Kidney Donor Profile Index Kidneys Research Articles

#2822 Can KDPI estimate long-term graft survival in a cohort of Portuguese patients?

Abstract Background and Aims The Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) was introduced in the United States in 2014 to support clinicians' decision-making regarding the acceptance or decline of potential donors. In Portugal, there is no valid stratification score to assist physicians in accepting or declining an organ offer. Our study aims to characterize a cohort of Portuguese kidney transplant recipients and donors and evaluate the correlation between KDPI and long-term graft survival. The results are interpreted considering the nuances of the Portuguese allocation system, which favors an age-matched donor-recipient allocation. Method We conducted an observational single-center retrospective cohort study, which included patients who received a deceased donor kidney transplant at our unit between January 2013 and December 2015. We excluded patients for whom the donor KDPI index was unavailable for retrieval. Besides the KDPI index, we collected data regarding the receptor's demographic, clinical, and immunological characteristics, as well as graft and recipient survival. The primary outcome was death-censored survival, and follow-up ended on the 31st of December 2023. The secondary outcome was survival with a functioning graft. Survival estimates were obtained using Kaplan-Meier curves. We performed univariate and multivariate survival analysis with log-rank tests and Cox proportional-hazards regression models. Results We selected 364 deceased-donor kidney recipients and 212 kidney donors. The mean KDPI was 60% and 53.3% of donors were classified as expanded criteria. The kidney recipients were predominantly male (68.4%), with a mean age of 50.16 years and an average of 4 HLA mismatches. Median follow-up was 102 months. Considering recipient characteristics according to pre-defined KDPI strata (≤ 20%, 21-85%, > 85%), recipients from higher KDPI were significantly older, with a mean age of 40.6, 48.8, and 61.1 years, respectively (p < 0.001), and had a higher average body mass index (p = 0.041). There were no significant differences regarding the number of HLA mismatches (p = 0.624) or the proportion of hypersensitized patients (p = 0.253) between classes. During follow-up, 16.8% patients presented graft failure and 9.9% died with a functioning graft. Cumulative death-censored graft survival at 5, 8, and 10 years was 87.7%, 87.1%, and 84.4% respectively. The cumulative percentage of patients living with a functioning graft at 5, 8, and 10 years was 83.6%, 76.7%, and 68.6%. Death-censored graft survival was lower in recipients of donors with higher KDPI (Fig. 1), although it did not reach statistical significance (p-value = 0.166). The number of HLA mismatches (p = 0.592) or the recipient's age (p = 0.513) did not significantly impact death-censored graft survival, whereas delayed graft function (DGF) was the variable with the strongest association in univariate analysis (p < 0.001). In a multivariate Cox regression model, KDPI (HR 1.02, p = 0.005) and DGF (HR 3.2, p < 0.001) correlated with graft loss, while older recipients (HR 0.971, p = 0.019) seemed to have a protective effect over death-censored survival. Patient survival with a functioning graft was significantly associated with KDPI strata (p = 0.008; Fig. 2), the recipient's age (p = 0.006), and DGF (p < 0.001) in univariate analysis. Considering KDPI kidneys ≥ 90%, 10-year cumulative death-censored survival was 67.9%. Conclusion In our sample, despite not reaching statistical significance, there was a trend for improved death-censored graft survival in patients with lower KDPI, which further emulates the results of other European cohorts. Nevertheless, the 10-year cumulative death-censored survival of higher KDPI kidneys (≥ 90%) was remarkable, showing that long-term acceptable outcomes can be achieved. The impact of KDPI on patient survival with a functioning graft is probably overestimated, given the bias introduced by the Portuguese matching system, which rewards an “old-for-old” donor-recipient allocation.

