Adult-size kidneys without acute tubular necrosis provide exceedingly superior long-term graft outcomes for infants and small children: a single center and UNOS analysis. United Network for Organ Sharing

BACKGROUND: Infants with end-stage renal disease are at highest risk for early graft loss and mortality of any subgroup undergoing renal transplantation. This study evaluates the influence of donor tissue mass and acute tubular necrosis (ATN) on graft survival and incidence of acute rejection episodes in infant and small child recipients of living donor (LD) and cadaver (CAD) adult-size kidneys (ASKs), pediatric CAD kidneys and combined kidney-liver transplants. Methods. Kidney transplants in infants and small children at a single center and those reported to the UNOS Scientific Renal Transplant Registry were analyzed. At Stanford, multi-variate analysis was conducted on 45 consecutive renal allograft recipients weighing < or = 15 kg, mean weight 11.2 +/- 2.6 kg. The UNOS Registry results in age groups 0-2.5 (n=548) and 2.5-5 years (n=743) were compared with age groups 6-12, 13-18, and the lowest risk adult group of 19-45 years. STANFORD RESULTS. Graft survival was 97.8 +/- 0.0 at 2 years and 84.6 +/- 0.1% at 8 years. The incidence of biopsy proven rejection was 8.8% in the first 3 months and 15.5% over the 8-year follow-up. None of the pediatric CAD kidneys had ATN. Rejection episodes were restricted to the pediatric CAD kidneys alone (3/3), with no kidney rejections in the combined pediatric CAD kidney-liver transplants (0/6; P=0.003). Four ASK transplants had ATN (1 postoperative and 3 late), and all predisposed to subsequent acute rejection episodes (4/4), whereas there were no rejection episodes in ASK transplants without ATN (0/32; P<0.001). At 3 years posttransplantation, mean serum creatinines were worse in ASKs with ATN (1.5 vs. 0.9 mg/dL; P<0.001) and in all grafts with rejection episodes (1.2 vs. 0.9 mg/dL; P<0.05). UNOS RESULTS: Among the 5 age groups studied, significantly better (P<0.001) long-term graft survival rates were observed in allograft recipients in the 2 youngest age groups with ASKs without ATN: 82 +/- 3% and 81 +/- 3% for LD and 70 +/- 7% and 78 +/- 4% for CAD recipients in the 0-2.5 and 2.5- to 5-year age groups, respectively, at 6 years after transplantation. Moreover, the projected graft half-lives after the 1st year in the LD groups without ATN were at least equivalent to those of HLA-identical sibling recipients ages 19-45 years: 26.3 +/- 5 and 29.3 +/- 6 years for the 0- to 2.5- and 2.5- to 5-year age groups, respectively, and 23.3 +/- 1 years for HLA-identical transplants. The graft half-lives for CAD recipients without ATN ages 0-2.5 and 2.5-5 yearswere equivalent or better than those for LD transplants without ATN in recipients aged 19-45 years: 15.4+/- 7 and 23.7 +/- 8 years versus 15.0 +/- 0.3 years. Mean serum creatinines were superior in the 2 younger recipient age groups compared with older age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Increased donor tissue mass of the ASK or kidney-liver transplants, in the absence of ATN, seems to confer a protective effect to infant and small child recipients of these allografts. This is manifested by a prolonged rejection-free state in the single center experience and enhanced graft survival and function in the UNOS analysis, comparable to HLA identical sibling transplants for LD infant and small child recipients and to LD adult results for CAD infant and small child recipients. To optimize this protective effect by whatever mechanism, absolute avoidance of ATN is essential in infant recipients of ASK or combined kidney-liver transplants.     

