were compared from 1 week to 3 years following surgery, were slightly higher among the control than the study group, but the difference was not significant (P > .05). There were no significant differences between the study and control groups in 1-,3-,5-, and 8-year recipient/graft survival rates (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term follow-up showed that transplantations using grafts from donors older than 50 years of age yielded similar results to those with younger donors.

Dual transplantation of marginal kidneys from nonheart beating donors selected using machine perfusion viability criteria

PURPOSE

Viability testing can be used to avoid the transplantation of nonheart beating donor organs that are likely to have primary nonfunction. Such testing also identifies a second group of kidneys which, although unsuitable for solitary transplantation, may be considered for dual transplantation. In kidneys in this group solitary transplants would be unlikely to produce a sufficient glomerular filtration rate to support the recipient. However, if used together as a dual transplant, they have the potential to produce sufficient renal function in 1 patient.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The group at our unit has performed 23 dual nonheart beating donor renal transplants from 2003 to date. Using 3 and 12-month post-transplantation recipient glomerular filtration rates as primary end points we compared our dual transplant group with our series of 115 single nonheart beating donor transplants from 1998 to 2006.

RESULTS

At 3 and 12 months mean glomerular filtration rates in the dual group were 46.2 and 45.5 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), respectively. These values were not significantly different from the mean glomerular filtration rates of 40.7 and 43.0 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), respectively, in the single transplant group.

CONCLUSIONS

We have observed that a subset of nonheart beating donor kidneys that do not satisfy the viability criteria for single organ transplantation may become successful dual organ grafts, thus, avoiding unnecessary organ nonuse and maximizing organ resources.

Older kidneys donor transplantation: five years' experience without biopsy and using clinical laboratory and macroscopic anatomy evaluation

INTRODUCTION

The exponential increase in organ demand is not associated with a similar increase of available kidneys. This emergency led to expanded criteria to consider a kidney transplantable. The aim of this retrospective study was to explain our use of older donor kidneys without biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2000 and 2005, 58 older kidneys were harvested: 27 were transplanted in our center; 13 were discarded; and 18 were transplanted in other centers. We considered 3 factors to define kidney quality: macroscopic anatomy, multiple factors linked to the donor, and clinical-laboratory data. After transplantation, we observed the patients for at least 1 year and up to 6 years.

DISCUSSION

At 1 year, 24/27 (89%) patients had a functional kidney, 2 patients showed an initial renal failure and 1 patient lost the kidney. At maximum follow-up, 19 patients (70%) had functional kidneys, 4 with initial renal failure. These results compared with the kidneys harvested using Standard Donor Kidney Criteria are acceptable. Obviously we need long-term follow-up to increase, the amount of data and obtain a definitive outcome.

CONCLUSION

Biopsy is the gold standard for the definition of an older kidney's quality. When a biopsy is not feasible, the study of the macroscopic anatomy the kidney's donor and of some donor's parameters represent an acceptable biopsy alternative, being able to rescue some organs that would be otherwise lost.

Dual Kidney Transplantation: A Case-Control Comparison With Single Kidney Transplantation From Standard and Expanded Criteria Donors

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to perform a case-matched cohort analysis of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) from expanded criteria donors (ECDs) compared to single kidney transplantation (SKT) from concurrent ECDs and standard criteria donors (SCDs, defined as non-ECD).

METHODS

Deceased donor (DD) kidney transplants (KTs) performed at a single center between October 2001 and February 2006 were reviewed retrospectively. If the calculated DD creatinine clearance (CrCl) was <65 mL/min, then the kidneys were transplanted dually into a single patient. In the case of DKT and SKT from ECDs, low risk patients were chosen and informed consent was obtained. Patients in each group were matched for age, gender, race, transplant number, and time of transplant.

RESULTS

Of 294 adult DD KTs performed, 16 (5%) were DKTs, which were matched with 16 concurrent SCD and 16 ECD SKT patients. Mean donor age in years (65 DKT vs. 33 SCD vs. 61 ECD; P<0.0001) and mean donor CrCl in ml/min (54 DKT vs. 91 SCD vs. 76 ECD; P=0.002) were different between groups. Patient survival was 100% in the DKT and SCD SKT groups and 94% in the ECD SKT group (mean follow up 23-28 months); graft survival rates in the DKT, SCD, and ECD groups were 81%, 81%, and 94%, respectively (P=NS). Graft function, rejection, and morbidity were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

DKT using kidneys from marginal ECDs is a viable option to counteract the growing shortage of available organs. Excellent short-term results and renal function can be achieved with older, low nephron mass donors provided that both kidneys are transplanted into a single recipient.

