Technical aspects of unilateral dual kidney transplantation from expanded criteria donors: experience of 100 patients

Successful Unilateral Dual-Kidney Transplant of Discarded Kidneys From Two Expanded Criteria Donors

In recent years, dual-kidney transplant has become an established method to overcome the inferior quality of donor organs and to allow the recovery of discarded human kidneys. However, in some cases, 1 of the 2 donor kidneys is unsuitable for transplant because of severe pathological changes, and the remaining marginal kidney is often discarded regardless of whether it meets criteria for dual-kidney transplant. Here, we report the use of marginal kidneys from 2 different donors, both of whom had missed kidney donation as a result of the serious pathological changes in their contralateral kidney. We combined the 2 donors' marginal kidneys for dual-kidney transplant, which were implanted into the right iliac fossa of the recipient after cold ischemia times of 13 hours 40 minutes and 30 hours 30 minutes, respectively. The recipient had fully recovered and showed favorable renal function without complications at discharge and at the 1.5-year follow-up. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report of successful unilateral dual-kidney transplant of discarded kidneys from 2 expanded criteria donors.

Renal transplantation in gigantism: A case report

BACKGROUND

Gigantism, characterized by excessive growth and height is due to increased secretion of growth hormone, most commonly from a pituitary adenoma. In addition to the surgical and anesthetic complexity, the extreme stature of these patients presents a unique challenge for kidney transplantation in deciding whether to proceed with a single or dual kidney transplantation. The lack of relevant literature further adds to the dilemma.

CASE SUMMARY

A 45-year-old patient with untreated gigantism and end stage renal failure on renal replacement therapy was waitlisted for a deceased donor dual kidney transplantation due to the extreme physical stature (Height-247 cm and weight-200 kg). He was offered 2 kidneys from a 1-0-1 HLA mismatched 24-year-old DCD donor (Height-179 cm and weight-75 kg), and was planned for a bilateral retroperitoneal implantation into the recipient external iliac vessels. The immunosuppression consisted of alemtuzumab induction (50 mg) and steroid-free maintenance with tacrolimus. The donor’s right kidney was uneventfully implanted extra-peritoneally into the right external iliac vessels. On contralateral exposure, the left common and external iliac arteries were ectatic and frail. A complex vascular reconstruction was not preferred in order to preserve the arterial supply to the left lower limb, to minimise the cold ischemia time and prevent additional warm ischemic insult to the second kidney. Hence, it was decided not to proceed with dual transplantation. Amidst concerns of nephron mass insufficiency, the graft function was remarkable with a serum creatinine of 120 µmol/L within a month from transplantation and 94 µmol/L at 1-year post transplantation, and without proteinuria.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first case report on kidney transplantation in gigantism. Although it is believed that dual kidney transplantation is ideal, a single kidney transplantation from an appropriately selected donor can provide sufficient functioning nephron mass in patients with gigantism.

Ipsilateral dual kidney transplantation in an elderly patient with severe atherosclerosis: a case report

Dual Kidney Transplantation (DKT) has been developed to improve outcomes from transplantation based on extended criteria of donors (ECD) and demonstrated excellent short-term outcomes. We performed DKT at Samsung Medical Center in March 2021. The donor was a 74-year-old male with no history of known underlying diseases but died from traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. The recipient was a 72-year-old male who had been undergoing nephrological observation for 4 years prior to the kidney transplant. The patient had been on hemodialysis since July 2017 and had been suffering from type 2 diabetes since 2003. On non-contrast computed tomography, diffuse calcific atherosclerosis was observed in the abdominal aorta and left iliac artery. As a result, ipsilateral DKT was performed. Because of this diffuse calcific atherosclerosis, we planned ipsilateral DKT on the right side. Postoperative healing was uneventful without complications. In conclusion, DKT is an option for improving survival in the ECD pool, and ipsilateral DKT can be helpful option for preventing organ discard in ECDs.

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.