Long-term Outcome of Living Donors Older Than 60 Years

Long-term outcomes of renal transplantation using kidneys from donors >60 years old are generally considered to be poor. This retrospective study included 265 living donor (LD) transplants in adult recipients with a mean follow-up of 13.1 ± 6.1 years (range, 1.3-25.8), all of them under CNI. They were grouped according to the donor age at least (n = 49) or less (n = 216) than 60 years. Graft and patient survivals were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox multiple regression.At 1, 3, and 10 years, postoperatively patient survivals in the group of older LD recipients were 97%, 96%, and 93%, versus 98%, 97% and 92% among the younger LD recipients.At 1, 3 and 10 years, postoperatively graft survivals uncensored for death were 94%, 92%, and 81% among the older LD recipients versus 93%, 89%, 75% among the control group, respectively, despite a slightly increased creatininemia observed at 10 years among the older LD recipients.Deaths censored graft survivals were 96%, 96%, and 87% among the older versus 94%, 91% and 78% among the younger LD recipients, respectively.Therefore, significantly better noncensored death-censored graft survivals, were observed among the recipients of older LD compared with recipients of the younger donor group.     

Kidney transplantation in young children: should there be a minimum age?

The optimal age for transplantation in children with end-stage renal disease remains controversial. Many centers have adopted a policy of waiting until such children reach a certain minimum age or weight, maintaining them on chronic dialysis until then. Their policy is based on historical data showing inferior graft survival in very young children. We feel that with proper donor selection and recipient care, comparable results can be achieved in very young age groups. We herein present our results with kidney transplantation in children <1 year old. Between 1 January 1984 and 31 December 1999, we performed 321 kidney transplants in children ≤13 years at the University of Minnesota. We analyzed our results in three age groups: <1 year (n=30), 1 through 4 years (n=122), and 5 through 13 years (n=169). We found no significant differences in patient or graft survival rates between the three groups. Almost all our infant (<1 year) recipients underwent primary transplants from living donors (LDs). However, even when we compared results only of primary LD transplants between the three groups, we found no significant differences. To date, all our infant recipients are alive and well, 24 (80%) with a functioning original graft. Causes of the 6 graft losses were chronic rejection (n=3), vascular thrombosis (n=2), and recurrent disease (n=1). Infants had significantly lower incidences of acute and chronic rejection compared with older recipients, but a tendency to higher incidences of delayed graft function and vascular thrombosis. Infants had significant increases in weight post transplant: the mean standard deviation score rose from –2.8 pre transplant to –0.2 by age 5 years and to +1.8 by age 10 years. The improvement in height was less marked: the mean standard deviation rose from –3.2 pre transplant to –1.6 by age 5 years and to –1.4 by age 10 years. Kidney transplant results in very young children can be comparable to those in older children. There need be no minimum age for performing a kidney transplant. The timing of the transplant should not be based on age or size alone. Received: 7 June 2001 / Revised: 3 August 2001 / Accepted: 3 August 2001     

Influence of Graft Type on Outcomes After Pediatric Liver Transplantation

We sought to determine which type of donor graft provides children and young adults with the best outcomes following liver transplantation. Using the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database, we identified 6467 recipients of first liver transplants during 1989-2000 aged < 30 years. We used Cox models to examine adjusted patient and graft outcomes by age (< 2, 2-10, 11-16, 17-29) and donor graft type (deceased donor full size (DD-F), split (DD-S), living donor (LD)]. For patients aged < 2, LD grafts had a significantly lower risk of graft failure than DD-S (RR = 0.49, p < 0.0001) and DD-F (RR = 0.70, p = 0.02) and lower mortality risk than DD-S (RR = 0.71, p = 0.08) during the first year post-transplant. In contrast, older children exhibited a higher risk of graft loss and a trend toward higher mortality associated with LD transplants. In young adults, DD-S transplants were associated with poor outcomes. Three-year follow up yielded similar graft survival results but no significant differences in mortality risk by graft type within age group. For recipients aged < 2, LD transplants provide superior graft survival than DD-F or DD-S and trend toward better patient survival than DD-S. Living donor is the preferred donor source in the most common pediatric age group (< 2 years) undergoing liver transplantation.     

