Early Outcomes of the New UK Deceased Donor Kidney Fast-Track Offering Scheme

Rescue Allocation Modes in Eurotransplant Kidney Transplantation: Recipient Oriented Extended Allocation Versus Competitive Rescue Allocation-A Retrospective Multicenter Outcome Analysis

BACKGROUND

Whenever the kidney standard allocation (SA) algorithms according to the Eurotransplant (ET) Kidney Allocation System or the Eurotransplant Senior Program fail, rescue allocation (RA) is initiated. There are 2 procedurally different modes of RA: recipient oriented extended allocation (REAL) and competitive rescue allocation (CRA). The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of patient survival and graft failure with RA mode and whether or not it varied across the different ET countries.

METHODS

The ET database was retrospectively analyzed for donor and recipient clinical and demographic characteristics in association with graft outcomes of deceased donor renal transplantation (DDRT) across all ET countries and centers from 2014 to 2021 using Cox proportional hazards methods.

RESULTS

Seventeen thousand six hundred seventy-nine renal transplantations were included (SA 15 658 [89%], REAL 860 [4.9%], and CRA 1161 [6.6%]). In CRA, donors were older, cold ischemia times were longer, and HLA matches were worse in comparison with REAL and especially SA. Multivariable analyses showed comparable graft and recipient survival between SA and REAL; however, CRA was associated with shorter graft survival. Germany performed 76% of all DDRTs after REAL and CRA and the latter mode reduced waiting times by up to 2.9 y.

CONCLUSIONS

REAL and CRA are used differently in the ET countries according to national donor rates. Both RA schemes optimize graft utilization, lead to acceptable outcomes, and help to stabilize national DDRT programs, especially in Germany.

Beyond donation to organ utilization in the UK

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Optimizing deceased donor organ utilization is gaining recognition as a topical and important issue, both in the United Kingdom (UK) and globally. This review discusses pertinent issues in the field of organ utilization, with specific reference to UK data and recent developments within the UK.

RECENT FINDINGS

A multifaceted approach is likely required in order to improve organ utilization. Having a solid evidence-base upon which transplant clinicians and patients on national waiting lists can base decisions regarding organ utilization is imperative in order to bridge gaps in knowledge regarding the optimal use of each donated organ. A better understanding of the risks and benefits of the uses of higher risk organs, along with innovations such as novel machine perfusion technologies, can help clinician decision-making and may ultimately reduce the unnecessary discard of precious deceased donor organs.

SUMMARY

The issues facing the UK with regards to organ utilization are likely to be similar to those in many other developed countries. Discussions around these issues within organ donation and transplantation communities may help facilitate shared learning, lead to improvements in the usage of scarce deceased donor organs, and enable better outcomes for patients waiting for transplants.

Outcomes of Declined Deceased Donor Kidney Offers That Are Subsequently Implanted: A UK Registry Study

BACKGROUND

Deceased donor kidneys are often declined for ≥1 patients but then implanted into another. Studies are needed to guide transplant clinicians and patients, especially given the increasing age and comorbidity of donors. This study compares outcomes of recipients of transplanted kidneys that were initially declined with outcomes of patients who remained on the waiting list.

METHODS

This UK Transplant Registry study examined named-patient, adult donation after brain death donor single kidney-only offers that were declined for donor- or organ-related reasons (DORRs), in which the kidney was subsequently transplanted from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2018. Outcomes included graft function and survival of kidneys transplanted following DORR decline, survival and transplant status of patients who had a kidney declined, and intercenter decline rates.

RESULTS

A total of 4722 kidneys declined for DORRs, which eventually resulted in single kidney-only transplants, were examined. One year after the offer decline, 35% of patients for whom the organ was declined remained on the list, 55% received a deceased donor transplant at a median of 174 d after the initial offer decline, and 4% had been removed or died. For patients transplanted following offer decline, there was no significant difference in 5-y graft survival when comparing the outcomes to those recipients who received the declined kidney. There was significant variation in DORR decline rates between UK transplant units (17%-54%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows reasonable outcomes of kidneys previously declined for DORRs and supports the utilization of those considered to be of higher risk for carefully selected recipients.