Abdominal wall complications after kidney transplantation: A clinical review

Introduction

Abdominal wall complications are common after kidney transplantation, and although they have a minor impact on patient and graft survival, they increase the patient's morbidity and may have an impact on quality of life. Abdominal wall complications have an overall incidence of 7.7–21%.

Methods

This review will explore the natural history of abdominal wall complications in the kidney transplant setting, with a special focus on wound dehiscence and incisional herni, with a particular emphasis on risk factors, clinical characteristics, and treatment.

Results

Many patient‐related risk factors have been suggested, including older age, obesity, and smoking, but kidney transplant recipients have an additional risk related to the use of immunosuppression. Wound dehiscence usually does not require surgical intervention. However, for deep dehiscence involving the fascial layer with concomitant infection, surgical treatment and/or negative pressure wound therapy may be required.

Conclusions

Incisional hernia (IH) may affect 1.1–18% of kidney transplant recipients. Most patients require surgical treatment, either open or laparoscopic. Mesh repair is considered the gold standard for the treatment of IH, since it is associated with a low rate of postoperative complications and an acceptable rate of recurrence. Biologic mesh could be an attractive alternative in patients with graft exposition or infection.

Current status of combined liver-kidney transplantation

Combined liver-kidney transplantation is a life-saving procedure for patients with end-stage liver disease and underlying chronic kidney disease, or prolonged acute kidney injury. Due to physiologic changes secondary to portal hypertension in patients with end-stage liver disease, kidney injury is common, and combined liver-kidney transplantation accounts for 10% of all the liver transplants performed in the United States. Recently implemented policy in the United States standardizes the medical criteria for eligibility, and introduces a 'safety net' for those who are transplanted with a liver graft alone, in order to be able to receive a kidney graft later. Increasing number of combined liver-kidney transplants provides a large cohort of patients to be studied in detail for identification of factors (both donor and recipient-related) associated with better outcomes. Data regarding the safety and efficacy of delaying the kidney transplant part of the combined liver-kidney transplantation, and the immunologic benefits of the multi-organ transplantations including the liver are emerging. Here, we review the most recent analyses, and provide our opinion regarding the best practices in combined liver-kidney transplantation based on the evidence.

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.

Expanded criteria donors in deceased donor kidney transplantation - An Asian perspective

There is an increasing gulf between demand and supply for kidneys in end-stage renal failure patients worldwide, especially Asia. Renal transplantation is often the treatment of choice for long-suffering patients who have to undergo dialysis on a regular basis. The utilization of expanded criteria donors (ECDs) to address the donor pool shortage has been proven to be a legitimate solution. Metzger first described the classification of standard criteria donor and ECD in 2002. Since then, the criterion has undergone various modifications, with the key aims of optimizing organ procurement rate while minimizing discard and rejection rates. We review the methods to improve selection, characterization of risks, and surgical techniques. Although the ECD kidneys have a higher risk of impaired donor and recipient outcome than the "standard criteria" transplants, it may be justified by the improved overall survival of these patients compared to those who remained on dialysis. It is, therefore, crucial that we perform meticulous selection, along with state of the art surgical techniques to maximize the use of this scarce resource. In this article, we review the pre-procurement and post-procurement processes implemented to preserve outcomes.

Dual kidney transplantation offers a safe and effective way to use kidneys from deceased donors older than 70 years

Purpose

Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) offers a way to extend the use of kidneys from expanded criteria donors (ECDs). Here, we compared the outcomes of DKT with those of single kidney transplantation from standard criteria donors (SCDs) and ECDs.

Methods

In 2014, we began performing DKT using both kidneys from deceased donors greater than 70 years of age with one of two risk factors: serum creatinine (sCr) level over 3.0 mg/dl or eGFR under 30 ml/min. By 2017, we had performed 15 DKTs. We compared the outcomes of the 15 DKT recipients with those of 124 patients who received a kidney from an SCD and 80 patients who received a kidney from an ECD.