Whole liver versus split liver versus living donor in the adult recipient: an analysis of outcomes by graft type

BACKGROUND: We studied patient and graft survival rates in adult liver transplant recipients, analyzing outcomes based on donor source (deceased donor [DD] vs. living donor [LD]) and graft type (whole liver vs. partial liver). METHODS: A retrospective database analysis of all adult liver transpants performed at our center over a 7-year period of time. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2005, 384 liver transplants were performed in adult recipients, either as a whole liver from a deceased donor (DD-WL, n=284), split liver from a DD (DD-SL, n=31), or a partial transplant from a living donor (LD, n=69). DD-SL transplants were performed with a full right or left lobe graft, while LD transplants used the right lobe. Demographic differences in the three groups were most noticeable for lower model for end-stage liver disease scores in LD recipients (P<0.001) and younger donor age in DD-SL recipients (P<0.001). Superior graft survival results were seen in LD recipients versus either DD-WL recipients or DD-SL recipients (P=0.02 and P=0.05, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed hepatitis C (HR=1.53, P=0.05) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HR=1.74, P=0.03) to be significant risk factors for patient survival. Hepatitis C (HR=1.61, P=0.03) and donor age more than 50 (HR=1.64, P=0.04) were significant risk factors for graft survival. However, neither graft type nor donor source were significant independent risk factors for patient or graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggests that the status of the recipient is probably a more important determinant of outcome than graft type or donor source.     

Pre-emptive transplants for patients with renal failure: an argument against waiting until dialysis

BACKGROUND: Pre-emptive kidney transplants have not been favored in some centers because of concern about possible increased noncompliance and allegedly inferior long-term results. We analyzed our experience with pre-emptive kidney transplants to determine whether such concerns are justified. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1, 1984, and June 30, 1998, we performed 1849 adult primary kidney transplants: 385 pre-emptive (recipients not undergoing dialysis, ND) and 1464 non-pre-emptive (recipients undergoing dialysis, D). Results were subdivided by donor source: cadaver (CAD) and living donor (LD). ND recipients tended to be younger, but otherwise, the two groups were similar. Posttransplantation quality of life in recipients was evaluated using the nationally standardized Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). The posttransplantation employment status of the recipients was also evaluated. RESULTS: The patient survival rate 5 years posttransplantation was significantly better for ND (vs. D) recipients for both CAD (92.6% vs. 76.6%, P=0.001) and LD (93.3% vs. 89.5%, P=0.02) transplants. The 5-year patient survival rate was significantly higher for ND recipients compared with recipients undergoing dialysis for < 1, 1-2, and > 2 years pretransplantation for both CAD (P=0.0005) and LD (P=0.0001) transplants. The graft survival rate 5 years posttransplantation was similar between ND and D recipients for CAD transplants, but significantly better for ND (vs. D) recipients of LD transplants (92.3% vs. 84.8%, P=0.006). For CAD transplants, the 5-year graft survival rate was not different when ND recipients were compared with recipients undergoing dialysis for < 1, 1-2, and > 2 years pretransplantation; for LD transplants it was significantly higher for ND recipients compared with recipients undergoing dialysis for < 1, 1-2, and > 2 years pretransplantation (P=0.04). The incidence of acute and chronic rejection was no different between ND and D recipients for either CAD or LD transplants, and it was also not affected by the pretransplantation time undergoing dialysis. Graft loss secondary to the recipient's discontinuation of immunosuppressive therapy (a crude estimate of compliance) was similar between ND and D recipients. Five years posttransplantation, the SF-36 scores regarding the recipient's quality of life and the employment status were similar for ND compared with D recipients, regardless of donor source. CONCLUSIONS: ND recipients do not seem to have higher rates of noncompliance than D recipients. Results for ND recipients seem to be superior than for D recipients, supporting the contention that renal failure patients should, if possible, undergo transplantation before dialysis.     