A tool for decision-making in kidney transplant candidates with poor prognosis to receive deceased donor transplantation in the United States

The primary outcomes for kidney transplant candidates are receipt of deceased or living donor transplant, death or removal from the waiting list. Here, we conducted a retrospective analysis of national Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data to evaluate outcomes for 208,717 adult kidney transplant candidates following the 2014 Kidney Allocation System in the United States. Competing risks models were utilized to evaluate Time to Equivalent Risk (TiTER) of deceased donor transplantation (DDTX) and death versus waitlist removal. We also evaluated TiTER based on kidney donor profile index (KDPI) and donor age. For all groups, the cumulative incidence of DDTX was initially higher from time of listing than death or waitlist removal. However, following accrued time on the waiting list, the cumulative incidence of death or waitlist removal exceeded DDTX for certain patient groups, particularly older, diabetic, blood type B and O and shorter pre-listing dialysis time. TiTER for all candidates aged 65-69 averaged 41 months and for 70 and older patients 28 months. Overall, 39.6% of candidates were in risk groups with TiTER under 72 months and 18.5% in groups with TiTER under 24 months. Particularly for older candidates, TiTER for kidneys was substantially shorter for younger donors or lower KDPI. Thus, our findings reveal that a large proportion of waitlisted patients in the United States have poor prognoses to ever undergo DDTX and our data may improve shared decision-making for candidates at time of waitlist placement. Hence, for specific patient groups, TiTER may be a useful tool to disseminate and quantify benefits of accepting relatively high risk donor organs.

Nonutilization of Kidneys From Donors After Circulatory Determinant of Death

Background.

The expansion of donation after circulatory determination of death (DCDD) programs and unmet demands for kidney transplantation indicate that there is a need to improve the efficiency and utilization of these organs.

Methods.

We studied all DCDD donors retrieved for kidney transplantation in Australia between 2014 and 2019 and determined the factors associated with nonutilization using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and random forest models. Self-organizing maps were used to group these donors into clusters with similar characteristics and features associated with nonutilization were defined.

Results.

Of the 762 DCDD donors, 116 (15%) were not utilized for kidney transplantation. Of the 9 clusters derived from self-organizing map, 2 had the highest proportions of nonutilized kidneys. Factors for nonutilization (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval], per SD increase) were duration from withdrawal of cardiorespiratory support till death (1.38 [1.16-1.64]), admission and terminal serum creatinine (1.43 [1.13-1.85]) and (1.41 [1.16-1.73]). Donor kidney function and duration of warm ischemia were the main factors for clinical decisions taken not to use kidneys from DCDD donors.

Conclusions.

Donor terminal kidney function and the duration of warm ischemia are the key factors for nonutilization of DCDD kidneys. Strategies to reduce the duration of warm ischemia and improve post-transplant recipient kidney function may reduce rates of nonutilization.

Early Assessment of National Kidney Allocation Policy Change

BACKGROUND

The new kidney allocation changes with elimination of donor service areas (DSAs) and Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network regions were initiated to improve equity in organ allocation. The aim of this evaluation was to determine the operational, financial, and recipient-related effect of the new allocation system on a large rural transplantation program.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of organ offers, allograft outcomes, and attributed costs in a comparative time cohort, before (December 16, 2020 to March 14, 2021) and after (March 15, 2021 to June 13, 2021) the allocation change was performed. Outcomes were limited to adult, solitary, deceased donor kidney transplantations.

RESULTS

We received 198,881 organ offers from 3,886 organ donors at our transplantation center from December 16, 2020 to June 31, 2021: 87,643 (1,792 organ donors) before the change and 111,238 (2094 organ donors) after the change, for a difference of +23,595 more offers (+302 organ donors). This resulted in 6.5 more organs transplanted vs a predicted loss of 4.9 per month. Local organ offers dropped from 70% to 23%. There was a statistically significantly increase in donor terminal serum creatinine (1.2 ± 0.86 mg/dL vs 2.2 ± 2.3 mg/dL, p < 0.001), kidney donor profile index (KDPI) (39 ± 20 vs 48 ± 22, p = 0.017), cold ischemia time (16 ± 7 hours vs 21 ± 6 hours, p < 0.001), and delayed graft function rates (23% vs 40%, p = 0.020).

