Outcomes after lung transplantation from selected donors older than 70 years in a single centre: time to close the debate?

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of lung transplantations using grafts from donors aged over 70 years against those performed using younger donors.

METHODS

This retrospective single-centre analysis includes lung transplants conducted at our institution from January 2014 to June 2022. Lung recipients were classified into 2 groups based on donor age (group A <70 years; group B ≥70 years). Variables regarding demographics, peri and postoperative outcomes and survival were included. The statistical analysis approach included univariable analysis, propensity score matching to address imbalances in donor variables (smoking status), recipient characteristics (sex, age, diagnosis and lung allocation score) and calendar period and survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 353 lung transplants were performed in this period, 47 (13.3%) using grafts from donors aged over 70 years. Donors in group B were more frequently women (70.2% vs 51.6%, P = 0.017), with less smoking history (22% vs 43%, P = 0.002) and longer mechanical ventilation time (3 vs 2 days, P = 0.025). Recipients in group B had a higher lung allocation score (37.5 vs 35, P = 0.035). Postoperative variables were comparable between both groups, except for pulmonary function tests. Group B demonstrated lower forced expiratory volume 1 s levels (2070 vs 2580 ml, P = 0.001). The propensity score matching showed a lower chance of chronic lung allograft dysfunction by 12% for group B. One-, three- and five-year survival was equal between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of selected expanded-criteria donors aged over 70 years did not result in increased postoperative morbidity, early mortality or survival in this study.

Long-Term Outcomes of Kidney Transplants from Older/Marginal Donors: A Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

To safely expand the donor pool, we introduced a strategy of biopsy-guided selection and allocation to single or dual transplantation of kidneys from donors >60 years old or with hypertension, diabetes, and/or proteinuria (older/marginal donors). Here, we evaluated the long-term performance of this approach in everyday clinical practice.

METHODS

In this single-center cohort study, we compared outcomes of 98 patients who received one or two biopsy-evaluated grafts from older/marginal donors ("recipients") and 198 patients who received nonhistologically assessed single graft from ideal donors ("reference-recipients") from October 2004 to December 2015 at the Bergamo Transplant Center (Italy).

RESULTS

Older/marginal donors and their recipients were 27.9 and 19.3 years older than ideal donors and their reference-recipients, respectively. KDPI/KDRI and donor serum creatinine were higher and cold ischemia time longer in the recipient group. During a median follow-up of 51.9 (interquartile range 23.1-88.6) months, 11.2% of recipients died, 7.1% lost their graft, and 16.3% had biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) versus 3.5, 7.6, and 17.7%, respectively, of reference-recipients. Overall death-censored graft failure (rate ratio 0.78 [95% CI 0.33-2.08]), 5-year death-censored graft survival (94.3% [87.8-100.0] vs. 94.2% [90.5-98.0]), BPAR incidence (rate ratio 0.87 [0.49-1.62]), and yearly measured glomerular filtration rate decline (1.18 ± 3.27 vs. 0.68 ± 2.42 mL/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.37) were similar between recipients and reference-recipients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Biopsy-guided selection and allocation of kidneys from older/marginal donors can safely increase transplant activity in clinical practice without affecting long-term outcomes. This may help manage the growing gap between organ demand and supply without affecting long-term recipient and graft outcomes.

Feasibility of using marginal liver grafts in living donor liver transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) is one of the most effective treatments for end-stage liver disease caused by related risk factors when liver resection is contraindicated. Additionally, despite the decrease in the prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) over the past two decades, the absolute number of HBsAg-positive people has increased, leading to an increase in HBV-related liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Consequently, a large demand exists for LT. While the wait time for patients on the donor list is, to some degree, shorter due to the development of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), there is still a shortage of liver grafts. Furthermore, recipients often suffer from emergent conditions, such as liver dysfunction or even hepatic encephalopathy, which can lead to a limited choice in grafts. To expand the pool of available liver grafts, one option is the use of organs that were previously considered “unusable” by many, which are often labeled “marginal” organs. Many previous studies have reported on the possibilities of using marginal grafts in orthotopic LT; however, there is still a lack of discussion on this topic, especially regarding the feasibility of using marginal grafts in LDLT. Therefore, the present review aimed to summarize the feasibility of using marginal liver grafts for LDLT and discuss the possibility of expanding the application of these grafts.

Results of liver transplantation with donors older than 80 years: a case control study

AIM

The inclusion of elderly donors can increase the pool of organs available for transplant.

BACKGROUND

To compare clinical outcomes and survival rates in patients who received livers from donors aged ≥ 80 years vs. younger donors.

METHODS

We considered all liver transplantations performed in our unit between January 2006 and January 2015. Twelve patients received liver from a cadaveric donor aged ≥ 80 years (study group) and their outcomes were compared with those of patients who received liver from a younger donor (control group). This study was carried out to analyze the characteristics of donors and recipients, as well as the clinical course and survival of recipients.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences were observed in donors' age (55.6 ± 14.4 vs. 82.7 ± 2.7 years, p < 0.001), donors' ICU stay (p = 0.008), donors' ALT levels (p = 0.009) and donors' AST levels (p = 0.01). Statistically significant differences were found in ischemia time (p < 0.05). In total, 8.3% of the recipients of liver from a donor aged < 80 required retransplantation vs. 25% of recipients of donor's ≥ 80 years. Patient survival at one, three and five years was 89%, 78.6% and 74.5%, respectively vs. 83.4%, 79.4% and 59.6% for the study group.

CONCLUSION

Livers from older donors can be safely used for transplantation with acceptable patient survival rates. However, graft survival rates are lower for recipients of livers from older donors as compared to younger donors, and survival only increased with retransplantation.