Ways to boost kidney transplant viability: a real need for the best use of older donors

Using kidneys from expanded criteria donors (ECD) increased transplant activity but resulted in a reduced graft survival. The relatively poor long-term outcome of ECD grafts may be the consequence of an imbalance between the number of viable nephrons supplied and the metabolic demand of the recipient. Providing more nephrons by dual transplants may improve outcomes but fails, per se, to confer the same benefit of single transplants from young donors. A biopsy-based score system has been presented by a panel of pathologists to assess whether kidneys from donors older than 60 years still contain enough viable nephrons to be made available for transplantation, and whether single or dual transplantation should be used. Allocating kidneys from older donors to a single or dual transplant on the basis of this scoring system allowed achieving a graft survival similar to that of single transplants from ideal donors and remarkably superior to that of single transplants from older donors not evaluated histologically before implantation. Thus, preimplantation histologic evaluation maximizes the success of ECD transplants and protects recipients from receiving organs at increased risk of premature failure. This may limit the number of patients who eventually must resume dialysis and need second transplants.

Experience with dual kidney transplants from donors at the extremes of age

BACKGROUND

Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) from donors at the extremes of age represents one approach to expanding the organ donor pool. The purpose of this study was to review our experience with DKT from older donors and en bloc KT (EBKT) from small pediatric donors.

METHODS

Deceased donor KTs performed at our center between October 2001 and November 2005, were reviewed retrospectively. If the calculated creatinine clearance in an expanded criteria donor was <65 mL/min, then the kidneys were transplanted dually into a single adult recipient. If a pediatric donor weighed <15 kg, then the kidneys were transplanted en bloc. In both instances, low-risk recipients were chosen (primary transplant, low sensitization, body mass index <25 kg/m(2), human leukocyte antigen matching). Donor, recipient, and transplant characteristics, waiting time, and outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

Of a total of 279 deceased donor KTs during the 49-month study period, 15 (5%) recipients underwent DKT and 5 (2%) underwent EBKT. Mean donor age was 65.4 years and 21.4 months in the DKT and EBKT groups, respectively. Patient survival rates in both groups were 100% with a mean follow-up of 22 months (minimum, 6 months). Kidney graft survival rates were 80% (12/15) and 60% (3/5) in the DKT and EBKT groups, respectively. The combined incidence of delayed graft function was 10%. Mean 12-month glomerular filtration rates were 46 mL/min and 66 mL/min in the DKT and EBKT groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

DKT using kidneys from marginal elderly donors and EBKT from small pediatric donors appear to offer a viable option to counteract the shortage of acceptable kidney donors.

Intermediate-term outcomes with expanded criteria deceased donors in kidney transplantation: a spectrum or specter of quality?

OBJECTIVE

To compare intermediate-term outcomes in adult recipients of expanded criteria (ECD) versus concurrent standard criteria (SCD) deceased donor kidney transplants at a single center using a standardized approach.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Expanded criteria donors (ECDs) are a source of kidneys that increase the donor organ pool, but the value of transplanting these kidneys has been questioned because of concerns regarding diminished survival and predicted poorer intermediate-term outcomes.

METHODS

Over a 47-month period, we performed 244 deceased donor kidney transplants into adult recipients, including 143 from SCDs and 101 from ECDs. Management algorithms were implemented to preserve nephron function, and recipient selection for an ECD kidney transplant was based on low immunologic risk. All patients received depleting antibody induction in combination with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil. A total of 188 patients (77%) had at least a 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

ECDs were older, had a higher BMI, had an increased incidence of cerebrovascular brain death and preexisting donor hypertension, and had a lower estimated creatinine clearance (CrCl, all P < 0.01) compared with SCDs. Cold ischemic times were similar between groups, but more ECD kidneys were preserved with pulsatile perfusion (P < 0.01). ECD kidney recipients were older, less sensitized, had a lower BMI, had fewer 0-antigen mismatches, and had a shorter waiting time (all P < 0.01) compared with SCD kidney recipients. Actual patient (93%) and kidney graft (83%) survival rates were similar between groups with a mean follow-up of 24 months. The rates of delayed graft function (DGF), acute rejection, readmissions, operative complications, major infections, and resource utilization were comparable between groups. Renal function followed longitudinally was consistently better in SCD patients (P < 0.05). Black recipients had higher rates of DGF, acute rejection, and graft loss (P < 0.05), but the effects were less pronounced in the ECD group.