CONCLUSION

The new kidney allocation policy has led to an increase in KDPI of donors with longer cold ischemia time, leading to higher delayed graft function rates. This has resulted in increasing logistical and financial burdens on the system. Implementing large-scale changes in allocation based predominantly on predictive modeling needs to be intensely reassessed during a longer follow up.

Kidney accelerated placement project: Outcomes and lessons learned

Opportunities continue to be lost with a high rate of kidneys recovered for transplant but not utilized, particularly those considered less than ideal quality. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Organ Center is tasked with allocating arguably the most difficult-to-place kidneys, and we hypothesized an accelerated placement pathway would increase utilization of kidneys placed by the Organ Center. The Kidney Accelerated Placement (KAP) project, implemented by the Organ Center from July 18, 2019 to July 15, 2020, aimed to offer kidneys with a high kidney donor profile index to programs that had a history of accepting such organs. We compared OPTN kidney match run, donor, and transplant recipient data during the project period and 1 year prior. There was no statistically significant change in the percentage of KAP-eligible donors accepted during the project period (16.4%) compared to the prior year (17.5%). Conversion from acceptance to transplant was higher under KAP (72.7% vs. 71.2%), though not significant. Waiting to accelerate placement after kidneys have been declined by multiple transplant programs locally and regionally is an intervention that may come too late to effectively increase utilization. Transplant rates of nationally shared and marginal kidneys remain a challenge, and future iterations of this project should be investigated.

Number of Donor Renal Arteries and Early Outcomes after Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation

Background

Anatomic abnormalities increase the risk of deceased donor kidney discard, but their effect on transplant outcomes is understudied. We sought to determine the effect of multiple donor renal arteries on early outcomes after deceased donor kidney transplantation.

Methods

For this retrospective cohort study, we identified 1443 kidneys from 832 deceased donors with ≥1 kidney transplanted at our center (2006-2016). We compared the odds of delayed graft function and 90-day graft failure using logistic regression. To reduce potential selection bias, we then repeated the analysis using a paired-kidney cohort, including kidney pairs from 162 donors with one single-artery kidney and one multiartery kidney.

Results

Of 1443 kidneys included, 319 (22%) had multiple arteries. Multiartery kidneys experienced longer cold ischemia time, but other characteristics were similar between groups. Delayed graft function (50% multiartery versus 45% one artery, P=0.07) and 90-day graft failure (3% versus 3%, P=0.83) were similar between groups before and after adjusting for donor and recipient characteristics. In the paired kidney analysis, cold ischemia time was significantly longer for multiartery kidneys compared with single-artery kidneys from the same donor (33.5 versus 26.1 hours, P<0.001), but delayed graft function and 90-day graft failure were again similar between groups.

Conclusions

Compared with single-artery deceased donor kidneys, those with multiple renal arteries are harder to place, but experience similar delayed graft function and early graft failure.

BSHI/BTS guidance on crossmatching before deceased donor kidney transplantation

All UK H&I laboratories and transplant units operate under a single national kidney offering policy, but there have been variations in approach regarding when to undertake the pre‐transplant crossmatch test. In order to minimize cold ischaemia times for deceased donor kidney transplantation we sought to find ways to be able to report a crossmatch result as early as possible in the donation process. A panel of experts in transplant surgery, nephrology, specialist nursing in organ donation and H&I (all relevant UK laboratories represented) assessed evidence and opinion concerning five factors that relate to the effectiveness of the crossmatch process, as follows: when the result should be ready for reporting; what level of donor HLA typing is needed; crossmatch sample type and availability; fairness and equity; risks and patient safety. Guidelines aimed at improving practice based on these issues are presented, and we expect that following these will allow H&I laboratories to contribute to reducing CIT in deceased donor kidney transplantation.