Association of Race and Ethnicity With High Longevity Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation Under the US Kidney Allocation System

Rationale & ObjectiveThe US Kidney Allocation System (KAS) prioritizes candidates with ≤20% Estimated Post-Transplant Survival (EPTS) for high longevity kidneys defined by a ≤20% Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI). Use of EPTS in the KAS deprioritizes candidates with older age, diabetes, and longer dialysis durations. We assessed whether this use also disadvantages racial-ethnic minority candidates, who are younger but more likely to have diabetes and longer durations of kidney failure requiring dialysis. Study DesignObservational cohort study. Setting& Participants: Adult candidates for and recipients of kidney transplantation represented in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from January 2015 through December 2020. ExposureRace and ethnicity. OutcomesAge-adjusted assignment to ≤20% EPTS, transplantation of a ≤20% KDPI kidney, and post-transplant survival in longevity matched recipients by racial-ethnicity. Analytic ApproachMultivariable logistic regression, Fine-Gray competing risks survival analysis, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazards methods. ResultsThe cohort included 199,444 candidates (7% Asian, 29% Black, 19% Hispanic/Latino, 43% White) listed for deceased donor kidney transplantation. Non-White candidates had significantly higher rates of diabetes, longer dialysis duration, and were younger than White candidates. Adjusted for age, Asian, Black, and Hispanic/Latino candidates had significantly lower odds of having a ETPS score ≤20% (OR 0.86, [0.81, 0.91], 0.52 [0.50, 0.54], and 0.49, [0.47, 0.51]), and were less likely to receive a ≤20% KDPI kidney (subHR 0.70 [0.66, 0.75], 0.89 [0.87, 0.92], and 0.73 [0.71, 0.76]), compared to White candidates. Among recipients with ≤20% EPTS scores transplanted with a ≤20% KDPI deceased donor kidney, Asian and Hispanic recipients had lower post-transplant mortality (HR 0.45 [0.27, 0.77], and 0.63 [0.47, 0.86]) and Black recipients had higher but not statistically significant post-transplant mortality (HR 1.22 [0.99, 1.52]) compared to White recipients. LimitationsProvider reported race-ethnicity data and 5-year post transplant follow-up period. ConclusionsThe US kidney allocation system is less likely to identify racial-ethnic minority candidates as having a ≤20% EPTS score which triggers allocation of high longevity deceased donor kidneys. These findings should inform the OPTN about how to remedy racial/ethnic disparities introduced through KAS’s current approach of allocating allografts with longer predicted longevity to recipients with longer estimated post-transplant survival.

Graft and Patient Survival in Kidney Transplant with Deceased Donor Using KDRI (Kidney Donor Risk Index), KDPI (Kidney Donor Profile Index), and EPTS (Estimated Post-Transplant Survival) in Colombia.

BACKGROUND EPTS (Estimated Post-Transplant Survival), KDRI (Kidney Donor Risk Index), and KDPI (Kidney Donor Profile Index) were developed aiming to ameliorate donor-recipient longevity matching in kidney transplants. They are based on a prediction model made using the United States population; evidence of their use outside EEUU remains limited. The aim of this study was to describe the quality of deceased-donor kidneys and to determine recipient and graft survival, glomerular filtration rate, and incidence of delayed graft function in renal transplantation according to these indices in Cali, Colombia. MATERIAL AND METHODS In this historical cohort study, Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze survival of recipient and graft according to the values of the indices categorized by quintiles. Glomerular filtration rate and incidence of delayed graft function were also analyzed according to KDRI and KDPI. RESULTS We included 380 patients. Medians of EPTS, KDRI, and KDPI were 24% (IQR 9-60), 0.8 (IQR 0.71-0.99), and 27% (IQR 13-49), respectively. Two-year survival was 97.8% in recipients with EPTS ≤20% and it decreased with higher values of the index. Recipient and graft survival were lower for all periods when donors had KDPI >80%. Incidence of delayed graft function was higher in patients whose donors had KDPI ≥60% (44% vs 21%). Glomerular filtration rate decreased with the highest values of KDPI for all periods. CONCLUSIONS Our study represents the initial evaluation of the usefulness of these indices in Colombia. Our results suggest that KDRI, KDPI, and EPTS may serve as valuable tools for kidney allocation in our setting. Further research with larger sample sizes is necessary to validate these indices in our population.

Differences between Kidney Transplant Recipients from Deceased Donors with Diabetes Mellitus as Identified by Machine Learning Consensus Clustering.