Patient and graft outcomes from deceased kidney donors age 70 years and older: an analysis of the Organ Procurement Transplant Network/United Network of Organ Sharing database

BACKGROUND: The organ shortage has resulted in more use of older deceased donor kidneys. Data are limited on the impact of donor aged 70 years and older on transplant outcomes. We examined patient and graft outcomes of renal transplant from expanded criteria donors (ECDs) aged 70 years and older, using the Organ Procurement Transplant Network/United Network of Organ Sharing database. METHODS: We identified 601 deceased donor transplants from donors older than 70 years from 2000 to 2005. The follow-up time was until May 2007. Allograft and patient survival were compared between recipients of transplants from older ECDs (age > or =70) and younger ECDs (age 50-69). The relative risk of graft loss and patient death were determined using multivariate models. RESULTS: The adjusted relative risks of overall graft loss (hazards ratio [HR] 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19-1.58), death-censored graft loss (HR 1.32; 95% CI 1.09-1.61), and patient death (HR 1.37; 95% CI 1.15-1.64) were greater among recipients of transplants from older ECD kidneys. The relative risk of patient death was lower when older ECD kidneys were transplanted into recipients older than 60 compared with recipients aged 41 to 60. In contrast, the relative risk of death-censored graft loss was not increased when older ECD kidneys were transplanted into recipients older than 60. CONCLUSIONS: Transplants from older ECD kidneys are associated with a higher risk of graft loss and patient death. The risk was highest when older ECD kidneys were transplanted into recipients younger than 60 years.     

Pediatric renal transplantation: 13 years of experience--report from the Chilean Cooperative Multicenter Group

Between 1989 and 2002, 178 renal transplants were performed in 168 pediatric patients in Chile. The mean age was 10.9 +/- 3.7 years (range 1 to 17.9). End-state renal disease etiologies were: congenital renal hypoplasia/dysplasia, chronic glomerulonephritis, and reflux nephropathy. Seventy received a graft from a living donor (LD), and 108 from a cadaveric donor (CD). Only 9% received antibody induction. Acute rejection episodes were reported in 76 patients: 38% in LD recipients and 48% in CD recipients (P = NS). One-, 3-, and 5-year graft survivals were 88%, 84%, and 76%, respectively, for LD and 86%, 79%, and 68% for CD recipients. Actuarial graft survival was significantly better among those patients with serum creatinine < 1 mg/dL at 1 year posttransplant compared with those with creatinine > 1 mg/dL (P < .05). The graft survival rate has improved from the first period (1989 to 1996) to the second period (1997 to 2002); (P = .05). Patient survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 98%, 98%, and 98%, respectively, for LD, and 95%, 94%, and 94% for CD. Global height/age Z-score decreased from -0.7 at birth to -1.5 when dialysis started, and to -2.4 at the time of transplantation. The Z-score height/age at 1, 3, and 5 years posttransplantation was -2.25, -2.24, and -2.5. No significant differences were observed in transplant outcomes comparing patients younger than 7 years with those older ones. In conclusion, pediatric renal transplant has been performed in Chile with acceptable morbidity. The patient and graft survivals are similar to the reported international experience. In the last period there was a significant improvement in graft survival.     

The impact of donor and recipient age on the outcome of kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND: As survival has improved in the general population over the last few decades, the age of patients participating in renal transplantation has also increased. This study sought to investigate the impact of donor and recipient age as predictors of long-term graft survival in renal transplantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed transplantation outcomes in 598 patients who received renal transplants from 1979 to 2002. Patients were divided into 4 groups according to their age at renal transplantation. Group A (donor age <50 years, recipient age >50 years, n = 19/3.2%); group B (donor age >50 years, recipient age <50 years, n = 153/25.5%); group C (donor age <50 years, recipient age >50 years, n = 69/11.6%), and group D (donor age <50 years, recipient age <50 years, n = 357/59.8%). Univariate analysis to assess the effect of donor and recipient age as predictor factors of graft outcome was complimented by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods to assess graft survival with P < 1.05 considered significant. RESULTS: In the elderly donor group, graft survival was 92.8% at 1 year and 85.6% at 3 years; in the younger donor group, they were 93.4% and 90.2%, respectively, a difference that was statistically significant (P = .02). Univariate analysis of age factors showed a significant reduction in graft survival among recipients who received kidneys transplants from donors older than 50 years, although recipient age >50 years was not found to be an independent risk factor. The incidence of acute rejection was 24.6% in the elderly donor group and 23.5% in the younger donor group (P = not significant). Among the 4 groups, the best result was group D with 1-year and 3-year graft survival rates of 93.3% and 90.5%, respectively, but this result was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These results may help the design for transplantation strategies for kidneys procured from elderly donors and for allocation to elderly recipients.     

