Citations

Abstract Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) outcomes have been attributed to multiple variables, including procurement surgeon recovery techniques. Outcomes of 196 DCD LTs at Mayo Clinic Arizona were analyzed based on graft recovery by a surgeon from our center (transplant procurement team [TPT]) versus a local procurement surgeon (non‐TPT [NTPT]). A standard recovery technique was used for all TPT livers. The recovery technique used by the NTPT was left to the discretion of that surgeon. A total of 129 (65.8%) grafts were recovered by our TPT, 67 (34.2%) by the NTPT. Recipient age (p = 0.43), Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease score (median 17 vs. 18; p = 0.22), and donor warm ischemia time (median 21.0 vs. 21.5; p = 0.86) were similar between the TPT and NTPT groups. NTPT livers had longer cold ischemia times (6.5 vs. 5.0 median hours; p < 0.001). Early allograft dysfunction (80.6% vs. 76.1%; p = 0.42) and primary nonfunction (0.8% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.47) were similar. Ischemic cholangiopathy (IC) treated with endoscopy occurred in 18.6% and 11.9% of TPT and NTPT grafts (p = 0.23). At last follow‐up, approximately half of those requiring endoscopy were undergoing a stent‐free trial (58.3% TPT; 50.0% NTPT; p = 0.68). IC requiring re‐LT in the first year occurred in 0.8% (n = 1) of TPT and 3.0% (n = 2) of NTPT grafts (p = 0.23). There were no differences in patient (hazard ratio [HR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76–5.03; p = 0.23) or graft (HR, 1.99; 95% CI, 0.98–4.09; p = 0.10) survival rates. Graft survival at 1 year was 91.5% for TPT grafts and 95.5% for NTPT grafts. Excellent outcomes can be achieved using NTPT for the recovery of DCD livers. There may be an opportunity to expand the use of DCD livers in the United States by increasing the use of NTPT.

AbstractBackgroundCenters 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsHigh (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 2 years (Low vs. High KDPI: 60.35 vs. 41.54 ml/min, P < .001), but similar 3‐year patient and graft survival (both, P > .09).ConclusionsHigh and low KDPI KTRs demonstrated similar 90‐day risk‐adjusted health care utilization, which should encourage use of high KDPI kidneys.

Abstract Background. There is controversy regarding the impact of delayed graft function (DGF) on kidney transplant outcomes. We hypothesize that the duration of DGF, rather than DGF itself, is associated with long-term kidney graft function.Methods. We analyzed all deceased donor kidney transplants (DDKT) done at our center between 2008 to 2020 with DGF to determine factors associated with DGF duration as well as the impact of DGF duration on 1) acute rejection, BKV infection, progression of fibrosis on protocol biopsy, and death censored graft survival 2) resource utilization, including hospital length of stay and readmissions. DGF duration was assessed at three 14-day intervals: <14 DGF days, 14-27 DGF days, >28 DGF days.Results. There were 1714 DDKT were included, 59.4% (n=1018) had DGF. The median DGF duration was 10 days IQR (6,15). The majority of recipients (95%) had resolution of DGF within 28 days. Donor factors associated with DGF days were longer cold ischemia time, donor on inotropes, older age, donation after circulatory death, higher terminal creatinine, and hypertension. Recipient factors associated with increased DGF duration included male sex, length on dialysis before transplant, and higher body mass index. There were no differences in acute rejection events or interstitial fibrosis progression by 4 months when comparing DGF days. The median length of stay was 3 days. However, readmissions increased with increasing DGF duration. Death-censored graft survival was not associated with the length of DGF except when DGF lasted >28 days. Conclusions. Inferior graft survival was observed only in recipients of DDKT with DGF lasting beyond 28 days. DGF lasting <28 days had no impact on graft survival. Duration of DGF, rather than DGF itself, is associated with graft survival. Trial Registration. Retrospective study approved by Mayo Clinic IRB.

Background. The risk of donor-derived severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in solid organ (heart, lung, liver, kidney, pancreas, and intestine) transplant recipients is poorly understood. Since hematogenous transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has not been documented to date, nonlung solid organs might be suitable for transplantation since they likely portend a low risk of viral transmission. Methods. Abdominal solid organs from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors were transplanted into uninfected recipients. Results. Between April 18, 2021, and October 30, 2021, we performed transplants of 2 livers, 1 simultaneous liver and kidney, 1 kidney, and 1 simultaneous kidney and pancreas from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors into 5 uninfected recipients. None of the recipients developed SARS-CoV-2 infection or coronavirus disease 2019, and when tested, allograft biopsies showed no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Conclusions. Transplanting nonlung organs from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors into uninfected recipients demonstrated no evidence of virus transmission.