Clinical outcomes of deceased donor kidney transplants coming from diabetic donors currently remain inconsistent, possibly due to high heterogeneities in this population. Our study aimed to cluster recipients of diabetic deceased donor kidney transplants using an unsupervised machine learning approach in order to identify subgroups with high risk of inferior outcomes and potential variables associated with these outcomes. Consensus cluster analysis was performed based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 7876 recipients of diabetic deceased donor kidney transplants from 2010 to 2019 in the OPTN/UNOS database. We determined the important characteristics of each assigned cluster and compared the post-transplant outcomes between the clusters. Consensus cluster analysis identified three clinically distinct clusters. Recipients in cluster 1 (n = 2903) were characterized by oldest age (64 ± 8 years), highest rate of comorbid diabetes mellitus (55%). They were more likely to receive kidney allografts from donors that were older (58 ± 6.3 years), had hypertension (89%), met expanded criteria donor (ECD) status (78%), had a high rate of cerebrovascular death (63%), and carried a high kidney donor profile index (KDPI). Recipients in cluster 2 (n = 687) were younger (49 ± 13 years) and all were re-transplant patients with higher panel reactive antibodies (PRA) (88 [IQR 46, 98]) who received kidneys from younger (44 ± 11 years), non-ECD deceased donors (88%) with low numbers of HLA mismatch (4 [IQR 2, 5]). The cluster 3 cohort was characterized by first-time kidney transplant recipients (100%) who received kidney allografts from younger (42 ± 11 years), non-ECD deceased donors (98%). Compared to cluster 3, cluster 1 had higher incidence of primary non-function, delayed graft function, patient death and death-censored graft failure, whereas cluster 2 had higher incidence of delayed graft function and death-censored graft failure but comparable primary non-function and patient death. An unsupervised machine learning approach characterized diabetic donor kidney transplant patients into three clinically distinct clusters with differing outcomes. Our data highlight opportunities to improve utilization of high KDPI kidneys coming from diabetic donors in recipients with survival-limiting comorbidities such as those observed in cluster 1.

RWD69 5-Year Graft Failure Outcomes Utilizing Kidneys with Higher Kidney Donor Profile Index Scores across Different Age Groups and Sex over a 10-Year Period

Several studies have shown that kidney transplantations with higher kidney donor profile index (KDPI) scores reduced mortality rates compared with remaining on dialysis or the waitlist hoping to receive a lower KDPI kidney. This study described the rate of 5-year graft failure of higher KDPI kidney transplants between sex and across different age groups.

RWD105 To What Extent Is Allocation of Higher KDPI Score Kidney Transplantation Occurring in the US?

To better serve patients on the kidney transplant waitlist in the US, current guidance recommends the expanded use of kidneys with higher Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) score to offset the limited supply of standard criteria donor. This research aims to explore KDPI score and evaluate patient characteristics associated with higher KDPI Kidney Transplant (KT).

Clinical Phenotypes of Dual Kidney Transplant Recipients in the United States as Identified through Machine Learning Consensus Clustering.

Background and Objectives: Our study aimed to cluster dual kidney transplant recipients using an unsupervised machine learning approach to characterize donors and recipients better and to compare the survival outcomes across these various clusters. Materials and Methods: We performed consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 2821 dual kidney transplant recipients from 2010 to 2019 in the OPTN/UNOS database. We determined the important characteristics of each assigned cluster and compared the post-transplant outcomes between clusters. Results: Two clinically distinct clusters were identified by consensus cluster analysis. Cluster 1 patients was characterized by younger patients (mean recipient age 49 ± 13 years) who received dual kidney transplant from pediatric (mean donor age 3 ± 8 years) non-expanded criteria deceased donor (100% non-ECD). In contrast, Cluster 2 patients were characterized by older patients (mean recipient age 63 ± 9 years) who received dual kidney transplant from adult (mean donor age 59 ± 11 years) donor with high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) score (59% had KDPI ≥ 85). Cluster 1 had higher patient survival (98.0% vs. 94.6% at 1 year, and 92.1% vs. 76.3% at 5 years), and lower acute rejection (4.2% vs. 6.1% within 1 year), when compared to cluster 2. Death-censored graft survival was comparable between two groups (93.5% vs. 94.9% at 1 year, and 89.2% vs. 84.8% at 5 years). Conclusions: In summary, DKT in the United States remains uncommon. Two clusters, based on specific recipient and donor characteristics, were identified through an unsupervised machine learning approach. Despite varying differences in donor and recipient age between the two clusters, death-censored graft survival was excellent and comparable. Broader utilization of DKT from high KDPI kidneys and pediatric en bloc kidneys should be encouraged to better address the ongoing organ shortage.