Results

Compared with ECDs and SCDs, DKT donors were older, had a higher diabetes burden, and a higher sCr level (p < 0.01, < 0.01, and 0.03, respectively). DKT recipients were also older and had a higher diabetes burden than recipients of kidneys from ECDs and SCDs (p < 0.01, both). DKT recipients had a lower nadir sCr and shorter duration to nadir sCr than single ECD KT recipients (p < 0.01and 0.04, respectively).

Conclusions

The survival rates of DKT grafts were compatible with those of single KT grafts. Therefore, DKT may be considered a suitable an option to expand the donor pool.

Histological and clinical evaluation of marginal donor kidneys before transplantation: Which is best?

Organ shortage represents one of the major limitations to the development of kidney transplantation. To increase the donor pool and to answer the ever increasing kidney request, physicians are recurring to marginal kidneys as kidneys from older donors, from hypertensive or diabetic donors and from non-heart beating donors. These kidneys are known to have frequently a worse outcome in the recipients. To date major problem is to evaluate such kidneys in order to use or to discard them before transplantation. The use of such kidneys create other relevant question as whether to use them as single or dual transplant and to allocate them fairly according transplant programs. The pre-transplant histological evaluation, the clinical evaluation of the donor or both the criteria joined has been used and according the time each criterion prevailed over the others. Aim of this review has been to examine the advantages and the drawbacks of any criterion and how they have changed with time. To date any criterion has several limitations and several authors have argued for the development of new guidelines in the field of the kidney evaluation for transplantation. Several authors argue that the use of omic technologies should improve the organ evaluation and studies are ongoing to evaluate these technologies either in the donor urine or in the biopsies taken before transplantation.

[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.

En-Bloc Pediatric Kidney Transplant to Adult Recipient with Two Different Ureterovesical Anastomosis Techniques

BACKGROUND En-bloc kidney transplantation from a small pediatric donor to an adult recipient has become more common owing to the shortage of deceased donor kidneys. In pediatric en-bloc kidney transplantation, ureterovesical anastomosis can be done either via ureteroneocystostomy or via partial bladder wall transplantation. We report 2 cases of en bloc kidney transplantation from a pediatric deceased donor to an adult recipient using different ureterovesical anastomosis methods and the long-term outcomes. CASE REPORT Two pediatric en-bloc kidney transplantations to adult recipients were performed at our center. One case used a graft bladder segment from a 5-month-old male donor that was transplanted to a 45-year-old adult male recipient using the bladder patch technique and one case used 4-year-old male donor kidneys transplanted to a 54-year-old adult male recipient via ureteroneocystostomy with ureteroplasty for ureterovesical anastomosis. Both recipients have shown normal renal function and normal voiding, without urinary complications, such as vesico-ureteral reflux and ureter stricture, during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS These 2 case reports suggest that using small pediatric en-bloc kidneys would be a viable option to overcome the increasing shortage of donor kidneys for transplantation regardless of the method of ureterovesical anastomosis.

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.

R Open Source Programming Code for Calculation of the Kidney Donor Profile Index and Kidney Donor Risk Index

BACKGROUND

The Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) and Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) were developed by the United States Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). They may influence the clinical decision whether to accept or discard a donor kidney, but still there are debates about KDPI/KDRI applicability and its consequences. To further evaluate these indexes in different populations, more data should be analyzed, and a universally applicable program code would facilitate it. Currently, KDPI/KDRI calculation could be readily done only on the OPTN website that is convenient for a single donor, but not suitable for processing data sets with many records.

SUMMARY

A universally applicable program algorithm in widely used R language for calculating KDPI and KDRI was developed according to donor factors and coefficients described in the OPTN guide.

KEY MESSAGES

The open R code permits to calculate KDPI/KDRI either for a single donor or for an unlimited number of records in large data sets. The presented software code would save substantial time to research groups all over the world and help to clarify the KDPI/KDRI role in global settings.

Dual Kidney Transplantation: A Single-Center Experience in Thailand

BACKGROUND

Dual kidney transplants (DKTs) from expanded criteria donors (ECDs) have been performed in our hospital since 2014. We needed to review our clinical outcome and update criteria to selected ECDs for DKTs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2014 and December 2016, 4 DKTs and 269 deceased donor kidney transplants were performed. The outcome of DKTs was reviewed. The literature was reviewed for surgical technique and indication for DKT.