Long-term results of liver transplantation in older patients 60 years of age and older

BACKGROUND: Advances in perioperative care and immunosuppression have enabled clinicians to broaden the indications for organ transplantation. Advanced age is no longer considered a contraindication to transplantation at most centers. Although short-term studies of elderly liver transplant recipients have demonstrated that the incidence of complications and overall patient survival are similar to those of younger adults, transplant center-specific, long-term data are not available. METHODS: From August of 1984 to September of 1997, 91 patients 60 years of age or older received primary liver transplants at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. This group of patients was compared with a group of younger adults (n=387) ranging in age from 18 to 59 years who received primary liver transplants during the same period. The most common indications for transplantation in both groups were Laennec's cirrhosis, hepatitis C, primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and cryptogenic cirrhosis. There was no difference in the preoperative severity of illness between the groups. Results. The length of hospitalization was the same for both groups, and there were no significant differences in the incidence of rejection, infection (surgical or opportunistic), repeat operation, readmission, or repeat transplantation between the groups. The only significant difference identified between the groups was long-term survival. Five-year patient survival was 52% in the older group and 75% in the younger group (P<0.05). Ten-year patient survival was 35% in the older group and 60% in the younger group (P<0.05). The most common cause of late mortality in elderly liver recipients was malignancy (35.0%), whereas most of the young adult deaths were the result of infectious complications (24.2%). CONCLUSION: Although older recipients at this center did as well as younger recipients in the early years after liver transplantation, long-term survival results were not as encouraging.     

Renal transplantation in recipients over the age of 60: the impact of donor age

BACKGROUND: Kidneys from older donors exhibit a series of changes characterized by glomerular, vascular, and tubular senescence. These changes may be aggravated by atherosclerosis, hypertension, or diabetes, which are highly prevalent in older individuals. METHODS: We analyzed the outcome after transplantation in 230 recipients over the age of 60, who received transplants between February 1990 and December 1996. We assessed the 1- and 5-year patient and graft survival, the quality of renal function, tacrolimus levels, the incidence of rejection, and the incidence of delayed graft function, and compared the outcomes in recipients of kidneys from donors over the age of 60 (group 1, n = 40) with those in recipients of kidneys from donors under the age of 60 (group 2, n = 190). There were no differences between the two groups in terms of recipient sex, race, age, and cold ischemia time. Immunosuppression was with tacrolimus and steroids in 61% of cases; in the remainder of the patients, a third agent, either azathioprine, cyclophosphamide (for 1 week), or mycophenolate mofetil was administered as well. The median follow-up was 31.5 months (range: 1-86). RESULTS: In recipients over the age of 60 receiving tacrolimus-based immunosuppression, overall patient survival at 1 and 5 years was 90% and 76%, and was not significantly compromised in recipients receiving a kidney from a donor over the age of 60. The overall 1-and 5-year actuarial graft survival was 84% and 64%; in recipients from donors over the age of 60, it was 73% and 52%, whereas in recipients of kidneys from donors under the age of 60, it was 87% and 66% (P<0.05). Most of the effect on graft survival was seen by 1 year. The mean serum creatinine was 2.6+/-2.7 mg/dl, without any difference between the two groups. Although the incidence of delayed graft function was higher in recipients of kidneys from donors over the age of 60, this difference did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Although the overall outcomes of transplantation in older recipients remain reasonable, the inferior outcomes with older donor kidneys call into question proposals to utilize older donor kidneys preferentially in older recipients.     