336.3: Clinical Utility of Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA During the Period of Recovery of Renal Function After Kidney Transplantation

Background: The transplant of kidneys with high KDPI, and the incidence and duration of delayed graft function (DGF) are risk factors associated with incomplete recovery of kidney function (IRF). In both situations, kidney biopsies are essential to exclude the diagnosis of acute rejection (AR). Purpose: This study evaluates the clinical utility of monitoring donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), a biomarker of kidney injury, in recipients of high Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) transplants during the period of kidney function recovery. Methods: This is a single center, prospective, cohort study in recipients of high KDPI kidneys who developed delayed graft function (DGF), defined as the need for dialysis within the first week after transplantation. All patients received a single 3 mg/kg anti-thymocyte globulin dose, tacrolimus, mycophenolate, and prednisone. Blood samples were obtained at 14 (D14) and 30 (D30) days to measure the percentage (%) of dd-cfDNA. The dd-cfDNA > 1% is associated with increased probability for acute rejection (AR). Results: This preliminary analysis includes data from 69 patients. The median KDPI was 73% [IQR 47-87] and the mean cold ischemia time was 27± 7 hours. The incidence of DGF was 89.8% with a median duration of 6 (IQR 2 – 9) days. At D14 the median GFR was 12 ml/min/1.73 m2 (IQR 6-21) and the median dd-cfDNA levels were 0.43% (IQR 0.02-0.78), with 19 patients (28%) showing dd-cfDNA >1%. Surveillance biopsies during DGF were performed in 42 (61%) patients showing one T-cell mediated rejection IA (dd-cfDNA of 0.41%) and 4 borderline changes (dd-cfDNA 0.82%, 0.85%, 0.98%, 1.90%). Using dd-cfDNA >1% to guide the indication of the surveillance biopsy, we would have avoided 22 (52%) biopsies but missed 1 (2%) patient with AR. At D30, the median GFR was 36 ml/min/1.73 m2 (IQR 28-48) and the median dd-cfDNA levels were 0.40% (IQR 0.01-0.66), with 12 patients (19%) showing dd-cfDNA >1%. Surveillance biopsies performed in 21 (30.43%) patients with incomplete recovery of kidney function showed 4 borderline changes (dd-cfDNA 0.17%, 0.66%, 0.67%, and 2.80%). Using dd-cfDNA >1% to guide the indication of the surveillance biopsy, we would have avoided 12 (57%) biopsies without missing any AR episodes. Overall, 5 (7%) patients showed dd-cfDNA >1% at D14 and D30, but none of them showed biopsy confirmed AR. Conclusions: This preliminary analysis suggests that monitoring dd-cfDNA may assist clinical decision during the period of DGF and in kidney transplant recipients with incomplete recovery of graft function.

Survival Benefit in Older Patients Transplanted With Viremic Hepatitis C Positive Kidneys When Compared With High KDPI Kidneys.

Because of the continued demand in kidney transplantation, organs from donors with risk criteria for blood-borne viruses, high Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) kidneys, and hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive kidneys are being considered. There continues to be reluctance on the part of the providers and the candidates to accept HCV-positive kidneys. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database of all adult (≥18 y old) recipients undergoing kidney transplant from May 10, 2013, to June 30, 2021. We compared patient and graft survival in candidates who received HCV-positive kidneys versus non-hepatitis C (Hep C) high KDPI kidneys by estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) groups. HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted in 5.6% of patients in the EPTS >61% group compared with 5.1% of patients in the 21%-60% EPTS group and 1.9% of 0%-20% EPTS group ( P < 0.001). Of all transplants performed in the EPTS 61%-100% group, 11.9% were KDPI >85% compared with 5.2% in the EPTS 21%-60%, and 0.5% in the EPTS 0%-20%. Patient survival was significantly longer at 1, 3, and 5 y in the EPTS >61% group who received Hep C-viremic or -nonviremic allografts compared with non-Hep C kidneys with KDPI >85%. When it comes to listing, only 25% of candidates in the EPTS >61% group were listed for Hep C nucleic acid testing-positive kidneys in 2021. Our findings could be used for counseling candidates on the types of kidneys they should consider for transplantation. Also, listing practices for viremic Hep C kidneys need continued re-evaluation.