RESULTS

Four DKTs were performed between 2014 and 2016. One-year graft survival rate was 100%. One patient developed delayed graft function. No morbidity or mortality occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

DKTs in our center were safe and had good outcome with optimized selected criteria. DKT can improve the rate of kidney transplant in a developing country.

Renal transplants from older deceased donors: Is pre-implantation biopsy useful? A monocentric observational clinical study

AIM

To compare survival of kidney transplants from deceased extended criteria donors (ECD) according to: (1) donor graft histological score; and (2) allocation of high score grafts either to single (SKT) or dual (DKT) transplant.

METHODS

Renal biopsy was performed as part of either a newly adopted DKT protocol, or of surveillance protocol in the past. A total 185 ECD graft recipients were categorized according to pre-implantation graft biopsy into 3 groups: SKT with graft score 1 to 4 [SKT_(1-4), n = 102]; SKT with donor graft score 5 to 8 [SKT_{(> 4)}, n = 30]; DKT with donor graft score 5 to 7 (DKT, n = 53). Graft and patient survival were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves and compared by log-rank test. Mean number of functioning graft years by transplant reference, and mean number of dialysis-free life years by donor reference in recipients were also calculated at 1, 3 and 6 years from transplantation.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in graft and patient survival between SKT_(1-4) and SKT_{(> 4)}, and between SKT_{(> 4)} and DKT. Recipient renal function (plasma creatinine and creatinine clearance) at 1 years did not differ in SKT_(1-4) and SKT_{(> 4)} (plasma creatinine 1.71 ± 0.69 and 1.69 ± 0.63 mg/dL; creatinine clearance 49.6 + 18.5 and 52.6 + 18.8 mL/min, respectively); DKT showed statistically lower plasma creatinine (1.46 ± 0.57, P < 0.04) but not different creatinine clearance (55.4 + 20.4). Due to older donor age in the DKT group, comparisons were repeated in transplants from donors older than 70 years, and equal graft and patient survival in SKT and DKT were confirmed. Total mean number of functioning graft years by transplant reference at 1, 3 and 6 post-transplant years were equal between the groups, but mean number of dialysis-free life years by donor reference were significantly higher in SKT (mean difference compared to DKT at 6 years: 292 [IQR 260-318] years/100 donors in SKT_(1-4) and 292.5 [(IQR 247.8-331.6) in SKT_{(> 4)}].

CONCLUSION

In transplants from clinically suitable ECD donors, graft survival was similar irrespective of pre-implantation biopsy score and of allocation to SKT or DKT. These results suggest use of caution in the use of histology as the only decision criteria for ECD organ allocation.

Dual en bloc technique for adult renal transplantation

INTRODUCTION

We describe and provide follow-up for a novel simplified technique permitting dual en bloc (DEB) transplantation of adult organs using single in situ arterial and venous anastomoses.

METHODS

Twenty-two adult DEB transplants were performed at our center between 2001 and 2012, utilizing 44 kidneys en bloc. Results were compared with 20 solitary transplants from expanded criteria donors (ECD) associated with lower terminal serum creatinines and Remuzzi biopsy scores vs DEB group. Adult DEB implants had donor inferior vena cava connected to recipient external iliac vein and "Y" arterial interposition graft anastomosed to the recipient iliac artery. Ureters were conjoined prior to implantation as a single patch into the recipient bladder.

RESULTS

Mean operative time was 206±57 minutes in DEB vs 180±30 minutes in single transplants (P<.05). Delayed graft function rate was 23% vs 25% in both groups. At 12-month follow-up, mean serum creatinine was 152±66 μmol/L vs in 154±52 μmol/L DEB and single kidney transplant recipients, respectively (P=NS). Three-year overall and graft specific survival were 86% and 84% in the DEB group, respectively (P=NS). Complication rates were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This DEB renal transplantation technique is safe and effective in adults. By employing techniques used to conjoin organ vasculature ex vivo, the number of in situ anastomoses is reduced, thereby minimizing operative ischemic time and potential for complications associated with extensive vascular dissection.

