Citations

AbstractDual kidney transplantation (DKT), utilizing two adult kidneys from the same donor for one recipient, has been used as a way to expand the available donor pool. These kidneys often come from high Kidney Donor Profile Index donors (KDPI > 85%). Data comparing outcomes between high KDPI DKT and single kidney transplants (SKT) remain limited. We assessed outcomes of 336 high KDPI kidney transplants performed at our center; 11.0% (n = 37) were DKT. Recipients of DKT were older (P = .02) and donors had a higher KDPI score (median 96% vs. 91%, P < .0001). DKT operative time was higher compared to SKT (+1.4 hours, P < .0001). There were no differences in delayed graft function (54.1% vs. 51.5%, P = .77) and hospital length of stay (median 4.0 vs. 3.0 days, P = .21) between DKT and SKT. Grade I Clavien‐Dindo complications occurred in 8.1% of DKT and 13.7% of SKT (P = .008). There were no grade IVa, IVb, or V complications in either group. DKT had more glomerulosclerosis (P = .04), interstitial fibrosis (P = .02), tubular atrophy (P = .01), and arterial thickening (P = .03) on 1‐year protocol biopsies. Estimated glomerular filtration was higher for DKT at 1‐ (P = .004) and 2‐years post‐transplant (P = .01). There were no differences in patient (HR 1.3, 95% CI .5‐3.3, P = .58) or graft (HR 1.1, 95% CI .5‐2.3, P = .83) survival. Good outcomes can be achieved with DKT using high KDPI kidneys with moderate chronic changes. DKT is a good option to help further utilize high KDPI kidneys and minimize discard.

Background. Improving both patient and graft survival after kidney transplantation are major unmet needs. The goal of this study was to assess risk factors for specific causes of graft loss to determine to what extent patients who develop either death with a functioning graft (DWFG) or graft failure (GF) have similar baseline risk factors for graft loss. Methods. We retrospectively studied all solitary renal transplants performed between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2018, at 3 centers and determined the specific causes of DWFG and GF. We examined outcomes in different subgroups using competing risk estimates and cause-specific Cox models. Results. Of the 5752 kidney transplants, graft loss occurred in 21.6% (1244) patients, including 12.0% (691) DWFG and 9.6% (553) GF. DWFG was most commonly due to malignancy (20.0%), infection (19.7%), cardiac disease (12.6%) with risk factors of older age and pretransplant dialysis, and diabetes as the cause of renal failure. For GF, alloimmunity (38.7%), glomerular diseases (18.6%), and tubular injury (13.9%) were the major causes. Competing risk incidence models identified diabetes and older recipients with higher rates of both DWFG and nonalloimmune GF. Conclusions. These data suggest that at baseline, 2 distinct populations can be identified who are at high risk for renal allograft loss: a younger, nondiabetic patient group who develops GF due to alloimmunity and an older, more commonly diabetic population who develops DWFG and GF due to a mixture of causes—many nonalloimmune. Individualized management is needed to improve long-term renal allograft survival in the latter group.

AbstractBackground and objectivesWe aimed to determine outcomes with transplanting kidneys from deceased donors with severe acute kidney injury requiring acute renal replacement therapy (RRT).Materials and methodsA total of 172 recipients received a kidney from donors with acute kidney injury stage 3 (AKIN3) requiring RRT. We compared the study group to 528 recipients who received a kidney from donors with AKIN stage 3 not on RRT and 463 recipients who received < 85% Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) AKIN stage 0 kidney.ResultsThe study group donors were younger compared to the 2 control groups. Despite higher DGF in the study group, the length of hospital stay and acute rejection were similar. Death censored graft survival (96% AKIN3‐RRT vs. 97%AKIN3 no RRT vs. 96% KDPI < 85% AKIN0,P = 0.26) and patient survival with functioning graft at 1 year (95% across all groups,P = 0.402) were similar. The estimated glomerular filtration rate were similar across the 3 groups after first month. Interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy score ≥ 2 on protocol biopsy at time 0, 4 and 12 months were similar. Primary nonfunction was rare and associated with high KDPI.ConclusionsTransplanting selected kidneys from deceased donors with AKIN3 requiring RRT is safe and has good outcomes.

