Efficient utilization of the expanded criteria donor (ECD) deceased donor kidney pool: an analysis of the effect of labeling

Kidney utilization in the Netherlands - do we optimally use our donor organs?

BACKGROUND

To ensure optimal utilization of deceased donor kidneys, it is important to understand the precise reasons why kidneys are discarded. In this study we aimed to obtain a comprehensive overview of kidney utilization and discard during the entire donation process in the Netherlands.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study we analysed kidney utilization of 3856 kidneys in the Netherlands between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2020. For every kidney that was not transplanted, we determined the moment of and reason for discard through a unique case-by-case assessment.

RESULTS

Kidney discard according to the traditional definition (procured but not transplanted) was 7.8%. However, when kidneys that seemed medically suitable at the beginning of the donation process were also included, many more potential donor kidneys were lost and the total non-utilization was 24.4%. Subjectively presumed impaired organ quality was responsible for 34.2% of all discarded kidneys. Two-thirds of kidneys discarded due to acute kidney injury (AKI) had only AKI stage 1 or 2.

CONCLUSION

The classical definition of organ discard underestimates the non-utilization of deceased donor kidneys. Strategies to improve kidney utilization could be a revision of the maximum allowed agonal time in donation after circulatory death, careful consideration in reporting and accepting kidneys from donors with AKI and a prospectively filled registry of detailed organ discard reasons, including the 'silent' non-utilization before procurement.

Hard-to-place kidney offers: Donor- and system-level predictors of discard

Understanding risk factors for deceased-donor kidney nontransplantation is important since discard rates remain high. We analyzed DonorNet^® data of consecutive deceased-donor nonmandatory share primary kidney-only offers to adult candidates at our center and beyond between July 1, 2015 and March 31, 2016 for donor- and system-level risk factors of discard, defined as nontransplantation at our or subsequent transplant centers. Exclusions were hepatitis C virus/hepatitis B virus core antibody status, blood type AB, and donor <1 year based on low candidate waitlist size. Of 456 individual kidney offers, from 296 donors, 73% were discarded. Most were national (93%) offers from Kidney Donor Profile Index 35-85% (n = 233) or >85% (n = 208) donors late in the allocation sequence with prior refusals logged for numerous candidates. On multivariate regression, factors significantly associated with discard were donor cerebrovascular accident (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.32), cancer transmission concern (aOR: 6.5), renal artery luminal compromise (aOR: 3.97), biopsy score ≥3 (aOR: 5.09), 2-hour pump resistive index >0.4 (aOR: 3.27), absence of pump (aOR: 2.58), nonspecific kidney abnormality (aOR: 2.76), increasing offer cold ischemia time category 11-15, 16-20, and >21 hours (aOR: 2.07, 2.33, 2.82), nighttime notification (aOR: 2.19), and neither kidney placed at time of offer (aOR: 2.74). Many traditional determinants of discard lack discriminatory value when granular factors are assessed. System-level factors also influence discard and warrant further study.

Stem/Stromal Cells for Treatment of Kidney Injuries With Focus on Preclinical Models

Within the last years, the use of stem cells (embryonic, induced pluripotent stem cells, or hematopoietic stem cells), Progenitor cells (e.g., endothelial progenitor cells), and most intensely mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) has emerged as a promising cell-based therapy for several diseases including nephropathy. For patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), dialysis or finally organ transplantation are the only therapeutic modalities available. Since ESRD is associated with a high healthcare expenditure, MSC therapy represents an innovative approach. In a variety of preclinical and clinical studies, MSC have shown to exert renoprotective properties, mediated mainly by paracrine effects, immunomodulation, regulation of inflammation, secretion of several trophic factors, and possibly differentiation to renal precursors. However, studies are highly diverse; thus, knowledge is still limited regarding the exact mode of action, source of MSC in comparison to other stem cell types, administration route and dose, tracking of cells and documentation of therapeutic efficacy by new imaging techniques and tissue visualization. The aim of this review is to provide a summary of published studies of stem cell therapy in acute and chronic kidney injury, diabetic nephropathy, polycystic kidney disease, and kidney transplantation. Preclinical studies with allogeneic or xenogeneic cell therapy were first addressed, followed by a summary of clinical trials carried out with autologous or allogeneic hMSC. Studies were analyzed with respect to source of cell type, mechanism of action etc.