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 transplant techniques: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) was developed to improve outcomes from transplantation of extended criteria donors (ECD). This study examined which surgical techniques have been reported for DKT and whether any technique had superior patient and graft survival.

METHOD

Electronic databases were searched for published studies mapping to MESH terms: "kidney or renal" AND "transplan*" AND "dual or double." Single case reports, studies of patients less than 18 years old, studies which did not describe the surgical technique, and studies that did not report patient or graft survival were excluded.

RESULTS

Fifteen reports of 434 DKT recipients were identified. Three techniques were described: bilateral placement; unilateral placement with separate anastomoses; and unilateral placement with patch anastomoses. Patient survival across all three techniques was over 95% at 1 year, and graft survival was also similar at over 90%. Rates of delayed graft function were between 20% and 30% across all techniques.

CONCLUSION

The three techniques have equivalent delayed graft function as well as patient and graft survival rates. This is an encouraging result as it means that the surgeon can choose to use the technique which is most appropriate for their own skills and for the patient.

Strategies for an Expanded Use of Kidneys From Elderly Donors

The old-for-old allocation policy used for kidney transplantation (KT) has confirmed the survival benefit compared to remaining listed on dialysis. Shortage of standard donors has stimulated the development of strategies aimed to expand acceptance criteria, particularly of kidneys from elderly donors. We have systematically reviewed the literature on those different strategies. In addition to the review of outcomes of expanded criteria donor or advanced age kidneys, we assessed the value of the Kidney Donor Profile Index policy, preimplantation biopsy, dual KT, machine perfusion and special immunosuppressive protocols. Survival and functional outcomes achieved with expanded criteria donor, high Kidney Donor Profile Index or advanced age kidneys are poorer than those with standard ones. Outcomes using advanced age brain-dead or cardiac-dead donor kidneys are similar. Preimplantation biopsies and related scores have been useful to predict function, but their applicability to transplant or refuse a kidney graft has probably been overestimated. Machine perfusion techniques have decreased delayed graft function and could improve graft survival. Investing 2 kidneys in 1 recipient does not make sense when a single KT would be enough, particularly in elderly recipients. Tailored immunosuppression when transplanting an old kidney may be useful, but no formal trials are available.Old donors constitute an enormous source of useful kidneys, but their retrieval in many countries is infrequent. The assumption of limited but precious functional expectancy for an old kidney and substantial reduction of discard rates should be generalized to mitigate these limitations.

Dual Kidney Transplantation Offers a Valuable Source for Kidneys With Good Functional Outcome

BACKGROUND

Reasons for declining kidney donors are older age, with or without, hypertension, kidney dysfunction, and diabetes. Implantation of both kidneys into a single recipient from such donors may improve their acceptability and outcome.

METHODS

Patients who underwent dual kidney transplantation (DKT) between June 2010 and May 2014 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Single kidney transplantations (SKT) with matching donor criteria were also identified. Donors considered for DKT were the following: DBDs >70 years of age with diabetes and/or hypertension; DCDs >65 years of age with diabetes and/or hypertension; and DCDs >70 years of age.

RESULTS

Over a 4-year period, 34 patients underwent adult DKT, and 51, with matching donor criteria, underwent SKT. The median estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 12 and 36 months of DKT was 49 (range, 5-79) and 42 (range, 15-85) mL/min compared with SKT of 35 (range, 10-65) and 32 (range, 6-65), respectively. The 1-year graft survival for DKT and SKT was 88% and 96% (P = .52), and patient survival was 94% and 98%, respectively (P = .12). Median hospital stay, intensive care unit admission, and wound complications were more frequent in the DKT group.

CONCLUSIONS

Graft function following DKT is significantly better compared with matched criteria SKT; graft and patient survival are similar. There is an increased rate of complications following DKT, with longer hospital stay and ICU admission.