Kidney donor profile index and post-transplant health care utilization: Implications for value of transplant care delivery.

Centers discard high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) allografts, potentially related to delayed graft function and prolonged hospital use by kidney transplant recipients (KTR). We sought to determine whether high KDPI KTRs have excess health care utilization. We conducted a retrospective cohort study from a high-volume center analyzing KTRs from January 3, 2011 to April 12, 2015 (n=652). We measured differences in hospital use, emergency visits, and outpatient visits within the first 90 days between low (≤85%) versus high KDPI (>85%) KTRs, as well as long-term graft function and patient survival. High (n=107) and low KDPI (n=545) KTRs had similar length of stay (median = 3 days, P=.66), and readmission rates at 7, 30, and 90 days after surgery (all, P>.05). High KDPI kidneys were not associated with excess utilization of the hospital, emergency services, outpatient transplant clinics, or ambulatory infusion visits on univariate or multivariate analysis (all, P>.05). Low KDPI KTRs had significantly better eGFR at 2years (Low vs. High KDPI: 60.35 vs. 41.54 ml/min, P<.001), but similar 3-year patient and graft survival (both, P>.09). High and low KDPI KTRs demonstrated similar 90-day risk-adjusted health care utilization, which should encourage use of high KDPI kidneys.

Evaluation of severity of delayed graft function in kidney transplant recipients.

The most common definition of delayed graft function (DGF) relies on dialysis during the first week post-transplant and does not consider DGF severity. The impact of DGF severity on long-term graft outcome remains controversial. We analysed 627 deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) transplanted in 2005-2015 at our centre for DGF severity, associated risk factors and long-term consequences of DGF. We found 349 (55.7%) KTRs with DGF, which were classified into four groups according to DGF duration (0-1, 2-7, 8-14, >14days) and were compared with KTR with no DGF. A longer duration of DGF was associated with progressive worsening of 10-year death-censored graft survival {no DGF: 88.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 82.4-94.2]; 0-1 day: 81.3% [95% CI 68.2-94.4], 2-7 days: 61.5% [95% CI 43.1.1-79.9], 8-14 days: 66.6% [95% CI 47.4-85.8], >14days: 51.2% [95% CI 33-69.4]; P<0.001}. In kidneys with a Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) ≥85%, all DGF severity groups demonstrated reduced graft survival. However, inthe <85% KDPIkidneys, only>14days DGF duration showed worse outcomes. DGF had a duration-dependent effect on graft survival, which varied depending on the KDPI. Of note, 0- to 1-day DGF showed comparable results to no DGF in the whole cohort.

Donor-Recipient Matching to Optimize the Utility of High Kidney Donor Profile Index Kidneys

BackgroundIn December 2014, the Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) was developed to give more precise information on donor kidney quality. Kidneys with KDPI scores ≥ 85 (K ≥ 85) have been reported to have inferior outcomes to kidneys with KDPI scores < 85. MethodsAfter the implementation of the new Kidney Allocation System, we developed a protocol to evaluate K ≥ 85 use. We analyzed the safety and efficacy of our institutional criteria and evaluated post-transplant outcomes. K ≥ 85 recipients were stratified based on their 1-year creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rates to elucidate characteristics associated with serum creatinine < 1.7 mg/dL or estimated glomerular filtration rates ≤ 45 mL/min/1.73 m2. ResultsFrom December 2014 to December 2019, 304 deceased donor kidney transplants were performed at Hartford Hospital; 58 (19%) were K ≥ 85 with an average KDPI of 91%. There were 4 graft losses; 2 were death censored. Prolonged cold ischemia time and black recipient race were associated with inferior recipient graft function at 1 year. ConclusionsHigh KDPI kidney use requires a multifaceted evaluation that takes into account donor and recipient characteristics for an ideal match. We have identified several characteristics that may predict optimal post-transplant kidney function.

Donor Kidney Quality and Transplant Outcome: An Economic Evaluation of Contemporary Practice.