CONCLUSIONS

By appropriate donor and recipient profiling and the use of management algorithms to project and protect renal function, excellent intermediate-term outcomes can be achieved with ECD kidney transplants that are comparable to SCD kidney transplants.

Monolateral placement of both kidneys in dual kidney transplantation: low surgical complication rate and short operating time*

Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) from marginal donors is increasingly used at many centers to help cope with the organ shortage problem. The disadvantages of DKT consist in longer operating times and the risk of surgical complications. DKT can be performed in two ways, i.e. using monolateral or bilateral procedures. From October 1999 to June 2005, 58 DKTs were performed at our unit. In 29 cases (group I), the kidneys were extraperitoneally placed bilaterally in the iliac fossae via two separate incisions; as of June 2003, monolateral kidney placement was preferred in 29 cases, whenever compatible with the recipient's morphological status (group II). After a mean follow-up of 51 +/- 19 months for group I and 15 +/- 7 months for group II, all patients are alive with 1-year graft survival rates of 93% and 96%, respectively. Mean operating times were 351 +/- 76 min in group I and 261 +/- 31 min in group II (P = 0.0001). The mean S-creatinine levels in groups I and II were 132 +/- 47 and 119 +/- 36 mumol/l, respectively, at 1 year. We observed eight surgical complications in group I and seven in group II. Both techniques proved safe, with no differences in surgical complication rates. The monolateral procedure has the advantage of a shorter operating time and the contralateral iliac fossa remains available for further retransplantation procedures.

Simultaneous double adult kidney transplantation using single arterial and venous anastomoses

INTRODUCTION

To provide optimal nephron mass, two adult kidneys can be transplanted into a single recipient.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

All techniques described to date have been based on the sequential transplantation of each transplant in a separate iliac fossa. We report on an operative technique allowing the simultaneous transplantation of both kidneys into the same iliac fossa, with simultaneous revascularization through a single arterial and single venous anastomosis in 12 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This technique reduces the surgical dissection, anesthesia exposure, and risk to elderly recipients and can be added to the armamentarium of the transplant surgeon.

The Fate of Organs Refused Locally and Transplanted Elsewhere

The number of kidney allografts procured from deceased donors has been fairly constant in the past few years, while organs from living donors steadily increase. In our program, existing protocols refused some kidneys which were subsequently accepted and transplanted at other hospitals. Thus, a review of our criteria to accept kidneys became necessary.

METHODS

We studied the outcome of all kidneys refused by us but transplanted in other programs between 2002 and 2004. The data analyzed included ID no. donor, transplant center, procurement date, donor age, ischemic times, recipient alive or dead, creatinine level (when it was offered), initial function, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, biopsy, reason why the kidney was not accepted in our program, kidney functioning or lost, and cause of graft failure. The chi-square, Fisher, and t tests were used to analyze our data; P values of <.05 were regarded as significant.

