Expanded Criteria Donor Group Research Articles

Kidney Transplantation Using Expanded Criteria Donors in Korea

BackgroundUse of expanded criteria donor (ECD) grafts seeks to solve the organ shortage. We investigated the current status of donor selection and transplantation outcomes. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 791 kidney transplantations performed between 1997 and 2009. An expanded criteria deceased donor (ECDD) was defined as an individual who fulfilled the United Network for Organ Sharing criteria or, the Nyberg criteria. An expanded criteria living donor (ECLD) was determined by fulfillment of 1 or more of 5 criteria. ResultsDeceased and living donor kidney transplantations were performed in 228 (28.8%) and 563 (71.2%) cases, respectively. Forty-three cases (18.9%) belonged to the ECDDs. The ECDD group showed a lower posttransplantation 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) than that of the standard criteria deceased donor (SCDD) group (70.7 ± 19.2 vs 48.6 ± 11.5; P < .001). The ECDDs were allocated to older recipients or recipients with more HLA mismatches than SCDDs. The number of ECLD cases was 173 (30.7%). The proportions of each medical abnormality of living donors were as follows: age older than 60 years (0.5%), hypertension (2.5%), obesity (2.1%), low eGFR (25.9%), proteinuria (0%), and microscopic hematuria (1.4%). The ECLD group showed a lower posttransplantation 1-year eGFR than that of the standard criteria living donor (SCLD) group (66.9 ± 16.0 vs 58.3 ± 11.2; P < .001). Graft survival was not different among the donor types (P = .518). ConclusionseCDs were 27.3% of the total kidney donors. Posttransplantation 1-year eGFR was lower in the ECD group. However, there was no difference in the graft survival among the different donor types.

Kidney Donation after Cardiac Death in Korea

Organ donation after cardiac death (DCD) has been suggested due to the shortage of allografts in Korea. We investigated the outcomes of 446 deceased donor kidney transplant recipients in our center between September 1, 1995, and December 31, 2009. Twenty-four (5.4%) of those patients received DCD kidney grafts. The DCD group had a long intensive care unit stay, frequent inotropics use (such as norepinephrine and dopamine), low mean blood pressure and estimated glomerular filtration rate, and high serum creatinine and deceased donor scores compared to the standard criteria donor (SCD) group and the expanded criteria donor (ECD) group. Mean true warm ischemic time of the DCD group was 59.7 minutes based on asystole time. The DCD group had a long hospital stay after transplantation, but there was no statistically significant difference in delayed graft function and primary nonfunction. Serum creatinine levels at 3 months after transplantation in the ECD and DCD group were significantly higher than the SCD group ( P < .001) but lower in the DCD group than in the ECD group at 6 months and 9 months ( P < .001 and P = .004) posttransplantation. There were no statistically significant differences in serum creatinine levels or in the graft survival rates between groups at 12 months ( P = .160 and P = .737). The use of DCD attracted Korean surgeons because DCD allografts are equivalent to a heart-beating donor. Donors who die during the evaluation of brain death should not be abandoned for procurement, and we need to try to harvest allografts after cardiac death (type 4 DCD) to expand donor pools.

9 The added value of quality-of-life and other patient-reported outcomes in clinical research of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes

European senior programme (ESP) is well known for acceptable outcomes using expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys from donors older than 65 years for recipients older than 65 years. The incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is 229/million in India with a mean age of 45 years. We performed a retrospective analysis of transplantation of ECD versus standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys into younger recipients.Forty-three ECD transplantations among 158 deceased donor organ transplantation (DDOT) were performed between January 2006 and December 2009. Among 43 transplantation from 30 donors, 14 were dual kidney transplantations (DKT) performed based upon biopsy evaluation. All recipients received thymoglobulin (rATG) induction followed by immunosuppression with a steroid, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and a calcineurin inhibitor. Statistical analysis used chi-square test and unpaired Student t test. Kaplan-Meier curves were used for survival analysis.For ECD the mean donor age was 64 ± 11 years. Cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) were the cause of death among 60% of donors, 73.13% of whom were hypertensive and 23.13% diabetic.Mean DKT donor age was 75 ± 9.17 years versus 60 ± 8.0 years for single kidney transplantation (SKT). Mean recipient age of DKT versus SKT was 44 ± 12.4 years versus 43 ± 14 years. Mean serum creatinine (SCr; mg/dL) of SKT patients was 1.64 ± 0.75 versus 1.68 ± 0.46 in DKT. Mean follow-up was 455 ± 352 days. Mean SCr of 43 ECD recipients of mean age, 43.4 ± 14.2 years was 1.61 ± 0.61 mg/dL. Among 43 recipients, 23.25% were diabetic, 41.86% displayed delayed graft function (DGF), and 23.25% experienced biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR). Patient survival rate was 72.09% and graft survival rate was 67.44%. For SCD transplantations (n = 115), the mean donor age was 36 ± 14 years and recipient mean age was 32.8 ± 14.07 years. Mean SCr was 1.32 ± 0.46 mg/dL with 26.95% recipients displaying DGF, whereas 20.86% had BPAR. In the SCD group the patient survival rate was 79.13% and the graft survival rate was 72.17%. Thus, although the ECD group showed poor graft function (P = .042), they had acceptable patient and graft survivals (P = .34 and P = .56, respectively).Because of the organ shortage, DDOT using ECD transplants for younger recipients is a feasible option with acceptable outcomes.

Expanded Criteria Donor Kidneys for Younger Recipients: Acceptable Outcomes

Introduction European senior programme (ESP) is well known for acceptable outcomes using expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys from donors older than 65 years for recipients older than 65 years. The incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is 229/million in India with a mean age of 45 years. We performed a retrospective analysis of transplantation of ECD versus standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys into younger recipients. Methods Forty-three ECD transplantations among 158 deceased donor organ transplantation (DDOT) were performed between January 2006 and December 2009. Among 43 transplantation from 30 donors, 14 were dual kidney transplantations (DKT) performed based upon biopsy evaluation. All recipients received thymoglobulin (rATG) induction followed by immunosuppression with a steroid, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and a calcineurin inhibitor. Statistical analysis used chi-square test and unpaired Student t test. Kaplan-Meier curves were used for survival analysis. Results For ECD the mean donor age was 64 ± 11 years. Cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) were the cause of death among 60% of donors, 73.13% of whom were hypertensive and 23.13% diabetic. Mean DKT donor age was 75 ± 9.17 years versus 60 ± 8.0 years for single kidney transplantation (SKT). Mean recipient age of DKT versus SKT was 44 ± 12.4 years versus 43 ± 14 years. Mean serum creatinine (SCr; mg/dL) of SKT patients was 1.64 ± 0.75 versus 1.68 ± 0.46 in DKT. Mean follow-up was 455 ± 352 days. Mean SCr of 43 ECD recipients of mean age, 43.4 ± 14.2 years was 1.61 ± 0.61 mg/dL. Among 43 recipients, 23.25% were diabetic, 41.86% displayed delayed graft function (DGF), and 23.25% experienced biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR). Patient survival rate was 72.09% and graft survival rate was 67.44%. For SCD transplantations (n = 115), the mean donor age was 36 ± 14 years and recipient mean age was 32.8 ± 14.07 years. Mean SCr was 1.32 ± 0.46 mg/dL with 26.95% recipients displaying DGF, whereas 20.86% had BPAR. In the SCD group the patient survival rate was 79.13% and the graft survival rate was 72.17%. Thus, although the ECD group showed poor graft function ( P = .042), they had acceptable patient and graft survivals ( P = .34 and P = .56, respectively). Conclusion Because of the organ shortage, DDOT using ECD transplants for younger recipients is a feasible option with acceptable outcomes.