The study had two main aims. First, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of transplanting deceased donor kidneys of differing quality levels based on the Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI). Second, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of remaining on the waiting list until a high-quality kidney becomes available compared to transplanting a lower-quality kidney. A decision analytic model to estimate cost-effectiveness was developed using a Markov process. Separate models were developed for 4 separate KDPI bands, with higher values indicating lower quality. Models were simulated in 1-year cycles for a 20-year time horizon, with transitions through distinct health states relevant to the kidney recipient from the healthcare payer's perspective. Weibull regression was used to calculate the time-dependent transition probabilities in the base analysis. The impact uncertainty arising in model parameters was included by probabilistic sensitivity analysis using the Monte Carlo simulation method. Willingness to pay was considered as Australian $28 000. Transplanting a kidney of any quality is cost-effective compared to remaining on a waitlist. Transplanting a lower KDPI kidney is cost-effective compared to a higher KDPI kidney. Transplanting lower KDPI kidneys to younger patients and higher KDPI kidneys to older patients is also cost-effective. Depending on dialysis in hopes of receiving a lower KDPI kidney is not a cost-effective strategy for any age group. Efforts should be made by the health systems to reduce the discard rates of low-quality kidneys with the view of increasing the transplant rates.

Use of expanded-criteria donors and>85 KDPI kidneys for pediatric kidney transplantation in the United States.

Pediatric kidney transplant outcomes associated with expanded-criteria donors (ECD) and high Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) kidneys are unknown. We reviewed the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 1987-2017 to identify 96 ECD and 92>85 KDPI kidney recipients (<18years). Using propensity scores, we created comparison groups of 375 non-ECD and 357≤85 KDPI recipients for comparisons with ECD and>85 KDPI transplants, respectively. We used Cox regression for patient/graft survival and sequential Cox approach for survival benefit of ECD and>85 KDPI transplantationvs remaining on the waitlist. After adjustment, ECD recipients were at significantly increased risk of graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=1.6; P=.001) but not of mortality (aHR=1.33; P=.15) compared with non-ECD recipients. We observed no survival benefit of ECD transplants vs remaining on the waitlist (aHR=1.05; P=.83). We found no significant difference in graft failure (aHR=1.27; P=.12) and mortality (aHR=1.41; P=.13) risks between>85 KDPI and≤85 KDPI recipients. However, > 85 KDPI transplants were associated with a survival benefit vs remaining on the waitlist (aHR=0.41; P=.01). ECD transplantation in children is associated with a high graft loss risk and no survival benefit, whereas>85 KDPI transplantation is associated with a survival benefit for children vs remaining on the waitlist.

Degree of Glomerulosclerosis in Procurement Kidney Biopsies from Marginal Donor Kidneys and Their Implications in Predicting Graft Outcomes.

Background: This study aimed to assess the association between the percentage of glomerulosclerosis (GS) in procurement allograft biopsies from high-risk deceased donor and graft outcomes in kidney transplant recipients. Methods: The UNOS database was used to identify deceased-donor kidneys with a kidney donor profile index (KDPI) score > 85% from 2005 to 2014. Deceased donor kidneys were categorized based on the percentage of GS: 0–10%, 11–20%, >20% and no biopsy performed. The outcome included death-censored graft survival, patient survival, rate of delayed graft function, and 1-year acute rejection. Results: Of 22,006 kidneys, 91.2% were biopsied showing 0–10% GS (58.0%), 11–20% GS (13.5%), >20% GS (19.7%); 8.8% were not biopsied. The rate of kidney discard was 48.5%; 33.6% in 0–10% GS, 68.9% in 11–20% GS, and 77.4% in >20% GS. 49.8% of kidneys were discarded in those that were not biopsied. Death-censored graft survival at 5 years was 75.8% for 0–10% GS, 70.9% for >10% GS, and 74.8% for the no biopsy group. Among kidneys with >10% GS, there was no significant difference in death-censored graft survival between 11–20% GS and >20% GS. Recipients with >10% GS had an increased risk of graft failure (HR = 1.27, p < 0.001), compared with 0–10% GS. There was no significant difference in patient survival, acute rejection at 1-year, and delayed graft function between 0% and 10% GS and >10% GS. Conclusion: In >85% KDPI kidneys, our study suggested that discard rates increased with higher percentages of GS, and GS >10% is an independent prognostic factor for graft failure. Due to organ shortage, future studies are needed to identify strategies to use these marginal kidneys safely and improve outcomes.