The weekend effect: transplantation is not "immune"

The "weekend effect" has been widely studied in various health care settings, but it has received less attention in the field of transplantation. The study by Mohan et al. reveals that this phenomenon exists in discard rates for deceased donor kidneys in the United States. These findings emphasize the importance of reducing unexplained variations in kidney discard rates, especially in light of the ongoing shortage of transplantable organs.

Novel Application of Localized Nanodelivery of Anti-Interleukin-6 Protects Organ Transplant From Ischemia-Reperfusion Injuries

Ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) evokes intragraft inflammatory responses, which markedly augment alloimmune responses against the graft. Understanding the mechanisms underlying these responses is fundamental to develop therapeutic regimens to prevent/ameliorate organ IRI. Here, we demonstrate that IRI results in a marked increase in mitochondrial damage and autophagy in dendritic cells (DCs). While autophagy is a survival mechanism for ischemic DCs, it also augments their production of interleukin (IL)-6. Allograft-derived dendritic cells (ADDCs) lacking autophagy-related gene 5 (Atg5) showed higher death rates posttransplantation. Transplanted ischemic hearts from CD11cCre/Atg5 conditional knockout mice showed marked reduction in intragraft expression of IL-6 compared with controls. To antagonize the effect of IL-6 locally in the heart, we synthesized novel anti-IL-6 nanoparticles with capacity for controlled release of anti-IL-6 over time. Compared with systemic delivery of anti-IL-6, localized delivery of anti-IL-6 significantly reduced chronic rejection with a markedly lower amount administered. Despite improved allograft histology, there were no changes to splenic T cell populations, illustrating the importance of local IL-6 in driving chronic rejection after IRI. These data carry potential clinical significance by identifying an innovative, targeted strategy to manipulate organs before transplantation to diminish inflammation, leading to improved long-term outcomes.

Increasing the Use of Kidneys From Unconventional and High-Risk Deceased Donors

In this paper, we have reviewed the literature and report on kidney donors that are currently used at relatively low rates. Kidneys from donors with acute kidney injury (AKI) seem to have outcomes equivalent to those from donors without AKI, provided one can rule out significant cortical necrosis. Kidneys from donors with preexisting diabetes or hypertension may have marginally lower aggregate survival but still provide patients with a significant benefit over remaining on the wait list. The Kidney Donor Profile Index derives only an aggregate association with survival with a very modest C statistic; therefore, the data indicated that this index should not be the sole reason to discard a kidney, except perhaps in patients with extremely low estimated posttransplant survival scores. It is important to note that the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients models of risk adjustment should allay concerns regarding regulatory issues for observed outcomes falling below expectations. The successful utilization of kidneys from donation after cardiac death over the past decade shows how expanding our thinking can translate into more patients benefiting from transplantation. Given the growing number of patients on the wait list, broadening our approach to kidney acceptance could have an important impact on the population with end-stage renal disease. Many lives could be prolonged by carefully considering use of kidneys that are often discarded.

Epidemiology of Kidney Discard from Expanded Criteria Donors Undergoing Donation after Circulatory Death

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The broader use of combined expanded criteria donor and donation after circulatory death (ECD/DCD) kidneys may help expand the deceased donor pool. The purpose of our study was to evaluate discard rates of kidneys from ECD/DCD donors and factors associated with discard.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

ECD/DCD donors and kidneys were evaluated from January 1, 2000 to March 31, 2011 using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. The kidney donor risk index was calculated for all ECD/DCD kidneys. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine risk factors for discarding both donor kidneys. The Kaplan-Meier product limit method and the log-rank statistic were used to assess the cumulative probability of graft failure for transplants from ECD/DCD donors where the mate kidney was discarded versus both kidneys were used.