Implementation of donation after circulatory death kidney transplantation can safely enlarge the donor pool: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidney transplantation has been introduced to address organ shortage. However, DCD kidneys are not accepted worldwide due to concerns about inferior quality. To investigate whether these concerns are justified, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate DCD graft outcomes compared to donation after brain death (DBD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched from database inception until September 2020. Exclusion criteria were studies reporting on pediatric/dual kidney transplants, multi-organ transplants or studies including normothermic perfusion techniques. The primary outcome was graft survival. Secondary outcomes were primary non-function (PNF), delayed graft function (DGF), 3-months biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), 1-year estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR), patient survival, and urologic complications. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis. Meta-regression analysis was performed in case of high between-study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fifty-one studies were included, comprising 73,454 DCD and 518,229 DBD recipients. One-year graft loss was increased in DCD recipients (death-censored: risk ratio (RR) 1.10 (95%-confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.16), all-cause: RR 1.13 (95%-CI 1.08-1.19)). Ten-year graft loss was similar to DBD (death-censored: RR 1.02 (95%-CI 0.92-1.13), all-cause: RR 1.03 (95%-CI 0.94-1.13)). DCD recipients had an increased risk of PNF (RR 1.43 (95%-CI 1.26-1.62)), DGF (RR 2.02 (95%-CI 1.88-2.16)), and 1-year mortality (RR 1.10 (95%-CI 1.01-1.21)). No differences were observed for 3-months BPAR, ureter stenosis/leakage, 1-year eGFR and 10-year mortality.

CONCLUSION

Long-term DCD kidney transplant outcomes are similar to DBD despite a higher risk of PNF, DGF, and a 13% increased risk of graft loss in the first year after transplantation. These results should encourage implementation of DCD programs.

Expedited placement to maximize utilization of marginal organs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Deceased donation represents the largest supply of organs for transplant in the United States. Organs with suboptimal characteristics related to donor disease or recovery-related issues are increasingly discarded at the time of recovery, prompting late allocation to candidates later in the match sequence. Late allocation contributes to organ injury by prolonging cold ischemia, which may further lead to the risk of organ discard, despite the potential to provide benefit to certain transplant candidates.

RECENT FINDINGS

Expedited placement of marginal organs has emerged as a strategy to address the growing problem of organ discard of marginal organs that have been declined late after recovery. In this review, we describe the basis for expedited organ placement, and approaches to facilitating placement of these grafts, drawing examples from kidney and liver donation and transplantation globally.

SUMMARY

There is significant global variation in practice related to late allocation. Multiple policy mechanisms exist to facilitate expedited placement, including simultaneous offers to multiple centers, predesignation of aggressive centers, and increasing organ procurement organization autonomy in late allocation. Optimizing late allocation of deceased donor organs holds significant promise to increase the number of transplants.

Organ utilization - the next hurdle in transplantation?

Nonutilization of organs from consented deceased donors remains a significant factor in limiting patient access to transplantation. Critical to reducing waste is a clear understanding of why organs are not used: accurate metrics are essential to identify the extent and causes of waste but use of these measures as targets or comparators between units/jurisdictions must be done with caution as focus on any one measure may result in unintended adverse consequences. Comparison between centres or countries may be misleading because of variation in definitions, patient or graft characteristics. Two of the most challenging areas to improve appropriate deceased donor organ utilization are appetite for risk and lack of validated tools to help identify an organ that will function appropriately. Currently, the implanting surgeon is widely considered to be accountable for the use of a donated organ so guidelines must be clear to allow and support sensible decisions and recognition that graft failure or inadvertent disease transmission are not necessarily attributable to poor decision-making. Accepting an organ involves balancing risk and benefit for the potential recipient. Novel technologies such as machine perfusion may allow for more robust guidance as to the functioning of the organ.

Recipient and allograft survival following donation after circulatory death versus donation after brain death for renal transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND-OBJECTIVES

Current evidence based on retrospective and prospective studies demonstrates that donation after circulatory death (DCD) grafts are more susceptible to delayed graft function (DGF) than donation after brain death (DBD) grafts. The short- and long-term survival outcomes of the two cohorts are unclear. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the patient and allograft survival outcomes for DCD and DBD in renal transplant surgery.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches were conducted by searching various databases. Fixed and random effects models were used to assess the accumulation of evidence over time.