Kidney Donor Profile Index in a Transplant Center in Mexico

BackgroundThe Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) was created in 2014 to measure the likelihood of graft failure for a given donor compared with the median kidney donor from the previous year. This scale is based on the American population only. Mexico is one of the countries with greater incidence of chronic kidney disease, a long waiting list, and not enough kidney donors with KDPI smaller than 80%. This has led transplant centers to take kidney grafts with a higher KDPI. ObjectiveTo investigate the agreement between the KDPI and histologic scores (preimplantation renal biopsy) and assess the relationship between the Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI), KDPI, and the histologic score on graft survival. MethodsA retrospective, analytical, transversal study was performed. Data were collected from patients with kidney grafts from deceased donors from January 1, 2011, to June 30, 2019, at our hospital. The variables analyzed were age, weight, height, sex, race and/or ethnicity, history of hypertension or diabetes, cause of death, serum creatinine, KDPI, KDRI, and biopsy result from each graft prior to transplant. ResultsThe total population was 59 deceased kidney donors. For our patients, a high KDPI did not increase mortality rate; it provided greater benefit than staying on dialysis. ConclusionsWe conclude that the use of KDRI should only be considered to assess the degree of fibrosis, not to rule out a transplantable kidney, in addition to the consistent demonstration that high KDPI kidneys (even 91%-100%) confer greater survival benefits to patients regarding the waiting list.

Regional Disparities in Transplantation With Deceased Donor Kidneys With Kidney Donor Profile Index Less Than 20% Among Candidates With Top 20% Estimated Post Transplant Survival.

The Kidney Allocation System in the United States prioritizes candidates with Estimated Post-Transplant Survival (EPTS) ≤20% to receive deceased donor kidneys with Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) ≤20%. We compared access to KDPI ≤ 20% kidneys for EPTS ≤ 20% candidates across the United States to determine whether geographic disparities in access to these low KDPI kidneys exist. We identified all incident adult deceased donor kidney candidates wait-listed January 1, 2015, to March 31, 2018, using United Network for Organ Sharing data. We calculated the proportion of candidates transplanted, final EPTS, and KDPI of transplanted kidneys for candidates listed with EPTS ≤ 20% versus >20%. We compared the odds of receiving a KDPI ≤ 20% deceased donor kidney for EPTS ≤ 20% candidates across regions using logistic regression. Among 121 069 deceased donor kidney candidates, 28.5% had listing EPTS ≤ 20%. Of these, 16.1% received deceased donor kidney transplants (candidates listed EPTS > 20%: 17.1% transplanted) and 12.3% lost EPTS ≤ 20% status. Only 49.4% of transplanted EPTS ≤ 20% candidates received a KDPI ≤ 20% kidney, and 48.3% of KDPI ≤ 20% kidneys went to recipients with EPTS > 20% at the time of transplantation. Odds of receiving a KDPI ≤ 20% kidney were highest in region 6 and lowest in region 9 (odds ratio 0.19 [0.13 to 0.28]). The ratio of KDPI ≤ 20% donors per EPTS ≤ 20% candidate and likelihood of KDPI ≤ 20% transplantation were strongly correlated (r2 = 0.84). Marked geographic variation in the likelihood of receiving a KDPI ≤ 20% deceased donor kidney among transplanted EPTS ≤ 20% candidates exists and is related to differences in organ availability within allocation borders. Policy changes to improve organ sharing are needed to improve equity in access to low KDPI kidneys.

The Collaborative Improvement and Innovation Network project to drive quality improvement.

The purpose is to describe an approach for improvement using an organized collaborative improvement framework where participants learn, apply, and share improvement ideas supported through a 3-year Organ Procurement Transplant Network (OPTN) project called Collaborative Improvement and Innovation Network (COIIN). The COIIN project, proposed as an alternative approach to monitoring transplant performance, supported collaboration, and improvement in 58 transplant hospitals and partner organ procurement organizations. The aim was to increase transplantation with a focus on increasing the utilization of moderate-to-high (50-100%) Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) kidneys. Preliminary findings show increases in transplant rate and utilization of moderate-to-high KDPI kidneys was achieved in many participating organizations. Preliminary COIIN project results suggest that an improvement approach that supports collaborative improvement can be effective in driving improvement. The COIIN project involved the development of a change package of key interventions for three key areas: waitlist management, organ-offer acceptance, and care coordination. Additionally, a balanced scorecard approach using outcome, process, and relationship measures, was used and effective in driving improvement. The preliminary COIIN outcome and process results suggest that collaborative improvement does drive improvement and was well received in the transplant community. In the video, two of the authors describe the content of the review and present the main topics discussed in the article (http://links.lww.com/MOT/A22).