RESULTS

There were 896 ECD/DCD donors comprising 1792 kidneys. Both kidneys were discarded in 44.5% of donors, whereas 51.0% of all available kidneys were discarded. The kidney donor risk index scores were higher among donors of discarded versus transplanted kidneys (median, 1.82; interquartile range, 1.60, 2.07 versus median, 1.67; interquartile range, 1.49, 1.87, respectively; P<0.001); however, the distributions showed considerable overlap. The adjusted odds ratios for discard were higher among donors who were older, diabetic, AB blood type, and hepatitis C positive. The cumulative probabilities of total graft failure at 1, 3, and 5 years were 17.3%, 36.5%, and 55.4% versus 13.8%, 24.7%, and 40.5% among kidneys from donors where only one versus both kidneys were transplanted, respectively (log rank P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows a significantly higher discard rate for ECD/DCD kidneys versus prior reports. Some discarded ECD/DCD kidneys may be acceptable for transplantation. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the factors that influence decision making around the use of ECD/DCD kidneys.

Outcomes of adult dual kidney transplants by KDRI in the United States

UNOS guidelines provide inadequate discriminatory criteria for kidneys that should be transplanted as single (SKT) versus dual (DKT). We evaluated the utility of the kidney donor risk index (KDRI) to define kidneys with better outcomes when transplanted as dual. Using SRTR data from 1995 to 2010 of de novo KTX recipients of adult deceased-donor kidneys, we examined outcomes of SKT and DKT stratified by KDRI group ≤1.4 (n = 49 294), 1.41-1.8 (n = 15 674), 1.81-2.2 (n = 6523) and >2.2 (n = 2791). DKT of kidneys with KDRI >2.2 was associated with significantly better overall graft survival [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-0.96] compared to single kidneys with KDRI >2.2. DKT was associated with significantly decreased odds of delayed graft function (top 2 KDRI categories) and significantly decreased odds of 1-year serum creatinine level >2 mg/dL (top 3 KDRI categories). Among SKT and DKT from KDRI >2.2 there were 16.1 and 13.9 graft losses per 100 patient follow-up years, respectively. KDRI >2.2 is a useful discriminatory cut-off for the determination of graft survival benefit with the use of DKT; however, the benefit of increased graft years was less than half of single kidneys from donors in the same KDRI range.

The impact of deceased donor kidney risk significantly varies by recipient characteristics

As of May 2012, over 92 000 patients were awaiting a solitary kidney transplant in the United States and new waitlist registrations have been rising for over a decade. The decreasing availability of donor organs makes it imperative that organ allocation be as efficient and effective as possible. We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult recipients in the United States (n=109 392) using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data. The primary aim was to evaluate the interaction of donor risk with recipient characteristics on posttransplant outcomes. Donor quality (based on kidney donor risk index [KDRI]) had significant interactions by race, primary diagnosis and age. The hazard of KDRI on overall graft loss in non-African Americans was 2.16 (95%CI 2.08-2.25) versus 1.85 (95%CI 1.75-1.95) in African Americans (p<0.0001), 2.16 (95%CI 2.08-2.24) in nondiabetics versus 1.84 (95%CI 1.74-1.94) in diabetics (p<0.0001), and 2.22 (95%CI 2.13-2.32) in recipients<60 years versus 1.83 (95%CI 1.74-1.92) in recipients≥60 (p<0.0001). The relative hazard for diabetics at KDRI=0.5 was 1.49 but at KDRI=2.0 the hazard was significantly attenuated to 1.17; among African Americans the respective risks were 1.50 and 1.17 and among recipients 60 and over, it was between 1.64 and 1.22. These findings are critical considerations for informed decision-making for transplant candidates.

Utilization of kidneys with similar kidney donor risk index values from standard versus expanded criteria donors

With the shortage of standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys, efficient expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidney utilization has become more vital. We investigated the effects of the ECD label on kidney recovery, utilization and outcomes. Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from November 2002 to May 2010, we determined recovery and transplant rates, and modeled discard risk, for kidneys within a range of kidney donor risk index (KDRI) 1.4-2.1 that included both SCD and ECD kidneys. To further compare similar quality kidneys, these kidneys were again divided into three KDRI intervals. Overall, ECD kidneys had higher recovery rates, but lower transplant rates. However, within each KDRI interval, SCD and ECD kidneys were transplanted at similar rates. Overall, there was increased risk for discard for biopsied kidneys. SCD kidneys in the lower two KDRI intervals had the highest risk of discard if biopsied. Pumped kidneys had a lower risk of discard, which was modulated by KDRI for SCD kidneys but not ECD kidneys. Although overall ECD graft survival was worse than SCD, there were no differences within individual KDRI intervals. Thus, ECD designation adversely affects neither utilization nor outcomes beyond that predicted by KDRI.