Intermediate-Term Outcomes of Dual Adult versus Single-Kidney Transplantation: Evolution of a Surgical Technique

Background. Acceptance of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) has proven difficult, due to surgical complexity and concerns regarding long-term outcomes. We herein present a standard technique for ipsilateral DKT and compare outcomes to single-kidney transplant (SKT) recipients. Methods. A retrospective single-center comparison of DKT and SKT performed between February 2007 and July 2013. Results. Of 516 deceased donor kidney transplants, 29 were DKT and 487 were SKT. Mean follow-up was 43 ± 67 months. DKT recipients were older and more likely than SKT recipients to receive an extended criteria graft (p < 0.001). For DKT versus SKT, the rates of delayed graft function (10.3 versus 9.2%) and acute rejection (20.7 versus 22.4%) were equivalent (p = ns). A higher than expected urologic complication rate in the DKT cohort (14 versus 2%, p < 0.01) was reduced through modification of the ureteral anastomosis. Graft survival was equivalent between DKT and SKT groups (p = ns) with actuarial 3-year DKT patient and graft survivals of 100% and 93%. At 3 years, the groups had similar renal function (p = ns). Conclusions. By utilizing extended criteria donor organs as DKT, the donor pool was enlarged while providing excellent patient and graft survival. The DKT urologic complication rate was reduced by modification of the ureteral anastomosis.

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.

Successful transplantation of kidneys from elderly circulatory death donors by using microscopic and macroscopic characteristics to guide single or dual implantation

Most kidneys from potential elderly circulatory death (DCD) donors are declined. We report single center outcomes for kidneys transplanted from DCD donors over 70 years old, using preimplantation biopsy Remuzzi grading to inform implantation as single or dual transplants. Between 2009 and 2012, 43 single transplants and 12 dual transplants were performed from elderly DCD donors. Remuzzi scores were higher for dual than single implants (4.4 vs. 3.4, p < 0.001), indicating more severe baseline injury. Donor and recipient characteristics for both groups were otherwise similar. Early graft loss from renal vein thrombosis occurred in two singly implanted kidneys, and in one dual-implanted kidney; its pair continued to function satisfactorily. Death-censored graft survival at 3 years was comparable for the two groups (single 94%; dual 100%), as was 1 year eGFR. Delayed graft function occurred less frequently in the dual-implant group (25% vs. 65%, p = 0.010). Using this approach, we performed proportionally more kidney transplants from elderly DCD donors (23.4%) than the rest of the United Kingdom (7.3%, p < 0.001), with graft outcomes comparable to those achieved nationally for all deceased-donor kidney transplants. Preimplantation biopsy analysis is associated with acceptable transplant outcomes for elderly DCD kidneys and may increase transplant numbers from an underutilized donor pool.

Lymphatic disorders after renal transplantation: new insights for an old complication

In renal transplanted patients, lymphoceles and lymphorrhea are well-known lymphatic complications. Surgical damage of the lymphatics of the graft during the procurement and of the lymphatic around the iliac vessels of the recipients has been associated with development of lymphatic complications. However, lymphatic complications may be related to medical factors such as diabetes, obesity, blood coagulation abnormalities, anticoagulation prophylaxis, high dose of diuretics, delay in graft function and immunosuppressive drugs. Consistently, immunosuppression regimens based on the use of mTOR inhibitors, especially in association with steroids and immediately after transplantation, has been associated with a high risk to develop lymphocele or lymphorrhea. In addition, several studies have demonstrated the association between rejection episodes and lymphatic complications. However, before the discovery of reliable markers of lymphatic vessels, the pathogenic mechanisms underlining the development of lymphatic complications during rejection and the influence of mTOR inhibitors remained not fully understood. The recent findings on the lymphatic systems of either native or transplanted kidneys together with the advances achieved on lymphangiogenesis shared some lights on the pathogenesis of lymphatic complications after renal transplantation. In this review, we describe the surgical and medical causes of lymphatic complications focusing on the rejection and immunosuppressive drugs as causes of lymphatic complications.