Role of donor age and acute rejection episodes on long-term graft survival in cadaveric kidney transplantations

Cadaveric donors can provide an effective solution to the problem of organ shortage, and many factors that may affect the functioning and survival of cadaveric kidneys have been studied. We aimed to clarify the impact of donor age and acute rejection episodes on long-term graft and patient survival in patients receiving cadaveric renal transplants. We retrospectively evaluated the long-term outcomes of 207 patients who had received cadaveric renal transplants between 1985 and 2004. Mean recipient age, HLA mismatch, mean donor age, delayed graft function (DGF), mean cold ischemia time, acute rejection episodes in the first 6 months after transplantation, and 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survivals were evaluated. Two study groups were created according to donor age: group 1 (n = 126) was composed of patients receiving kidneys from donors younger than 50 years, and group 2 (n = 81) was composed of patients receiving kidneys from donors 50 years of age or older. Mean recipient age, HLA mismatch, and mean cold ischemia time between groups were not different. The DGF rate in group 1 was 40% (n = 50) and in group 2 was 46% (n = 37) (P > .05). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of patients without acute rejection within the first 6 months after transplantation in group 1 (58/126; 46%) versus those in group 2 (46/81; 57%) were 95% versus 90%, 65% versus 60%, and 40% versus 35%, respectively (P > .05). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates of patients with acute rejection within the first 6 months in group 1 (n = 68) versus those in group 2 (n = 35) were 93% versus 89%, 71% versus 55%, and 44% versus 28%, respectively (P = .005). There was no significant difference in 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates between patients with DGF in both groups. Acute rejection episodes within the first 6 months after cadaveric transplantation, especially in patients receiving kidneys from donors older than 50 years, were shown to affect 5-year survival of the kidney graft. However, cadaver age alone had no negative effect on 5-year graft survival rates. Cadaveric donors older than 50 years may be a solution to the organ shortage in the treatment of end-stage renal disease.     

Do elderly patients deserve a kidney graft?

PURPOSE: Compare renal transplant long-term outcomes among recipients aged 60 years or older with those in younger patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 103 transplants in recipients above 60 years of age for the influence of key factors related to the graft and patient. The results were compared with 1060 transplant recipients aged 18 to 59 years. RESULTS: The mean ages were 62.93 and 40.35 years for the older and younger group. The older group showed a higher prevalence of obesity and unknown etiologies for the end-stage renal disease. Important comorbidity was significantly more frequent among recipients aged more than 60 years, mainly of a cardiovascular nature (56% vs 18.5%). Donor age (39.75 vs 31.59 years), cold ischemia time (22.43 vs 20.49 hours) and human leukocyte antigen compatibilities (2.59 vs 2.36) were significantly greater in the older subset. After a mean follow-up of 4.72 and 6.07 years for the older versus younger group, we found no differences in initial graft function, acute rejection rate, and serum creatinine/clearance. Patient and graft survivals at 1, 5, and 10 years were lower among the 60+ group. There were no differences in graft survival censored for death with a functioning graft, namely, 95.1%, 89.4%, and 81.2% for the 60+ cohort. The main cause of graft loss in the older group was death with a functioning graft. CONCLUSION: Renal transplantation should be considered for selected patients older than 60 years. Despite a shorter life expectancy, they benefit from it similar to younger recipients.     

Renal transplantation from elderly living donors

A worldwide shortage of cadaveric donors has led to the increased utilization of elderly living donors, with controversial results. In an attempt to assess the effect of donor age on graft survival and subsequent renal function, we analyzed our clinical results in 276 consecutive recipients of living related renal transplants spanning both the cyclosporine and the azathioprine eras, of whom a total of 44 recipients received kidneys from donors over 55 years old. All recipients were otherwise similar in age, race, haplotype mismatch, number of retransplants, and number of pretransplant transfusions, apart from an increased number of diabetics among the CsA-treated recipients of elderly kidneys (38% vs. 14%). The cumulative patient and graft survival rates at 1 and 5 years were independent of donor age whether CsA or AZA was utilized. Nor was the incidence of rejection or infection significantly different in the older donor group when compared with the younger cohort. Short-term and intermediate-term renal function, as assessed by serum creatinine, was however poorer but stable in the older donor group when compared with the younger one. The mean serum creatinine levels at 1 year in the CsA- and AZA-treated recipients of kidneys from older donors were 2.4 and 2.0 mg/dl, respectively, compared with 1.6 and 1.4 mg/dl, respectively, when the donor age was less than 55 years (P less than 0.001). Since renal function at the end of the first posttransplant year is considered a determinant of long-term graft survival, this is a cause for concern, but in view of the universal shortage of organs and the negligible morbidity to donors, renal transplantation from elderly living donors remains an acceptable practice.     

