Standard Criteria Donor Kidneys Research Articles

Long-term outcomes of dual kidney transplantation-a single center experience

The shortage of kidney donors has led to broadening of the acceptance criteria for deceased donor organs beyond the traditional use of young donors. We determined long-term post-transplant outcomes in recipients of dual expanded criteria donor kidneys (dECD, n = 44) and compared them to recipients of standard criteria donor kidneys (SCD, n = 194) and single expanded criteria donor kidneys (sECD, n = 62). We retrospectively reviewed these 300 deceased donor kidney transplants without primary non-function (PNF) or death in the first two wk, at our center from 1996 to 2003. The three groups were similar in baseline characteristics. Kidney allograft survival and patient survival (nine yr) were similar in the three respective donor groups, SCD, sECD and dECD (60% vs. 59% vs. 64% and 82% vs. 73% vs. 73%). Acute rejection in the first three months was 23.2%, 16.1%, and 22.7% in SCD, sECD and dECD, respectively (p = 0.49) and delayed graft function was 25.2%, 31.9% and 17.1% in the three groups, respectively (p = 0.28). When PNF and death within the first two wk was included, there was no significant difference in graft survival between the three groups. In our population, recipients of dECD transplants have acceptable patient and graft survival with kidneys that would have usually been discarded.

Delayed Graft Function Has an Equally Bad Impact on Deceased Donor Renal Graft Survival in Both Standard Criteria Donors and Expanded Criteria Donors

Introduction The use of expanded criteria donors (ECDs) is still limited because of inferior graft survival compared to standard criteria donors (SCDs). We assessed the impact of immediate graft function (IGF) on renal graft survival among recipients of SCD and ECD grafts to determine whether these kidneys performed equally well under “ideal” conditions favoring IGF. Methods We included all cadaveric renal transplants performed from 1990 to 2002 ( n = 335). Delayed graft function (DGF) was defined as the need for dialysis in the first 7 days posttransplant. Slow graft function (SGF) and IGF were defined as a serum creatinine fall by <20% versus >20% in the first 24 hours posttransplant, respectively. Non–death censored actual graft survivals are reported herein. Results Seventy-two of the 335 subjects (21.5%) received organs from ECDs and displayed IGF in 54.7%, SGF 16.2%, and DGF 29.1%. Among SCDs, the SGF and DGF rates were 15.3% and 23.4%, respectively. In ECD, the SGF and DGF rates were 19.4% and 50% ( P < .02). Actual graft survivals at 1 and 5 years was 86.3% and 70.4%, respectively. Patients with IGF had higher actual graft survival at 5 years compared to SGF and DGF (83.5% vs 74.1% vs 45.4%). DGF had an equally bad impact on actual 5-year graft survival in SCDs and ECDs (42.6% vs 50%). Conclusion DGF has a strong detrimental impact on 5-year graft survival. There is a higher rate of DGF in ECD versus SCD kidneys. The detrimental impact on 5-year actual graft survival is equal in SCD and ECD kidneys. Minimizing DGF should be our goal.

The advantage of live-donor kidney transplantation in older recipients

Although renal transplantation confers a survival advantage over maintenance dialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease, many factors can attenuate this survival advantage over the long term. Among the most important negative influences on outcomes are older donor age, extended time on the transplant waiting list, and use of organs from deceased donors. Whether it is better to avoid prolonged waiting times for a standard criteria donor kidney by transplanting an organ from an older living donor is a clinically important question. In their analysis, Gill and colleagues have addressed this question for older transplant recipients. The investigators' primary finding is that survival after transplantation from an older living donor is at least equivalent to that after transplantation from a younger deceased donor (i.e. a standard criteria donor) and superior to that observed following transplantation from expanded criteria donors. Reasons that prevent a straightforward clinical application of such findings are discussed in this commentary.

A Systematic Review of Kidney Transplantation From Expanded Criteria Donors

During the past few years, there has been renewed interest in the use of expanded criteria donors (ECD) for kidney transplantation to increase the numbers of deceased donor kidneys available. More kidney transplants would result in shorter waiting times and limit the morbidity and mortality associated with long-term dialysis therapy. Systematic review of the literature. Kidney transplantation population. Studies were identified by using a comprehensive search through MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Inclusion criteria were case series, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials assessing kidney transplantation in adult recipients using ECDs. A special focus was given to studies comparing the evolution of kidney transplantation between standard criteria donors (defined as a donor who does not meet criteria for donation after cardiac death or ECD) and ECDs (defined as any brain-dead donor aged > 60 years or a donor aged > 50 years with 2 of the following conditions: history of hypertension, terminal serum creatinine level >or= 1.5 mg/dL, or death resulting from a cerebrovascular accident). Criteria used to define and select ECDs, practice patterns, long-term outcomes, early complications, and some patient issues, such as selection criteria and immunosuppressive management. ECD kidneys have worse long-term survival than standard criteria donor kidneys. The optimal ECD kidney for donation depends on adequate glomerular filtration rate and acceptable donor kidney histological characteristics, albeit the usefulness of biopsy is debated. This review is based mainly on data from observational studies, and varying amounts of bias could be present. We did not attempt to quantitatively analyze the effect of ECD kidneys on kidney transplantation because of the huge heterogeneity found in study designs and definitions of ECD. Based on the available evidence, we conclude that patients younger than 40 years or scheduled for kidney retransplantation should not receive an ECD kidney. Patients 40 years or older, especially with diabetic nephropathy or nondiabetic disease, but a long expected waiting time for kidney transplantation, show better survival receiving an ECD kidney than remaining on dialysis therapy.