RESULTS

The five-year patient survival rate was significantly better in the DBD than in the DCD cohort. Non-significant differences were observed in 1-, 3- and 10-year patient survival and in the 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year graft survival rates between the two cohorts. The acute rejection rate was lower in the DCD cohort than in the DBD cohort. Extended criteria of donor status, delayed graft function and primary non-function were significantly higher in the DCD cohort than in the DBD cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the short- and long-term survival graft and patient benefits are similar between DCD and DBD kidney transplants. Therefore, large, controlled DCD kidney programmes are urgently needed worldwide in order to increase the number of kidney transplants.

Accelerating kidney allocation: Simultaneously expiring offers

Using nonideal kidneys for transplant quickly might reduce the discard rate of kidney transplants. We studied changing kidney allocation to eliminate sequential offers, instead making offers to multiple centers for all nonlocally allocated kidneys, so that multiple centers must accept or decline within the same 1 hour. If more than 1 center accepted an offer, the kidney would go to the highest-priority accepting candidate. Using 2010 Kidney-Pancreas Simulated Allocation Model-Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients data, we simulated the allocation of 12 933 kidneys, excluding locally allocated and zero-mismatch kidneys. We assumed that each hour of delay decreased the probability of acceptance by 5% and that kidneys would be discarded after 20 hours of offers beyond the local level. We simulated offering kidneys simultaneously to small, medium-size, and large batches of centers. Increasing the batch size increased the percentage of kidneys accepted and shortened allocation times. Going from small to large batches increased the number of kidneys accepted from 10 085 (92%) to 10 802 (98%) for low-Kidney Donor Risk Index kidneys and from 1257 (65%) to 1737 (89%) for high-Kidney Donor Risk Index kidneys. The average number of offers that a center received each week was 10.1 for small batches and 16.8 for large batches. Simultaneously expiring offers might allow faster allocation and decrease the number of discards, while still maintaining an acceptable screening burden.

Primary Nonfunction on Kidney Transplant Recipients From Donation After Circulatory Death Donors

BACKGROUND

The need for donor pool expansion remains an important task for kidney transplantation. The aim of this study is the evaluation of primary nonfunction (PNF) from donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidneys.

METHODS

Between 1996 and 2017, 100 kidney transplants from DCD donors were conducted in our department. We retrospectively analyzed PNF of kidney transplant recipients from DCD donors in terms of donors' and recipients' epidemiologic characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 100 grafts, 95 recipients (95.0%) had discontinued hemodialysis at the time of hospital discharge. Only 5 recipients (5.0%) developed PNF. All 5 PNF recipients received a single graft from an expanded criteria donor (ECD). The mean donor age in the PNF group was 65.0 (SD, 6.2) years. Significant differences between the PNF group and discontinued dialysis group were found for donor age (P < .01) and for the use of ECD kidneys (P < .02). Nevertheless, no significant difference was found between groups for several factors: a history of hypertension and cerebrovascular events, terminal creatinine levels, and graft weight.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of PNF from DCD kidneys was very low. Although ECD kidneys in older donors might be a significant risk factor for PNF, these findings suggest that DCD kidneys should be used more frequently for donor expansion.

Prospective Validation of Prediction Model for Kidney Discard

BACKGROUND

Many kidneys are discarded every year, with 3631 kidneys discarded in 2016 alone. Identifying kidneys at high risk of discard could facilitate "rescue" allocation to centers more likely to transplant them. The Probability of Delay or Discard (PODD) model was developed to identify marginal kidneys at risk of discard or delayed allocation beyond 36 hours of cold ischemia time. However, PODD has not been prospectively validated, and patterns of discard may have changed after policy changes such as the introduction of Kidney Donor Profile Index and implementation of the Kidney Allocation System (KAS).

METHODS

We prospectively validated the PODD model using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data in the KAS era (January 1, 2015, to March 1, 2018). C statistic was calculated to assess accuracy in predicting kidney discard. We assessed clustering in centers' utilization of kidneys with PODD >0.6 ("high-PODD") using Gini coefficients. Using match run data from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2016, we examined distribution of these high-PODD kidneys offered to centers that never accepted a high-PODD kidney.