Lengthy Cold Ischemia Time Is a Modifiable Risk Factor Associated With Low Glomerular Filtration Rates in Expanded Criteria Donor Kidney Transplant Recipients

The proportion of expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys transplanted in North America is steadily increasing. By definition, graft survival is shorter for ECD than standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys. Seeking to identify factors associated with low posttransplant glomerular filtration rates (GFR), we retrospectively reviewed data on 390 consecutive patients transplanted in our center from January 1999 to December 2006 including 78% SCD and 22% ECD by UNOS criteria. We analyzed donor and patient characteristics, HLA mismatches, cold ischemia time (CIT) and delayed graft function (DGF). Pulsatile perfusion was not used. The average CIT was 14.6 hours for all SCD and ECD cases. All patients received thymoglobulin, a calcineurin inhibitor, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids. The only factor associated with low estimated GFR in the entire ECD cohort was CIT. The average CIT for the ECD group was 18.3 hours, whereas it was only 13.6 hours for those in the SCD group ( P < .001). We observed that at 6 months posttransplant, those in the ECD group are 2.2 times more likely (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.065–4.654; P = .033) to have an estimated GFR ≤50 mL/min/1.73 m 2 compared with those in the SCD group for CIT up to 18 hours. The higher odds ratio for low estimated GFR was sustained at 3 years posttransplant. In our center, a lengthy CIT was an early risk factor associated with impaired renal function. We concluded that all efforts should be made to reduce CIT.

Outcome of Kidney Transplantation Using Expanded Criteria Donors and Donation After Cardiac Death Kidneys: Realities and Costs

Expanded criteria donors (ECDs) and donation after cardiac death (DCD) provide more kidneys in the donor pool. However, the financial impact and the long-term benefits of these kidneys have been questioned. From 1998 to 2005, we performed 271 deceased donor kidney transplants into adult recipients. There were 163 (60.1%) SCDs, 44 (16.2%) ECDs, 53 (19.6%) DCDs and 11 (4.1%) ECD/DCDs. The mean follow-up was 50 months. ECD and DCD kidneys had a significantly higher incidence of delayed graft function, longer time to reach serum creatinine below 3 (mg/dL), longer length of stay and more readmissions compared to SCDs. The hospital charge was also higher for ECD, ECD/DCD and DCD kidneys compared to SCDs, primarily due to the longer length of stay and increased requirement for dialysis (70,030 dollars, 72,438 dollars, 72,789 dollars and 47,462 dollars, respectively, p < 0.001). Early graft survival rates were comparable among all groups. However, after a mean follow-up of 50 months, graft survival was significantly less in the ECD group compared to other groups. Although our observations support the utilization of ECD and DCD kidneys, these transplants are associated with increased costs and resource utilization. Revised reimbursement guidelines will be required for centers that utilize these organs.

Successful Transplantation of Kidneys from Deceased Donors with Acute Renal Failure: Three-Year Results

Kidneys from deceased donors with acute renal failure (ARF) are generally not accepted for transplantation because of the expected poor outcome. This prospective study examined the utilization of kidneys from donors with ARF for transplantation and the outcomes. Fifty-five kidneys from donors with ARF were transplanted. The outcome was compared with concurrent and matched 55 recipients of standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys and 55 expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys. ARF kidneys were accepted from donors aged <50 years, a negative history for kidney disease, and a negative pretransplant biopsy for chronic structural changes. The immunosuppression was similar in all three groups. The outcome measurements included three-year patient and graft survival, biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), subclinical acute rejection (SCAR), and chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN), serum creatinine, and creatinine clearance. Three-year patient and graft survival was 90% and 90% in ARF group, 100% and 89% in SCD group and 83% and 66% in ECD group. BPAR and SCAR were comparable in the groups but CAN was significantly higher in ECD group. Mean serum creatinine levels were 1.9+/-1.1, 1.9+/-0.9, and 2.2+/-1.3 mg/dl and mean creatinine clearances were 66+/-15, 68+/-14, and 58+/-10 mls/minute in ARF, SCD, and ECD groups, respectively (SCD and ARF vs. ECD P = 0.04). Transplantation of kidneys from selected deceased donors with ARF provides comparable survival and function compared to kidneys from non-ARF donors and may be considered for transplantation to expand the donor pool to overcome the current acute shortage of kidneys.