AbstractKidney transplant (KT) outcomes from high kidney donor profile index (KDPI ≥85%) donors with acute kidney injury (AKI) remain underreported. KT from 172 high KDPI Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) stage 0‐1 donors and 76 high KDPI AKIN stage 2‐3 donors from a single center were retrospectively assessed. The AKIN 2‐3 cohort had more delayed graft function (71% vs. 37%, p < .001). At one year, there were no differences in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (44 ± 17 vs. 46 ± 18, p = .42) or fibrosis on protocol biopsy (ci, p = .85). Donor terminal creatinine (p = .59) and length of delayed graft function (p = .39) did not impact one‐year eGFR. There were more primary nonfunction (PNF) events in the high KDPI AKIN 2‐3 group (5.3% vs. 0.6%, p = .02). With a median follow‐up of 3.8 years, one‐year death‐censored graft failure was 3.5% for AKIN 0‐1 and 14.5% for AKIN 2‐3 (HR 2.40, 95% CI 1.24‐4.63, p = .01). Although AKIN stage 2‐3 high KDPI kidneys had comparable one‐year eGFR to AKIN stage 0‐1 high KDPI kidneys, there were more PNF occurrences and one‐year death‐censored graft survival was reduced. Given these findings, additional precautions should be undertaken when assessing and utilizing kidneys from severe AKI high KDPI donors.

Objective: To understand whether reduced lengths of stay after kidney transplantation were associated with excess health care utilization in the first 90 days or long-term graft and patient survival outcomes. Background: Reducing length of stay after kidney transplant has an unknown effect on post-transplant health care utilization. We studied this association in a cohort of 1001 consecutive kidney transplants. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 2011–2015 data from a prospectively-maintained kidney transplant database from a single center. Results: A total of 1001 patients underwent kidney transplant, and were dismissed from the hospital in 3 groups: Early [≤2 days] (19.8%), Normal [3–7 days] (79.4%) and Late [>7 days] (3.8%). 34.8% of patients had living donor transplants (Early 51%, Normal 31.4%, Late 18.4%, P < 0.001). Early patients had lower delayed graft function rates (Early 19.2%, Normal 32%, Late73.7%, P = 0.001). By the hospital dismissal group, there were no differences in readmissions or emergency room visits at 30 or 90 days. Glomerular filtration rate at 12 months and rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection were also similar between groups. The timing of hospital dismissal was not associated with the risk-adjusted likelihood of readmission. Early and Normal patients had similar graft and patient survival. Late dismissal patients, who had higher rates of cardiovascular complications, had significantly higher late mortality versus Normal dismissal patients in unadjusted and risk-adjusted models. Conclusion: Dismissing patients from the hospital 2 days after kidney transplant is safe, feasible, and improves value. It is not associated with excess health care utilization or worse short or long-term transplant outcomes.

AbstractKidney paired donation (KPD) and the new kidney allocation system (KAS) in the United States have led to improved transplantation rates for highly sensitized candidates. We aimed to assess the potential need for other approaches to improve the transplantation rate of highly sensitized candidates such as desensitization. Using the UNOS STAR file, we analyzed transplant rates in a prevalent active waiting‐list cohort as of June 1, 2016, followed for 1 year. The overall transplantation rate was 18.9% (11 129/58769). However, only 9.7% (213/2204) of candidates with a calculated panel reactive antibody ≥99.9% received a transplant, and highly sensitized candidates were less likely to receive a living donor transplant. Among candidates with a CPRA ≥ 99.5% (ie. 100%), only 2.5% of transplants were from living donors (13 total, 7 from KPD). Nearly 4 years after KAS (6/30/2018), 1791 actively wait‐listed candidates had a CPRA of ≥99.9% and 34.6% (620/1791) of these had ≥5 years of waiting time. Thus, despite KPD and KAS, many sensitized candidates have not been transplanted even with prolonged waiting time. We conclude that candidates with a CPRA ≥ 99.9% and sensitized candidates with an incompatible living donor and prolonged waiting time may benefit from desensitization to improve their ability to receive a transplant.

Background. We examined the 10-year experience of Mayo Clinic's kidney paired donation (KPD).We aimed to determine the benefits for the recipients of enrolled ABO/HLA compatible pairs and determine the factors associated with prolonged KPD waiting time. Methods. We performed a retrospective study of 332 kidney transplants facilitated by the Mayo 3-site KPD program from September 2007 to June 2018. Results. The median (interquartile range) time from KPD entry to transplantation was 89 days (42-187 days). The factors independently associated with receiving a transplant >3 months after KPD entry included recipient blood type O and calculated panel reactive antibodies ≥98%. Fifty-four ABO/HLA compatible pairs participated in KPD for the following reasons: cytomegalovirus mismatch (18.5% [10/54]), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) mismatch (EBV) (9.3% [5/54]), age/size mismatch (51.9% [28/54]), or altruistic reasons (20.3% [11/54]). Cytomegalovirus and EBV mismatch were avoided in 90% (9/10) and 100% (5/5) of cases. Recipients who entered KPD for age/size mismatch and altruistic reasons received kidneys from donors with lower Living Kidney Donor Profile Index scores than their actual donor (median [interquartile range] 31.5 [12.3-47]; P < 0.001 and 26 (-1 to 46); P = 0.01 points lower, respectively). Median time to transplant from KPD entry for compatible pair recipients was 70 days (41-163 days), and 44.4% (24/54) of these transplants were preemptive. All chains/swaps incorporating compatible pairs included ABO/HLA incompatible pairs. Conclusions. KPD should be considered for all living donor/recipient pairs because the recipients of these pairs can derive personal benefit from KPD while increasing the donor pool for difficult to match pairs.