Sirolimus Use in Recipients of Expanded Criteria Donor Kidneys

With changing donor characteristics and the growing shortage in organ supply, renal transplant practitioners have sought to optimize the use of expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys, which have poorer outcomes than standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys. The outcomes may represent an acceptable trade-off if ECD transplants offer enhanced overall patient survival by reducing waiting times. ECD kidneys may be more susceptible to toxicity associated with calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs); therefore, a potential strategy to improve outcomes in this growing demographic is the use of CNI-free immunosuppressive protocols. To date, published clinical studies have demonstrated encouraging outcomes using sirolimus-based CNI-free regimens in SCD kidney transplant recipients. We conducted a pilot study to examine outcomes in ECD kidney transplant recipients receiving a CNI-free quadruple drug regimen, consisting of antithymocyte globulin (ATG), sirolimus, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and a corticosteroid, compared with outcomes in a retrospective CNI-control group of ECD recipients who had received standard CNI-based immunosuppressive treatment. Patient survival and allograft survival at 1 year were not significantly different between the CNI-free group (n = 13) and the CNI-control group (n = 13) [100% vs 92% and 92% vs 85%, respectively]; nor was the incidence of rejection (26% and 31%) or delayed graft function (38% of patients in both groups). Serum creatinine was significantly lower and the estimated glomerular filtration rate was significantly higher for the CNI-free group at 3-6 months but not at 1 year. Protocol biopsies in the CNI-free patients at 1 year revealed no significant progression of chronic vascular lesions. Banff chronic/sclerosing allograft nephropathy scores were 42% grade I, 25% grades II and III, and 33% grade 0. Thus, a sirolimus-based CNI-free regimen may improve outcomes in ECD kidney transplant recipients and merits further study.

Outcomes of Kidneys from Donors After Cardiac Death: Implications for Allocation and Preservation

Although donation after cardiac death (DCD) kidneys have a high incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) and have been considered marginal, no tool for stratifying risk of graft loss nor a specific policy governing their allocation exist. We compared outcomes of 2562 DCD, 62,800 standard criteria donor (SCD) and 12,812 expanded criteria donor (ECD) transplants reported between 1993 and 2005, and evaluated factors associated with risk of graft loss and DGF in DCD kidneys. Donor age was the only criterion used in the definition of ECD kidneys that independently predicted graft loss among DCD kidneys. Kidneys from DCD donors <50 had similar long-term graft survival to those from SCD (RR 1.1, p = NS). While DGF was higher among DCD compared to SCD and ECD, limiting cold ischemia (CIT) to <12 h decreased the rate of DGF 15% among DCD <50 kidneys. These findings suggest that DCD <50 kidneys function like SCD kidneys and should not be viewed as marginal or ECD, and further, limiting CIT <12 h markedly reduces DGF.

Kidney and Pancreas Transplantation in the United States, 1996–2005

Kidney and pancreas transplantation in 2005 improved in quantity and outcome quality, despite the increasing average age of kidney graft recipients, with 56% aged 50 or older. Geography and ABO blood type contribute to the discrepancy in waiting time among the deceased donor (DD) candidates. Allocation policy changes are decreasing the median times to transplant for pediatric recipients. Overall, 6% more DD kidney transplants were performed in 2005 with slight increases in standard criteria donors (SCD) and expanded criteria donors (ECD). The largest increase (39%) was in donation after cardiac death (DCD) from non-ECD donors. These DCD, non-ECD kidneys had equivalent outcomes to SCD kidneys. 1-, 3- and 5-year unadjusted graft survival was 91%, 80% and 70% for non-ECD-DD transplants, 82%, 68% and 53% for ECD-DD grafts, and 95%, 88% and 80% for living donor kidney transplants. In 2005, 27% of patients were discharged without steroids compared to 3% in 1999. Acute rejection decreased to 11% in 2004. There was a slight increase in the number of simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants (895), with fewer pancreas after kidney transplants (343 from 419 in 2004), and a stable number of pancreas alone transplants (129). Pancreas underutilization appears to be an ongoing issue.