RESULTS

Originally 137, we excluded kidneys exported due to mandatory sharing (26 of 137 = 18.97%) and multiorgan placement (10 of 137 = 7.3%). Thus, 101 kidneys were not accepted by us because they did not meet the existing criteria of our program, but were accepted elsewhere. Reasons for nonacceptance were divided into donor quality, donor social history, donor age, donor size/weight, positive serological test, as well as organ preservation time, organ anatomical damage, elevated creatinine, abnormal urinalysis, abnormal biopsy, and decreased urine output. Donor issues were 66 of 101 (65.3%) with a graft loss of 13.6%, and organ issues were 35 of 101 (34.7%) with a graft loss of 66.6%. Donor quality totaled 24 of 66 (36.4%) and donor social history totaled 20 of 66 (30.3%); these were the most common causes for kidney nonacceptance related to donor issues. Reasons related to organ quality included elevated creatinine (15 of 35 = 42.9%; graft loss, 46.6%), and abnormal biopsy (9 of 35 = 25.7%; graft loss, 11.1%) and organ anatomical damage (4 of 35 = 11.4%; graft loss, 75%) (P = .42). Graft loss was more frequent with creatinine levels above 2.4 mg/dL (P < .001, RR gf = 1.5). Long-term fate of these 101 kidneys transplanted elsewhere: 82 (81.2%) were still working while 19 (18.8%) were lost. The causes of graft loss were renal artery thrombosis (42.1%), renal venous thrombosis (26.3%), death for other reasons (15.8%), graft never worked (10.5%), and ESRD (5.7%). The results suggest that the criteria for refusal related to donor issues, including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, donor age and donor size, should be revised owing to the low percentage of graft loss. Other donor issues such as positive serological test and donor social history (drug use, alcoholism) represent a serious potential risk for the health of recipients; for this reason, considering these persons as possible donors is very difficult irrespective of the graft outcome. Kidney refusals related to organ issues (especially elevated creatinine and anatomical damage) due to the very high percentage of graft loss should be considered high risk and probably be excluded. The increase in the demand of kidneys to be transplanted is a very important reason for a continuous and systematic review of donor exclusion criteria in every transplant program. The results presented here have helped us to improve both our outcomes and utilizations based on scientific evidence.

Kidney Transplantation From Donors Aged 65 Years or More as Single or Dual Grafts

AIM

The organ shortage and aging donor population force transplant centers to accept donors previously considered unusable for kidney transplantation. We report the experience of two Italian transplant centers with single (SKTx) and dual (DKTx) kidney transplantation from donors aged 65 years or more.

METHODS

The study population comprised 75 SKTx (mean donor age 70.5 years) and 28 DKTx (mean donor age 75.0 years). Kidneys from donors with a calculated admission creatinine clearance <50 mL/min, a Karpinski's score on kidney biopsy between 5 and 7, or both were allocated to DKTx. Grafts with better function or lower biopsy scores were employed for SKTx.

RESULTS

Delayed graft function occurred in 45.3% of SKTx and in 39.3% of DKTx. After a mean follow-up period of 30.0 +/- 19.5 months, the acute rejection rate was 24.0% in SKTx and 7.1% in DKTx. Mean serum creatinine was 1.8 +/- 0.9 and 1.8 +/- 1.3 mg/dL in SKTx, and 1.8 +/- 1.6 mg/dL and 1.3 +/- 0.2 mg/dL in DKTx at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Patient survival was 93.3% and 91.2% in SKTx, and 92.9% and 92.9% in DKTx at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Graft survival was 92.0% and 88.3% in SKTx, and 89.3% and 89.3% in DKTx at the same time intervals. Keeping preservation time below 16 hours and avoiding calcineurin inhibitors were both associated with improved graft survival and function.

CONCLUSION

Careful donor selection, short preservation time, and tailored immunosuppression allow safe and efficient use of elderly donor kidneys.

Dual-kidney transplantation with organs from expanded criteria donors: a long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

Since 1995, dual-kidney transplantation using organs from marginal donors has been used at our center to expand the organ donor pool and decrease the waiting time for deceased donor kidney transplantation. This approach has allowed for a shorter waiting period without compromising outcome in the early posttransplant period. We now have 8-year follow-up in the first recipients. Older individuals were offered this option preferentially, because we reasoned that they would stand to benefit most from the shorter waiting period.

METHODS

Patients aged 55 years or more who underwent either dual-kidney transplantation with expanded criteria donors or single-kidney transplantation with standard donors were included in this study. All expanded criteria donor organs were those that were refused by all other local transplant centers. The primary endpoints were recipient death and graft failure.

RESULTS

Waiting time for dual-kidney transplantation was 440 +/- 38 days versus 664 +/- 51 days for single-kidney transplantation (P<0.01). The 8-year actuarial patient survivals for the single- and dual-kidney transplants were 74.1% and 82.1%, respectively. The 8-year actuarial graft survivals for the single- and dual-kidney transplants were 59.4% and 69.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Eight-year actuarial patient and graft survivals in older individuals who underwent dual-kidney transplantation are equivalent to those who underwent standard single-kidney transplantation. With the continuing organ shortage and increasing waiting times for cadaver kidney transplantation, dual-kidney transplantation using organs that would otherwise be discarded offers a good option for older individuals who may not withstand a long waiting period.