Background. Kidneys from deceased donors with acute kidney injury (AKI) are more likely to be discarded because of concerns for poor outcomes after transplantation. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term outcomes of a large cohort of patients transplanted utilizing kidneys from deceased donors with AKI. Methods. All patients receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant during a recent 10-year period were included. Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) criteria were used to classify the donors. Donor kidneys with >10% cortical necrosis or more than mild chronic changes were discarded. The primary outcome is the combined endpoint of death or graft loss. Results. The cohort included 1313 kidneys from 974 donors, AKIN stage 0 (no AKI) in 319 (24.3%), stage 1 in 370 (28.2%), stage 2 in 177 (13.5), and stage 3 in 447 (34.0%). Estimated 5-year graft survival (95% confidence interval) was 78.5% (72.5-84.5), 77.8% (72.8-82.1), 83.8% (76.8-88.9), and 84.6% (79.5-88.7) for AKIN donor stage 0 to 3, respectively (log-rank P = 0.10). After adjusting for baseline differences, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for the combined endpoint for the AKIN stage 3 group (relative to AKIN 0 group) was 0.70 (0.45-1.10). Delayed graft function occurred in 44.6% and 75.4% of AKIN 2 and 3 groups, as compared to 33.9% and 33.5% in AKIN 0 and 1 ( P < 0.001). Conclusion. We conclude that transplanting selected kidneys from deceased donors with AKI with preimplantation biopsy showing <10% cortical necrosis and no more than mild chronic changes have excellent long-term graft survival.

Abstract Chronic kidney disease is common in patients with multiple myeloma. Historically, individuals with end-stage renal disease and multiple myeloma did poorly with renal transplantation due to higher mortality rates from the malignancy itself or associated comorbidities. However, over the past 2 decades, there have been significant advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma with the advent of new therapeutic agents resulting in an improvement of long-term survival. As a result, more individuals with multiple myeloma are being referred for kidney transplantation, especially those with good functional capacity and minimal comorbidities. Recent literature has suggested that certain patients with multiple myeloma can successfully undergo renal transplantation after stem transplantation with consideration for maintenance therapy, although caution should be used with immunomodulating drugs due to the anecdotally reported risk of acute rejection. Therefore, having a multidisciplinary approach with the transplant team and hematology both before and after transplant is crucial in maximizing the chance of success for these individuals. This review summarizes the literature on renal transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma as well as the therapeutic advancements that have occurred which may allow certain patients to undergo successful transplantation.

Background Significant heterogeneity exists in practice patterns and algorithms used for cardiac screening before kidney transplant. Cardiorespiratory fitness, as measured by peak oxygen uptake (VO 2peak ), is an established validated predictor of future cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in both healthy and diseased populations. The literature supports its use among asymptomatic patients in abrogating the need for further cardiac testing. Methods and Results We outlined a pre–renal transplant screening algorithm to incorporate VO 2peak testing among a population of asymptomatic high‐risk patients (with diabetes mellitus and/or >50 years of age). Only those with VO 2peak <17 mL/kg per minute (equivalent to <5 metabolic equivalents) underwent further noninvasive cardiac screening tests. We conducted a retrospective study of the a priori dichotomization of the VO 2peak <17 versus ≥17 mL/kg per minute to determine negative and positive predictive value of future cardiac events and all‐cause mortality. We report a high (>90%) negative predictive value, indicating that VO 2peak ≥17 mL/kg per minute is effective to rule out future cardiac events and all‐cause mortality. However, lower VO 2peak had low positive predictive value and should not be used as a reliable metric to predict future cardiac events and/or mortality. In addition, a simple mathematical calculation documented a cost savings of ≈$272 600 in the cardiac screening among our study cohort of 637 patients undergoing evaluation for kidney and/or pancreas transplant. Conclusions We conclude that incorporating an objective measure of cardiorespiratory fitness with VO 2peak is safe and allows for a cost savings in the cardiovascular screening protocol among higher‐risk phenotype (with diabetes mellitus and >50 years of age) being evaluated for kidney transplant.