Liver transplantation in patients over sixty years of age.

BACKGROUND: Although some centers have reported very good patient and graft survival in liver allograft recipients, reports from both North America (United Network of Organ Sharing) and Europe (European Liver Transplantation Registry) have failed to confirm this. AIM: We have reviewed our experience of liver transplantation in older recipients and compared their clinical outcome to a younger group. METHODS: Retrospective analyses were conducted on 875 consecutive adult patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic liver disease, between 1990 and 1999. Group I consisted of patients under 60 years of age (n=701; 80.2%) and group II of patients over 60 years (n=174; 19.8%). RESULTS: The proportion of older patients transplanted increased from 10.15% between 1990-1991 to 20.85% (1997-1999). Actuarial graft survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 78%, 74%, and 69% and 78%, 73%, and 66% for groups I and II, respectively (P=0.49). The overall actuarial patient survival tended to be better in the younger group (1-, 3-, and 5-year survival of 83%, 79%, and 76% for group I and 81%, 75%, and 69% for group II (P=0.07). Crude mortality probability shows a stable trend until 45 years, a gradual increase in mortality between 45 and 60 years, and then the risk of death is accelerated. The same analysis shows the risk of death is between 1.5 and 2 times greater in Child C patients; this is greater in patients aged more than 66 years. CONCLUSION: There is no statistically significant difference in patient or graft survival in patients aged over 60 compared to younger recipients. However, when age is assessed as a continuous variable, an adverse effect of older age is seen on outcome and this effect is more marked in sicker patients.     

Kidney transplant outcomes from older deceased donors: a paired kidney analysis by the European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry

As the median age of deceased kidney donors rises, updated knowledge of transplant outcomes from older deceased donors in differing donor–recipient age groups is required. Using ERA‐EDTA Registry data we determined survival outcomes of kidney allografts donated from the same older deceased donor (55–70 years), and transplanted into one recipient younger and one recipient of similar age to the donor. The recipient pairs were divided into two groups: group 1; younger (median age: 52 years) and older (60 years) and group 2; younger (41 years) and older (60 years). A total of 1410 adults were transplanted during 2000–2007. Compared to the older recipients, the mean number of functioning graft years at 10 years was 6 months longer in the group 1 and group 2 younger recipients (P < 0.001). Ten‐year graft survival was 54% and 40% for the group 1 younger and older recipients, and 60% and 49% for the group 2 younger and older recipients. Paired Cox regression analyses showed a lower risk of graft failure (group 1 younger; adjusted relative risk [RRa]:0.57, 95% CI:0.41–0.79, and group 2 younger; RRa:0.63, 95% CI:0.47–0.85) in younger recipients. Outcomes from older deceased donor allografts transplanted into differing donor–recipient age groups are better than previously reported. These allografts remain a valuable transplant resource, particularly for similar‐aged recipients.     