Sensitivity of expanded-criteria donor kidneys to cold ischaemia time

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), working in conjunction with organ procurement organizations and transplant programmes, has recently defined a class of cadaver kidney grafts for special allocation procedures to enhance utilization of those organs. The criteria defining these expanded-criteria donor (ECD) kidneys are donor age > or = 60 yr or donor age between 50 and 59 yr plus two of the following characteristics: donor history of cerebrovascular accident (CVA), donor history of hypertension (htn), and elevated creatinine (>1.5) at any time during donor management. Kidney grafts from ECD donors carry an increased relative risk of non-function compared to other cadaver kidney grafts. The goal of the special allocation procedure is to reduce the time associated with placement by matching ECD grafts with patients previously designated as being willing to accept them. In assessing the potential impact of these allocation procedures, the sensitivity of ECD grafts to cold ischaemia time (CIT) became of great significance. Specifically, we questioned whether minimization of CIT might reduce the relative risk of poor graft function, justifying reduction of the geographical range of placement and thereby reducing the time the grafts would spend in-transit.

METHODS

To assess this, we queried the SEOPF database for cadaveric kidney transplants between 1/1/1997 and 15/8/2002. There were 1312 transplants from ECD donors during this period and 8451 from non-ECD donors. Between these groups, there were no significant differences in recipient gender, ethnicity, peak and most recent panel reactive antibody (PRA). Recipients of ECD kidneys were significantly older: 50.9 +/- 13.0 yr vs. 44.9 +/- 13.9 (mean age +/- SD, P < 0.0001). There were statistically significant but very small differences in the degree of AB and DR mismatch between the groups.

RESULTS

Defining delayed graft function (DGF) as dialysis within the first week post-transplant and primary non-function (PNF) as dialysis within the first week and failure in the first year, we found an association with CIT as illustrated in Table 1. Overall, ECD kidneys had a significantly increased (P < 0.0001) incidence of PNF and DGF. Notably, PNF in ECD appeared to be uniformly distributed across CIT and while DGF was CIT-dependent, the DGF differences between ECD and non-ECD were fairly consistent across CIT.

CONCLUSION

While CIT minimization is potentially beneficial, ECD kidneys do not appear to be more sensitive to it than non-ECD kidneys.

Increased kidney transplantation utilizing expanded criteria deceased organ donors with results comparable to standard criteria donor transplant

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes in recipients of expanded criteria donor (ECD) versus standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys at a single center using a standardized approach with similar immunosuppression.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Expanded criteria deceased organ donors (ECD) are a source of kidneys that permit more patients to benefit from transplantation. ECD is defined as all deceased donors older than 60 years and donors older than 50 years with 2 of the following: hypertension, stroke as the cause of death, or pre-retrieval serum creatinine (SCr) greater than 1.5 mg/dl.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 90 recipients of adult deceased donor kidneys transplanted from October 1, 2001 to February 17, 2003, including 37 (41%) from ECDs and 53 (59%) from SCDs. ECD kidneys were used by matching estimated renal functional mass to recipient need, including the use of dual kidney transplants (n = 7). ECD kidney recipients were further selected on the basis of older age, HLA-matching, low allosensitization, and low body mass index. All patients received a similar immunosuppressive regimen. Minimum follow up was 9 months.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in donor and recipient characteristics between ECD and SCD transplants. Patient (99%) and kidney graft survival (88%) rates and morbidity were similar between the 2 groups, with a mean follow-up of 16 months. Initial graft function and the mean 1-week and 1-, 3-, 6-, 12-, and 18-month SCr levels were similar among groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of ECD kidneys at our center effectively doubled our transplant volume within 1 year. A systematic approach to ECD kidneys based on nephron mass matching and nephron sparing measures may provide optimal utilization with short-term outcomes and renal function comparable to SCD kidneys.

Kidney transplantation from donors aged more than 65 years

BACKGROUND

There are no agreed criteria to predict the outcome of elderly donor kidneys or to decide between single (SKG) or dual (DKG) kidney graft transplantation.