Background: Black kidney transplant recipients have worse allograft outcomes compared to White recipients. The feature importance and feature interaction network analysis framework of machine learning random forest (RF) analysis may provide an understanding of RF structures to design strategies to prevent acute rejection among Black recipients. Methods: We conducted tree-based RF feature importance of Black kidney transplant recipients in United States from 2015 to 2019 in the UNOS database using the number of nodes, accuracy decrease, gini decrease, times_a_root, p value, and mean minimal depth. Feature interaction analysis was also performed to evaluate the most frequent occurrences in the RF classification run between correlated and uncorrelated pairs. Results: A total of 22,687 Black kidney transplant recipients were eligible for analysis. Of these, 1330 (6%) had acute rejection within 1 year after kidney transplant. Important variables in the RF models for acute rejection among Black kidney transplant recipients included recipient age, ESKD etiology, PRA, cold ischemia time, donor age, HLA DR mismatch, BMI, serum albumin, degree of HLA mismatch, education level, and dialysis duration. The three most frequent interactions consisted of two numerical variables, including recipient age:donor age, recipient age:serum albumin, and recipient age:BMI, respectively. Conclusions: The application of tree-based RF feature importance and feature interaction network analysis framework identified recipient age, ESKD etiology, PRA, cold ischemia time, donor age, HLA DR mismatch, BMI, serum albumin, degree of HLA mismatch, education level, and dialysis duration as important variables in the RF models for acute rejection among Black kidney transplant recipients in the United States.

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.

Background: Lower patient survival has been observed in sickle cell disease (SCD) patients who go on to receive a kidney transplant. This study aimed to assess the post-transplant outcomes of SCD kidney transplant recipients in the contemporary era. Methods: We used the OPTN/UNOS database to identify first-time kidney transplant recipients from 2010 through 2019. We compared patient and allograft survival between recipients with SCD (n = 105) vs. all other diagnoses (non-SCD, n = 146,325) as the reported cause of end-stage kidney disease. We examined whether post-transplant outcomes improved among SCD in the recent era (2010–2019), compared to the early era (2000–2009). Results: After adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics, SCD was significantly associated with lower patient survival (HR 2.87; 95% CI 1.75–4.68) and death-censored graft survival (HR 1.98; 95% CI 1.30–3.01), compared to non-SCD recipients. The lower patient survival and death-censored graft survival in SCD recipients were consistently observed in comparison to outcomes of recipients with diabetes, glomerular disease, and hypertension as the cause of end-stage kidney disease. There was no significant difference in death censored graft survival (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.51–1.73, p = 0.98) and patient survival (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.50–1.74, p = 0.82) of SCD recipients in the recent versus early era. Conclusions: Patient and allograft survival in SCD kidney recipients were worse than recipients with other diagnoses. Overall SCD patient and allograft outcomes in the recent era did not improve from the early era. The findings of our study should not discourage kidney transplantation for ESKD patients with SCD due to a known survival benefit of transplantation compared with remaining on dialysis. Urgent future studies are needed to identify strategies to improve patient and allograft survival in SCD kidney recipients. In addition, it may be reasonable to assign risk adjustment for SCD patients.

Context.— It is unclear if preimplantation frozen section biopsy correlates with outcomes after deceased donor kidney transplantation. Objective.— To assess if chronic histologic changes on the preimplant frozen section correlates with graft loss and estimated glomerular filtration rate independently of kidney donor profile index (KDPI). Design.— Seven hundred three preimplantation biopsies were reviewed and a Banff sum score was calculated using glomerular sclerosis, interstitial fibrosis, vascular intimal thickening, and arteriolar hyalinosis. The posttransplant outcomes were compared for preimplantation biopsy Banff sum 0-1, 2-3, and 4-9. The cohort was also stratified by KDPI 85 or less versus more than 85. Results.— For the entire biopsy cohort, graft survival, estimated glomerular filtration rate at 1 year, and chronic changes on a 1-year posttransplant biopsy were superior in the group with preimplantation Banff sum 0-1. After stratifying by KDPI, the Banff sum no longer correlated with graft survival. In a univariate mode, using the Banff sum score as a continuous variable, a higher Banff sum score was significantly associated with graft failure (P = .03); however, after adjusting the KDPI, the Banff sum score no longer correlated with graft failure (P = .45). The 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate and 1-year biopsy changes were superior in the group with Banff sum 0-1 only in the cohort with KDPI 85 or less. Conclusions.— In donor kidneys used for transplant, preimplantation biopsy chronic changes correlate with estimated glomerular filtration rate and biopsy findings at 1 year, but biopsies with mostly mild chronicity and Banff sum scores less than or equal to 5 did not impact graft survival beyond KDPI.

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.