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.

Selective Use of Expanded Criteria Donors for Renal Transplantation With Good Results

Increasing demand for renal transplants has stimulated expanded criteria for the use of deceased donors. Recently an official category of “Expanded Criteria Donors” (ECD) was designated by UNOS. This category included any deceased donor (1) greater than age 60 years or (2) age 50 to 59 years with any two of: (a) creatinine greater than 1.5 mg/dL (b) cerebrovascular accident cause of death, or (c) hypertension history. It has been anticipated that at 3 years, 70% of ECD kidneys with serum creatinine greater than 1.5 would be lost. We reviewed our experience with the use of this type of kidney prior to the era of officially designated ECD. Survival rates and serum creatinines were compared to standard criteria donor recipients for the same time period whose donor was greater than 50 years of age and correlated with biopsies. From 1996 to 2003, 341 deceased donor kidneys were transplanted at our center. Of these, 37 were ECD kidneys and 46 were standard criteria donors kidneys. Four pretransplant biopsies had greater than 20% sclerosed glomeruli. Four donors had 0% to 25% arteriosclerosis pretransplant; on postperfusion biopsy, eight had 0% to 25% arteriosclerosis, while three had 25% to 50%. The mean donor age was 61 years; mean recipient age was 54 years; recipient sex was 57% male, and 54% of the recipients were African-American. At 1, 2, and 3 years posttransplant, there was no significant difference between the two groups in serum creatinine, graft survival, or patient survival. Despite using ECD donors, good long-term function can be obtained, particularly if selectivity is exercised.

Optimal use of older donors and recipients in kidney transplantation

The aging donor and recipient population have led to new challenges in kidney transplantation. The purpose of this study was to review retrospectively our single center experience in deceased-donor kidney transplantation, with respect to donor and recipient age. From October 1, 2001, through February 20, 2004, we performed 144 deceased-donor kidney transplantations, which included 37 procedures (26%) in recipients > or =60 years old and 107 procedures (74%) in recipients 19 to 59 years old. The deceased-donor pool included 57 expanded criteria donors (ECD) and 87 standard criteria donors (defined as not ECD). ECD kidneys were used by matching estimated renal functional mass to recipient size (body mass index, <25 kg/m(2)), which included the use of dual kidney transplantations (n = 9). ECD kidney recipients were further selected on the basis of age >40 years and low immunologic risk. Recipients received rabbit antithymocyte globulin or alemtuzumab induction in combination with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids. The mean age differed between recipient groups (65 vs 46 years; P < .001). In recipients > or =60 years old, 23 recipients (62%) received kidney transplants from ECDs compared with 34 kidney transplants from ECDs (32%; P < .001) in recipients who were <60 years old. Patient survival was 89% in recipients who were > or =60 years old, compared with 95% in recipients who were <60 years old (P = .11), with a mean follow-up time of 27 months. Kidney graft survival rates were 84% in both recipient groups. Initial and subsequent graft function, rejection, infection, reoperation, length of stay, readmission, and resource use were similar among groups. By the matching of nephron mass with recipient size and avoiding the use of ECD kidneys in recipients with a high immunologic risk, short-term outcomes that are comparable with standard criteria donor kidneys in younger patients can be achieved with either older donors or recipients, regardless of age.

Expanded Criteria Donors: Process and Outcomes

Expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys are transplantable deceased donor (DD) kidneys for which the average patient, graft survival, and renal function are inferior when compared to standard criteria DD kidneys. Although the term ECD kidneys has been used since the early 1990s to describe kidneys with various characteristics associated with poorer outcomes, the concept has been formally implemented in U.S. organ allocation. A DD kidney is considered to be an ECD organ if the estimated adjusted risk of graft failure is > or = 70% (RR > or = 1.70) compared to DD kidneys with standard characteristics of transplant suitability. The donor characteristics that define an ECD kidney include age > or = 60 years, or age 50-59 years plus two of the following: cerebrovascular accident as the cause of death, preexisting hypertension, or terminal serum creatinine greater than 1.5 mg/dl. In the aggregate, recipients of ECD kidneys have improved survival compared to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on the kidney transplant waiting list. Patient survival is 5% lower at 1 year and 8-12% lower at 3-5 years for ECD kidney recipients. Adjusted graft survival in ECD kidneys is 8% lower at 1 year and 15-20% lower at 3-5 years after transplantation compared to standard criteria donor kidneys. However, patients less than 40 years of age, African Americans, Asians for whom the median waiting time is less than 1350 days receive no survival benefit from ECD kidney transplantation. Informed choice by the potential recipient is a prominent feature of the allocation policy regarding ECD kidneys. Since there are recipient characteristics associated with no survival benefit following ECD transplantation, nephrologists who refer patients for kidney transplantation should be familiar with the combination of donor and recipient factors that are likely to yield detrimental results.