METHODS

Between January 1999 and January 2003, 46 SKG and 14 DKG were performed from elderly donors (mean donor age 71.6 years; range: 66 to 87). Kidney biopsies were scored according to Karpinski. A calculated admission creatinine clearance <50 mL/min and/or a biopsy score of 5 or 6 were used to select kidneys for DKG. Grafts with better function or lower biopsy scores were employed for SKG.

RESULTS

Mean cold ischemia time (CIT) was 16.8 hours (range 8.1 to 28.6) in SKG, and 16.3 hours (range 4.6 to 24.3) for the first kidney and 17.4 hours (range 5.1 to 25.9) for the second graft in DKG. Delayed graft function (DGF) occurred in 34.1% SKG and in 28.5% DKG. Acute rejection rates were 9.1% for SKG and 0% for DKG. Three-year actuarial patient survival rates were 97.7% for SKG and 92.9% for DKG; for kidneys, 95.4% and 92.9%. One-year mean serum creatinine levels were 1.8 mg/dL (range 1.1 to 4.0) for SKG and 1.2 mg/dL (range 1.0 to 1.8) for DKG (P =.01). CIT longer than 16 hours was related to increased rates of DGF for both SKG (45.4% vs 22.7%) or DKG (42.9% vs 14.3%) and reduced 3-year graft survival rates (SKG: 90.9% vs 100%; DKG: 85.7% vs 100%).

CONCLUSIONS

With stringent selection criteria and short CIT (<16 hours), elderly donor kidneys may show good results, thus meaningfully expanding the donor pool.

Tackling the shortage of donor kidneys: how to use the best that we have

Shortage of kidney donor is still a major limitation for renal transplantation programs. This review focuses on the emerging practices, adopted to increase transplant activities, of expanding the criteria for donor and recipient selection without exposing the recipient to the drawbacks of a graft with inadequate nephron mass. Expanding the donor pool inevitably led to consideration for kidney transplantation of organs from older donors or from donors with hypertension, diabetes or other renal diseases. To fit the reduced performance of these suboptimal organs with the renal requirement of the recipient, selection of recipients with reduced metabolic requirements or increase of nephron mass by simultaneous transplantation of two suboptimal kidneys in the same recipient have been pursued. However, a critical aspect of both approaches is to quantify functioning nephron mass provided to the recipient by pre-transplant kidney biopsies. Morphological parameters assessed on kidney biopsies at the time of donor evaluation may serve to quantify the preserved tissue and to discriminate chronic irreversible lesions from acute changes that may account for a transiently impaired renal function in the donor, but that may recover after transplant.

Prognostic significance of microvascular thrombosis in donor kidney allograft biopsies

BACKGROUND

With a continuing demand for donor kidneys for organ transplantation, it is important to understand the significance of pathologic findings in the donor organ before transplantation. Microvascular thrombosis is sometimes encountered in association with disseminated intravascular coagulation in the donor, and it is unclear whether this finding may affect immediate allograft function and long-term graft survival. To further elucidate this question, we examined our experience with microvascular thrombosis in donor biopsies in the kidney transplant program at our institution.

METHODS

Donor kidney biopsies showing microvascular thrombosis were identified from consecutive donor biopsies in the Duke University Medical Center transplant file database between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2000. These biopsies and all other kidney biopsies and specimens from the recipients of these kidneys thus identified were reviewed. Sections were stained using a variety of methods, including hematoxylin-eosin, periodic acid-Schiff, methenamine silver, and Masson trichrome methods. Clinical records of the transplant recipients of these kidneys were also reviewed to assess allograft performance and survival.

RESULTS

From 230 consecutive donor kidney biopsies, we identified eight cases exhibiting donor-microvascular thrombosis. Mean follow-up times were 27.5 months for the thrombi group and 35 months for the non-thrombi group. Recipients of grafts with donor thrombi were more likely to exhibit delayed graft function, but graft function at 1 and 2 years and graft survival were similar between the two groups. Subsequent posttransplantation biopsies in five of eight cases showed no evidence of residual thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that the presence of donor microvascular thrombosis does not portend poor outcome in renal transplantation.

Dual-kidney transplants: long-term results

BACKGROUND

Dual-kidney transplantation, where two usually aged adult kidneys are placed into an adult recipient, is one way to help alleviate the continuing disparity between the number of patients on the kidney transplant waiting list and those who receive kidney transplants each year. The Dual Kidney Registry was developed to analyze donor and recipient data and outcomes at several centers.