Long-Term Outcome of Renal Transplantation From Marginal Donors

Long-term survival of kidneys from suboptimal donors is known to be not as good as that from optimal ones. However, the shortage of donors has led many transplant centers to consider accepting older donors with comorbidities. We analyzed 238 patients who received deceased donor renal transplants in the period 2000–2005. The recipients were matched to be no more than 15 years older or younger than the corresponding donors. Among them 125 received a single and 18 a double transplantation from donors considered marginal, according to UNOS criteria for expanded criteria donor (ECD). Most kidneys were evaluated with a pretransplant biopsy, using the scoring system introduced by Karpinski in 1999. The analysis indicated clearly better results in the non-ECD group: both patients and graft survival rates were 10% higher at 1, 2, and 3 years. However, the ECD group showed satisfactory outcomes, confirming the utility of this procedure. The long-term survival rates of single or double grafts from marginal donors are satisfactory, confirming the practice of allocating kidneys after a preimplantation histological evaluation, allowing expansion of the donor pool and providing older patients access to the waiting lists.

Expanded-Criteria Donor Kidneys: A Single-Center Clinical and Short-Term Financial Analysis—Cause for Concern in Retransplantation

Expanded-criteria donor (ECD) kidneys are associated with a higher risk of posttransplant failure, but they remain a favorable alternative to dialysis. Now that a uniform definition of "expanded criteria" exists, it is more appropriate than ever to evaluate their utility compared with that seen with non-ECD kidneys. The authors analyzed 202 cadaveric kidney-only recipients that underwent transplantation from January 1999 to September 2001, including 45 (22%) recipients whose donors met current ECD criteria. ECD and non-ECD kidney recipients had similar pretransplant characteristics except for older age and increased duration of renal failure in the ECD group. Patient, graft, and death-censored graft survival in both groups were similar in primary recipients but significantly worse in retransplant recipients of ECD kidneys. The relative risk of death-censored graft loss was 1.58 in the ECD group (P = 0.45). Overall inpatient charges (minus organ acquisition charge) for 1 year posttransplant were 76,962 US dollars (ECD) versus 71,026 US dollars (non-ECD) (P = 0.53); the same charges in retransplant recipients were 136,596 US dollars (ECD) versus 91,296 US dollars (non-ECD) (P = 0.25). ECD recipients, especially retransplant recipients, had consistently higher creatinine concentrations, although the average current value of all functioning ECD grafts remains less than 2 mg/dL. ECD recipients had a higher incidence of ureteral stricture (4.4% vs. 0%), but this never resulted in graft loss. Considering the widening disparity between renal allograft availability and need and the fact that ECD kidneys provide superior outcomes compared with dialysis, the authors' data encourage the continued use of ECD kidneys in primary recipients but justify caution in the retransplant setting.

Transplantation of kidneys from expanded criteria donors

The critical shortage of organs for transplantation has resulted in a controversial expansion of the criteria used to define a suitable cadaveric organ donor. The shortage of kidneys has a particularly hard impact on those patients on the waiting list who have uncommon major histocompatibility antigens or who are highly immunized. To determine outcomes between patients receiving grafts from expanded criteria donors (ECDs) and others, a retrospective review of 105 consecutive kidney transplantations performed at a single institution during a 3 1/2 year period was conducted. A total of 44 (41.9%) patients received kidneys from ECDs, 45 (42.9%) from conventional cadaveric donors, and 16 (15.2%) from live donors. All patients were treated by the same physicians and received either triple or quadruple sequential immunosuppressive therapy. In general, high risk recipients did not receive kidneys from ECDs. Actuarial graft survival, incidence of delayed function, length of stay, and hospital charges were not significantly different between the ECD and conventional cadaveric donor groups of recipients. A higher incidence of urinary complications occurred in the ECD group (p=0.03). This incidence was noted primarily in the recipients of kidneys from donors 5 years of age or younger. However, no allografts were lost as a result of urinary complications. ECD kidneys that were imported from outside the local catchment area accounted for approximately 25% of all cadaveric transplantations performed. With appropriate selection of organs from ECDs, acceptable results can be obtained. ECD organs can serve to partially alleviate the extreme organ shortage. These organs should be procured and made available to those centers willing to use them.