RESULTS

The PODD model predicted discard accurately under KAS (C-statistic, 0.87). Compared with utilization of low-PODD kidneys (Gini coefficient = 0.41), utilization of high-PODD kidneys was clustered more tightly among a few centers (Gini coefficient, 0.84 with >60% of centers never transplanted a high-PODD kidneys). In total, 11684 offers (35.0% of all high-PODD offers) were made to centers that never accepted a high-PODD kidney.

CONCLUSIONS

Prioritizing allocation of high-PODD kidneys to centers that are more likely to transplant them might help reduce kidney discard.

Duration of delayed graft function and outcomes after kidney transplantation from controlled donation after circulatory death donors: a retrospective study

The impact of the duration of delayed graft function (DGF) on graft survival is poorly characterized in controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) donor kidney transplantation. A retrospective analysis was performed on 225 DCD donor kidney transplants between 2011 and 2016. When patients with primary nonfunction were excluded (n = 9), 141 recipients (65%) had DGF, with median (IQR) duration of dialysis dependency of 6 (2-11.75) days. Longer duration of dialysis dependency was associated with lower estimated glomerular filtration rate at 1 year, and a higher rate of acute rejection. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, the presence of DGF was associated with lower graft survival (log-rank test P = 0.034), though duration of DGF was not (P = 0.723). However, multivariable Cox regression analysis found that only acute rejection was independently associated with lower graft survival [HR (95% CI) 4.302 (1.617-11.450); P = 0.003], whereas the presence of DGF and DGF duration were not. In controlled DCD kidney transplantation, DGF duration itself may not be independently associated with graft survival; rather, it may be that acute rejection associated with prolonged DGF is the poor prognostic factor.

Renal transplant from infant and neonatal donors is a feasible option for the treatment of end-stage renal disease but is associated with increased early graft loss

Kidney transplants from young pediatric donors are uncommonly performed in the UK. Published literature of kidney transplant from donors weighing less than 5 kg is sparse. We present our initial experience of en bloc kidney transplantation (EKT) from donors weighing less than 20 kg, including neonatal donors. All recipients undergoing EKT from donors under 20 kg at our center from January 2005 to October 2016 were included. Donor and recipient details were recorded from a prospective database. Electronic patient records were examined for follow-up data. Of 30 EKTs included, 15 were from ≤5 kg donors and 15 from >5 kg donors (median weight 3.4 and 12.7 kg, respectively). One-year graft survival for ≤5 kg and >5 kg donors for EKT was 86.7% and 93.3% (P = 0.85), respectively. Progressive improvement in estimated GFR (eGFR) was noted in both donor categories through first-year posttransplant but in the ≤5 kg donor category significant improvement was seen at 12 months compared to 3 months after transplantation (median eGFR 37.3 vs 70.0 mL/min/1.73 m² , P = 0.03). Two early graft losses were attributable to early vascular complications and one graft loss due to primary nonfunction. Our data show that kidney transplantation from such donors is a feasible option at centers with experience of EKT, albeit with increased risk of early graft loss.

Single Graft Utilization From Donors With Severe Acute Kidney Injury After Circulatory Death

Chronic shortages of organs for transplantation have led to the use of marginal kidneys from donors after circulatory death with acute kidney injury (AKI), but the utilization of kidneys with severe AKI is not well established. We retrospectively analyzed eight kidney transplantation (KTx) cases from donation after circulatory death (DCD) with terminal creatinine (t-Cr) concentrations higher than 10.0 mg/dL and/or oliguria for more than 5 days (AKI network criteria: stage III). Although all patients showed delayed graft function, no cases of primary nonfunction (PNF) were found. Five patients maintained stable renal function for approximately 15.5, 10, 10, 5, and 0.5 years after KTx. Only 1 patient showed biopsy-proven acute rejection. Also, 2 patients developed graft failure: one attributable to chronic antibody mediated rejection at 11.3 years after KTx, and one attributable to recurrence of IgA nephropathy at 4.6 years after KTx. Kidneys with AKI stage III yielded great outcomes without the risk of primary nonfunction and rejection. Although the AKI kidneys were associated with delayed graft function, these results suggest that even the most severe kidneys with AKI stage III from DCD donors can be considered a valid alternative for recipients on a waiting list for KTx.