METHODS

Two hundred eighty-seven patients who have undergone transplantation since 1994 have been entered into the relational database. The patients were followed yearly after initial entry into the database.

RESULTS

The mean donor age was 58+/-13 years and the mean terminal creatinine clearance was 77+/-40 mL/min. The mean glomerular sclerosis on procurement biopsy was 16+/-13%. Delayed graft function (DGF), defined as dialysis in the first 7 days after transplantation, was a predictor of poor outcome, and increased cold storage time was a predictor of DGF. The overall incidence of DGF was 27%. In recipients with prompt graft function (PGF), the mean cold storage time was 22+/-9 hr versus 29+/-10 hr in recipients with DGF (P<0.001). The overall 1- and 5-year graft survival was 86% and 69%, respectively. The 1- and 5-year graft survival rates were significantly better in recipients with PGF (90% and 74%) versus DGF (79% and 54%) (P<0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Cold storage time and DGF have a significant impact on the 1- and 5-year graft survival in recipients of dual-kidney transplants. The 5-year graft survival in recipients of dual-kidney transplants is excellent.

Dual kidneys from marginal adult donors as a source for cadaveric renal transplantation in the United States

The current organ shortage has led to the utilization of double kidney transplants from marginal adult donors, but outcomes data are limited. The United Network for Organ Sharing registry database was used to compare the outcomes of 403 dual adult kidney transplantations (DKT) and 11,033 single kidney transplantations (SKT) from 1997 to 2000. Graft and patient survival and the effect of multiple risk factors were evaluated. It was found that DKT patients were older, less sensitized, and received grafts from older, more mismatched donors with longer cold ischemia times. There was also a greater percentage of donors with a history of diabetes or hypertension and African-American recipients and donors in the DKT group. Graft survival was inferior in the DKT group, with a 7% lower graft survival rate at 1 yr. There was a higher incidence of primary nonfunction in the DKT group, although the incidence of delayed graft function, early rejection treatment, and graft thrombosis did not differ. Multivariate analysis was used to identify African-American recipient ethnicity and retransplant as risk factors for graft loss. Graft survival was comparable in DKT and SKT with donors over 55 yr of age. DKT resulted in inferior graft outcomes compared with SKT. When compared with SKT with donors over 55 yr of age, DKT resulted in similar graft outcomes. These otherwise discarded kidneys should be cautiously considered as a source of marginal donors.

Intermediate outcomes of dual renal allografts: the University of Washington experience

PURPOSE

The increased survival advantage of renal transplantation with end stage renal disease combined with an increasing incidence of renal disease fuel an increasing disparity between supply and demand for transplantable kidneys. Despite efforts to increase cadaveric organ donation through education and publicity, the number of cadaveric kidneys transplanted has not increased and in the last year was surpassed by kidneys transplanted from living donors. In an effort to maximize cadaver organ donors use of kidneys from expanded criteria donors has been investigated. In select cases both donor kidneys have been transplanted into a single recipient, which is called dual renal transplant. We report on the 4-year dual renal transplant graft and patient outcomes and compare these to age matched single cadaver kidney transplants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 10 dual renal transplant recipients and 10 age matched single cadaver kidney recipients was performed. All patients underwent transplantation at our university between January 1996 and February 1998. Mean followup was 4.1 years (range 2.5 to 5.1) for the dual kidney recipients and 3.6 (0.0 to 5.5) years for the control group.

RESULTS

Of the 10 dual renal transplant recipients 7 remain alive and 3 died of nontransplant related causes. Of the 10 single recipients 8 are alive, 1 died of postoperative complications and 1 died of nontransplant related causes. When censored for death with a functioning graft, 7 of 10 dual grafts are functioning at followup with a mean creatinine clearance of 39.4 ml. per minute (range 16.1 to 65.9) and mean serum creatinine of 2.0 mg./dl. (1.1 to 3.9). If not censored for death with a functioning graft, 50% of dual grafts are functioning. Of the 3 graft losses 2 were due to recurrent disease and 1 was attributed to chronic rejection. In the control group 8 of 10 grafts are functioning at current followup (regardless of censoring for death with a functioning graft) with a mean creatinine clearance of 48.7 ml. per minute (range 23.4 to 66.5) and mean serum creatinine of 1.6 mg./dl. (1.2 to 2.4). Of the 2 graft losses 1 resulted from postoperative complications and 1 was due to chronic rejection. CONCLUSIONS At the 4-year followup patients undergoing dual renal transplant have comparable graft function, incidence of graft loss and survival compared to the control group. However, because of our small sample size, differences in the 2 groups may be significant in a larger study. Additional studies need to be conducted to determine if this practice represents an acceptable use of kidneys from expanded criteria donors.