Kidney transplantation in older recipients: Preemptive high KDPI kidney vs lower KDPI kidney after varying dialysis vintage.

AIMTo evaluate the outcomes of transplanting marginal kidneys preemptively compared to better-quality kidneys after varying dialysis vintage in older recipients.METHODSUsing OPTN/United Network for Organ Sharing database from 2001-2015, we identified deceased donor kidney (DDK) transplant recipients > 60 years of age who either underwent preemptive transplantation of kidneys with kidney donor profile index (KDPI) ≥ 85% (marginal kidneys) or received kidneys with KDPI of 35%-84% (better quality kidneys that older wait-listed patients would likely receive if waited longer) after being on dialysis for either 1-4 or 4-8 years. Using a multivariate Cox model adjusting for donor, recipient and transplant related factors- overall and death-censored graft failure risks along with patient death risk of preemptive transplant recipients were compared to transplant recipients in the 1-4 and 4-8 year dialysis vintage groups.RESUTLSThe median follow up for the whole group was 37 mo (interquartile range of 57 mo). A total of 6110 DDK transplant recipients above the age of 60 years identified during the study period were found to be eligible to be included in the analysis. Among these patients 350 received preemptive transplantation of kidneys with KDPI ≥ 85. The remaining patients underwent transplantation of better quality kidneys with KDPI 35-84% after being on maintenance dialysis for either 1-4 years (n = 3300) or 4-8 years (n = 2460). Adjusted overall graft failure risk and death-censored graft failure risk in preemptive high KDPI kidney recipients were similar when compared to group that received lower KDPI kidney after being on maintenance dialysis for either 1-4 years (HR 1.01, 95%CI: 0.90-1.14, P = 0.84 and HR 0.96, 95%CI: 0.79-1.16, P = 0.66 respectively) or 4-8 years (HR 0.82, 95%CI: 0.63-1.07, P = 0.15 and HR 0.81, 95%CI: 0.52-1.25, P = 0.33 respectively). Adjusted patient death risk in preemptive high KDPI kidney recipients were similar when compared to groups that received lower KDPI kidney after being on maintenance dialysis for 1-4 years (HR 0.99, 95%CI: 0.87-1.12, P = 0.89) but lower compared to patients who were on dialysis for 4-8 years (HR 0.74, 95%CI: 0.56-0.98, P = 0.037).CONCLUSIONIn summary, our study supports accepting a “marginal” quality high KDPI kidney preemptively in older wait-listed patients thus avoiding dialysis exposure.

Assessment of the Kidney Donor Profile Index in a European cohort.

Recently, transplant societies have had to change their allocation policies to counter global organ shortages. However, strategies differ significantly and long-term outcomes and cross-regional applicability remain to be evaluated. Therefore, we retrospectively analysed the Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) of 987 adult kidney transplants at our centre using data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) as a reference. In our cohort, the median KDPI was 66%, with a higher proportion of >85% KDPI kidneys compared with the US cohort (32.3% versus 9.2%). Among elderly patients (≥65 years of age), 62% received >95% KDPI kidneys, which were primarily allocated within the Eurotransplant Senior Program (ESP). After 10 years, the rate of death-censored graft survival was 70.5%. Recipients of >85% KDPI kidneys were significantly older, demonstrating higher mortality, poorer graft survival and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate. Patients receiving ≥99% KDPI kidneys had a satisfactory 5-year death-censored graft survival (72.9%). The 5-year survival rate of patients living with a functioning graft exceeded the matched OPTN data in the whole KDPI range, despite a higher proportion of elderly recipients. Multivariate analysis revealed KDPI as an independent risk factor for graft loss (hazard ratio 1.14/10%, P < 0.001), although C-statistics of 0.62 indicated limited discriminative ability for individuals. The analysis demonstrated KDPI as a potentially useful tool for donor quality assessment in a European cohort. Most importantly, our analysis revealed acceptable outcomes even for very high KDPI kidneys.