Availability, utilization and outcomes of deceased diabetic donor kidneys; analysis based on the UNOS registry

The number of kidneys obtained from deceased diabetic donors available for transplantation has increased >eightfold increase in the past 15 years. We assessed allograft outcomes associated with deceased diabetic donors and compared them with that of standard and extended criteria donors (ECD) in the UNOS data registry. We identified 1982 recipients of diabetic standard criteria donors over a 10-year period from 1995 through 2004. Both overall and death-censored survival of organs from diabetic standard criteria donors was significantly better than that of organs obtained from nondiabetic ECD while inferior to that from nondiabetic standard criteria donors. Compared with ECD donors, diabetic donors had lower serum creatinine, less cold ischemia and these kidneys were less likely to be pump-perfused. Recipients of diabetic kidneys were younger and less likely to experience delayed graft function compared with recipient of ECD kidneys. More recently, many diabetic donor kidneys have been given to diabetic recipients with early graft survival being similar to that among nondiabetic recipients. These findings demonstrate the potential to expand and to improve utilization of this resource without compromising outcomes for recipients. Improved, evidence-based evaluation and allocation of deceased diabetic donor kidneys is needed to optimize their use.

The aggressive phenotype: center-level patterns in the utilization of suboptimal kidneys

Despite the fact that suboptimal kidneys have worse outcomes, differences in waiting times and wait-list mortality have led to variations in the use of these kidneys. It is unknown whether aggressive center-level use of one type of suboptimal graft clusters with aggressive use of other types of suboptimal grafts, and what center characteristics are associated with an overall aggressive phenotype. United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data from 2005 to 2009 for adult kidney transplant recipients was aggregated to the center level. An aggressiveness score was assigned to each center based on usage of suboptimal grafts. Deceased-donor transplant volume correlated with aggressiveness in lower volume, but not higher volume centers. Aggressive centers were mostly found in regions 2 and 9. Aggressiveness was associated with wait-list size (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.20-2.34, p = 0.002), organ shortage (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.57-3.37, p < 0.001) and waiting times (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.20-2.57, p = 0.004). No centers in single-center OPOs were classified as aggressive. In cluster analysis, the most aggressive centers were aggressive in all metrics and vice versa; however, centers with intermediate aggressiveness had phenotypic patterns in their usage of suboptimal kidneys. In conclusion, wait-list size, waiting times, geographic region and OPO competition seem to be driving factors in center-level aggressiveness.

Import kidney transplants from nonmandatory share deceased donors: characteristics, distribution and outcomes

Outcomes of locally rejected kidneys transplanted at other centers (import KTX) are unknown. SRTR data from 2000 to 2009 of deceased-donor KTXs excluding 0-mismatch, paybacks, and other mandatory shares were compared by location of KTX at local (n = 48,165), regional (n = 4428) or national (n = 4104) centers using multivariable regression models. Compared to nonmandatory share local transplants, import KTX were associated with significantly higher overall risks of patient death (regional aHR 1.15, p < 0.01; national aHR 1.14, p < 0.01), and graft failure (regional aHR 1.17, p < 0.01; national aHR1.21, p < 0.01). In paired analysis, the risk of delayed graft function (DGF) for import KTX was higher compared to locally transplanted mates (regional aOR 1.53, p < 0.01, national aOR 2.14, p < 0.01); however, despite longer ischemia times, overall graft survival was similar. Mean cold ischemia times (CIT) pre- and post-DonorNet were similar for local and regional transplants, but significantly higher for national transplants (28.9 ± 9.9 vs. 29.9 ± 9.7 h, respectively, p = 0.01). Import KTX is associated with increased risks of graft failure, patient death and DGF. In the era of DonorNet cold ischemia times of kidneys imported to regional centers are not improved compared to pre-DonorNet; and, those of national centers are significantly prolonged.