Estimated and measured donor creatinine clearance are poor predictors of long-term renal graft function and survival

The objective of this study was to evaluate estimated and measured donor renal function in predicting graft function long-term and to identify donor criteria associated with nonacceptable graft prognosis. In 200 consecutive cadaver donors creatinine clearance was measured at explantation and estimated using the Cockcroft formula on admission serum creatinine. Graft function was evaluated in recipients (n = 387) by 24-h creatinine clearance regularly during 3 years after transplantation. Measured creatinine clearance correlated to some extent with long-term graft function, while Cockcroft estimation was slightly superior and similar to using donor age only. Kidneys from donors with intra-operative creatinine clearance < or = 55 mL/min (median 50 mL/min) produced acceptable recipient graft function of 48 mL/min at 3 years and 76% 3-year graft survival. Donor age > or =60 years resulted in clearance at 3 years of 29 mL/min and 78% 3-year graft survival; adding the criteria of admission Cockcroft < or =60 mL/min, graft function at 3 years (28 mL/min) and 3-year graft survival (76%) were similar. In conclusion, creatinine-based estimates of the functional capacity of the donor kidney, calculated or intra-operatively measured, do little to improve the ability of donor age alone to predict long-term allograft function after renal transplantation, and nonacceptable donors are not discriminated.

The use of expanded criteria cadaver and live donor kidneys for transplantation

The use of expanded criteria donors (non-traditional donors) can help lessen the current shortage of kidneys available for transplantation. The use of older donors has accounted for a large measure of the increase in the organ donation rate; however, the most significant factors found to impact on transplant success negatively traditionally have been shown to be extremes of donor age and last-hour urine output. Less significant variables affecting success rates are average systolic blood pressure, terminal serum creatinine, and days of hospitalization. With the appropriate selection of organs from expanded donors, acceptable outcomes can be obtained. When living donors are selected properly, kidneys with anatomic variants without pathologic significance can be used safely. Kidneys with a heightened potential for the development of progressive disease should not be transplanted. Efforts to decrease the cold ischemia time by increasing the use of kidneys from expanded criteria donors may improve the outcome of transplantation further. Advances in surgical techniques, preservation solutions, and methods for predicting eventual long-term renal function in kidneys from expanded donors will be critical in allowing precise selection criteria for kidneys for transplantation, resulting in the optimum use of a scarce and precious resource. Until options such as xenotransplantation become clinically feasible, the challenge will be to identify which donor organs previously considered suboptimal can be used safely to expand the organ donor pool.

Use of marginal organs from non-heart-beating cadaveric kidney donors

BACKGROUND

The severe shortage of cadaver donor kidneys for transplantation has prompted many centers to utilize older donor kidneys, which have been associated with lower graft survival rates. The aim of the present study was to examine the availability and feasibility of considering kidneys from donors over the age of 60.

METHOD

We studied 252 cadaveric renal transplant recipients (156 males, 96 females) who received kidneys from uncontrolled non-heart-beating donors between 1987 and 1997. We performed in situ cooling with especially designed double-balloon catheters to minimize warm ischemic kidney damage. Recipients were classified according to donor age (<age 60 and >age 60), and we examined graft survival rates. All patients were followed for a minimum of 1 year after transplantation.

RESULTS

Graft survival rates for recipients of kidneys from the older donor group at 1, 5, and 10 years after transplantation were 77%, 37%, and 30%, respectively. Corresponding values for the younger donor kidney recipients were 87%, 64%, and 47%, respectively (P=0.0011). Improved survival rates were noted when older kidneys were used for lighter weight recipients (<54 kg). No other significant factors impacted on older donor graft survival rates.

CONCLUSION

Older donor kidneys are associated with poorer graft survival rates. However, kidney transplants from older donors can be quite effective in lighter weight recipients (<54 kg).