Historical perspectives in kidney transplantation: an updated review

The present state of success in kidney transplantation, including its benefits to patients with end-stage renal failure, was achieved through relentless research, both in experimental animal models and human volunteers. Kidney transplantation has evolved during the past century thanks to various milestones in surgical techniques, immunology, immunosuppressive drugs, expansion of donor sources, organ preservation, transplant against immunological barriers (ABO blood group-incompatible and positive crossmatch transplants), and research on induction of tolerance, xenotransplants, and stem cell technology. Despite significant improvements in graft and patient survival, several issues still must be addressed to reduce the growing number of patients with kidney failure waiting to receive organs. This article provides an up-to-date review of the milestones in the history of kidney transplantation and highlights strategies to resolve current problems faced by patients and the transplant community.

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.

A single-center experience with 200 dual kidney transplantations

This study reports on a large series of 200 dual kidney transplantations (DKTs) from expanded criteria donors (ECDs) and proposes specific ways to optimize outcomes. Data concerning 200 DKTs performed in the last 14 yr were retrospectively analyzed. Kidneys from high-risk ECD were allocated for use in DKTs on an old-for-old basis after histological assessment. Different surgical techniques and immunosuppressant regimens were used over time, and the outcomes are discussed. Donors and recipients were a median 73 (70-77) and a 62 (58-67) yr old, respectively. Delayed graft function occurred in 31.5% of cases, and acute rejection in 13.5%. Patient and graft survival at five yr were 90.4% and 85.8%, respectively. Unilateral kidney placement was preferred for 75% of patients, and was associated with a low rate of surgical complications. Our current standard therapy comprising low-dose calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) associated with mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTOR) and steroids appears to offer the best risk/benefit profile for elderly patients undergoing DKT. In our experience, outcomes after DKT can be improved by: (i) kidney clinical-histological assessment; (ii) unilateral kidney placement; (iii) minimal use of CNI associated with mTOR.

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.

Dual kidney transplant: a single-center experience and review of the literature

OBJECTIVES

Adult dual kidney transplant is a strategy to overcome the imbalance between limited nephron mass supplied from an older donor and a recipient with a metabolic request.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In our report, we review the literature and present our single-center experience. From June 2007 until July 2012, nine hundred twenty-eight single and seventeen dual kidney transplants from deceased donors were performed.

RESULTS

The average donor was 71.5 ± 3.6 years of age with an average serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, and an average number of sclerotic glomeruli, 106.1 ± 44.2 μmol/L, 0.97 ± 0.37 mL/s, and 22.4 ± 14.2. Immediate graft function and acute rejection episodes were observed in 75% and 6% of patients. The overall patient survival rates at 1 and 2 years after transplant were 93%. The overall graft survival rates at 1 and 2 years were 88%.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous studies and our single-center experience suggest that the dual transplant procedure may help improve results of kidney transplants from expanded criteria donors and extend the donor pool by using kidneys that would be discarded otherwise.

Improved access to histopathology using a digital system could increase the organ donor pool and improve allocation

Improvements in digital slide scanners have reached a stage that digital whole slide images (WSIs) can be used for diagnostic purposes. A digital system for histopathology, analogous to the systems used in radiology, would allow the establishment of networks of subspecialist histopathologists to provide a regional, national or even international rota to support out of hours histopathology for emergency frozen sections, urgent paraffin sections and to generally improve efficiencies with the provision of histopathology services. Such a system would promote appropriate organ utilization by allowing rapid characterization of unexpected lesions in the donor to determine whether donation should occur and further characterization of the organ, such as the degree of fibrosis in the kidney or steatosis in the liver, to determine whether the organ should be used. If introduced across Europe, this would promote safe and effective exchange of organs and support a cost efficient use of pathologist expertise. This review article outlines current issues with the provision of an urgent out of hours histopathology service and focuses on how such a service has the potential to increase organ donors, improve allocation, sharing and the use of available donor organs.

[Ipsilateral dual kidney transplantation: a monocentric experience about 15 cases and literature review]

OBJECTIVE

Our study aimed to support the viability of the concept of Ipsilateral Dual Kidney Transplantation (DKT) by presenting our initial experience and proposing a review of the literature in this subject.

METHODS

Fifteen ipsilateral DKT were performed at Nice University Hospital between August 2010 and March 2012. We have described our skin incision preferences, the vascular anastomoses, and the uretero-vesical reimplantation. We have analyzed the operative duration, the cold ischemia time (CIT) of both transplants, the blood transfusion volume, the intraoperative and postoperative complications, the time to diuresis recovery, the hospital stay, and the kinetics of the creatinine clearance until the third postoperative month. We have compared our results with those of the literature.

RESULTS

The average CIT of the first transplant (T1) was 17.5 ± 3.3 hours, and that of the second (T2) was 18.4 ± 3.3 hours. The mean operating time was 234 ± 67 minutes. Patients received an average of 2 units of blood during surgery [0-4] and 1.8 units in the postoperative period [0-15]. The complications rate was 26.7% and included an intraoperative T2 artery thrombosis and 3 postoperative complications consistent with a hematoma, a T2 ureteric necrosis and a T2 venous thrombosis. Two transplants were lost (6.7%) and one death (6.7%) was reported on day 40. The average length of hospital stay was 20.9 ± 7.8 days. The mean creatinine clearance values were 12.6 mL/min at D2, 35.6 mL/min at D7, 44.9 mL/min on discharge, and 48.2 mL/min at D90.

CONCLUSION

Our results supported the viability of the dual kidney transplantation concept. Furthermore the ipsilateral approach shortened the procedure and limited the surgical trauma by preserving the contralateral iliac fossa, without compromising renal function recovery or increasing morbidity.

Kidneys at higher risk of discard: expanding the role of dual kidney transplantation

Half of the recovered expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys are discarded in the United States. A new kidney allocation system offers kidneys at higher risk of discard, Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI)>85%, to a wider geographic area to promote broader sharing and expedite utilization. Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) based on the KDPI is a potential option to streamline allocation of kidneys which otherwise would have been discarded. To assess the clinical utility of the KDPI in kidneys at higher risk of discard, we analyzed the OPTN/UNOS Registry that included the deceased donor kidneys recovered between 2002 and 2012. The primary outcomes were allograft survival, patient survival and discard rate based on different KDPI categories (<80%, 80-90% and >90%). Kidneys with KDPI>90% were associated with increased odds of discard (OR=1.99, 95% CI 1.74-2.29) compared to ones with KDPI<80%. DKTs of KDPI>90% were associated with lower overall allograft failure (HR=0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.89) and better patient survival (HR=0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98) compared to single ECD kidneys with KDPI>90%. Kidneys at higher risk of discard may be offered in the up-front allocation system as a DKT. Further modeling and simulation studies are required to determine a reasonable KDPI cutoff percentile.

Renal transplantation and polycystic: surgical considerations

BACKGROUND

The indication and timing of nephrectomy in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) remain controversial, especially in patients who are candidates to renal transplantation (RT). The main surgical options such as unilateral vs. bilateral nephrectomy, nephrectomy before vs. after RT, or simultaneous nephrectomy and transplantation, are herein discussed.

OBJECTIVE

Evidence acquisition of the best surgical management available for ADPKD in the context of kidney transplantation.

ACQUISITION OF EVIDENCE

Systematic literature review in PubMed from 1978 to 2013 was conducted. Articles selected included:randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. Furthermore, well designed ADPKD reviews were considered for this study.

SYNTHESIS OF EVIDENCE

Laparoscopic nephrectomy in ADPKD is a safe procedure with an acceptable complication rate. Unilateral nephrectomy has advantages over the bilateral one regarding the perioperative complication rate. Although the timing of nephrectomy is controversial, it seems that simultaneous nephrectomy and renal transplantation does not increase surgical morbidity neither affect graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous nephrectomy and RT appears to be an acceptable alternative to conventional two-stage procedure without any increased morbidity, in the context of ADPKD. Furthermore, laparoscopic nephrectomy performed in experienced centres is a safe alternative to conventional approach.