血液透析和腹膜透析对肾移植术后并发症和预后的影响

目的 探讨血液透析(HD)与腹膜透析(PD)对肾移植术后并发症和预后的影响。 方法 回顾分析402例术前维持性透析超过3个月的同种异体尸体肾移植术患者的临床资料。按透析方式将患者分为HD组（303例）和PD组（99例），并对345例随访（30.2±15.2）月。比较术前HD和PD对肾移植术后受者和移植肾存活率以及肾移植术后并发症，包括急性排斥、移植肾功能延迟恢复（DGF）、感染、慢性排斥等的影响。 结果 除了术前平均透析时间PD组长于HD组，乙型肝炎（乙肝）感染率HD组明显高于PD组外，在原发病、年龄、性别、血压、血红蛋白、HLA配型、冷热缺血时间、丙型肝炎感染等方面两组间差异无统计学意义。移植术后两组在DGF、急性排斥、慢性排斥、巨细胞病毒（CMV）感染和其他感染的发生率等方面差异无统计学意义。HD组术前透析时间>12个月的患者急性排斥的发生率显著高于<12个月的患者（P ＜ 0.05）。乙肝患者比非乙肝患者更易发生移植肾丧失功能（19.23% 比 8.86％，P = 0.021）。PD组乙肝病毒阴性的患者术后感染发生率较低。术后患者1年和5年存活率在两组间差异无统计学意义（1年：HD 94.34%，PD 91.25%；5年：HD 92.83%，PD 90%）；同样移植肾1年和5年存活率两组间差异也无统计学意义（1年：HD 93.21%，PD 96.25%；5年：HD 87.17%，PD 91.25%）。 结论 HD和PD对肾移植术后并发症、患者及移植肾1年和5年存活率的影响相似，均可作为慢性肾衰竭患者肾移植术前替代治疗。HD患者的急性排斥发生率随着透析时间的延长而增加，因此，缩短肾移植前透析时间将有助减少肾移植术后并发症。     

The effect of donor age, recipient age, and HLA match on immunologic graft survival in cadaver renal transplant recipients.

We retrospectively analyzed 526 primary cadaver recipients transplanted at a single center to identify pretransplant variables that predict long-term survival with multivariate analysis. All recipients received at least three random blood transfusions and were treated under a quadruple-therapy protocol consisting of ALG, azathioprine, prednisone, and cyclosporine. Of 526 consecutive transplants, 86 grafts were lost from acute or chronic rejection. Thirteen grafts were lost for nonimmunologic reasons and 35 recipients died with a functioning graft. A total of 273 patients (52%) experienced at least one episode of acute rejection. Donor age ranged from 3 to 64 years, with 62% of donors less than 30 years of age and 9% of donors over 50 years of age. Donor age was not predictive of long-term graft survival and neither was the difference between donor and recipient age. Recipient age was predictive of subsequent immunologic graft less, with younger recipients at greater risk (P = 0.011). The rate of first rejection was also inversely related to recipient age, with younger recipients rejecting earlier (P = 0.0001). The degree of DR mismatch was the only other significant predictor of long-term graft success (P = 0.013). Transplant survival correlated with the degree of DR mismatch: 2 DR mismatch was the worst, 1 DR mismatch was intermediate and 0 DR mismatch was the best (P = 0.02). A, B, AB, and BDR did not influence long-term graft outcome. In our center, donor age does not predict graft failure. Younger recipients have a higher rate of early rejection and, combined with a poor DR match, are at higher risk for long-term graft failure.     

The use of "marginal" donors for organ transplantation. The influence of donor age on outcome

The influence of donor age on outcome was studied in the recipients of 12,131 cadaveric renal allografts, 3026 heart allografts, and 2913 liver allografts with followup information in the UNOS data base for transplants performed between 10/1/87 and 12/31/89. For recipients of kidney transplants, donors of ages 6-15 had significantly better 1-year graft survival than donors of ages 56-65, but the difference was only 7.0%. Donors of age greater than 65 actually did better than donors ages 56-65, but donors less than or equal to 5 were less satisfactory. Kidneys from older donors survived as well as kidneys from younger donors in patients with repeat transplants, diabetes, black race, age over 45, O HLA or 5 and 6 HLA matches, delayed graft function, shared kidneys and PRA greater than 50. For kidney recipients, multifactorial analysis by Cox regression showed that donor age was less important than the use of ALG, donor race, diabetes or peak PRA in ages 16-45, delayed function, repeat transplant, and HLA match. Recipients of heart transplants from donors ages 45-55 had 1-year graft survival that was 8.4% less than recipients of hearts from donors age 16-45. However, 32.7% of heart patients died during the first 12 months after listing without benefit of a transplant. Liver transplant recipients of donor ages 16-45 had 10.8% better 1-year graft survival than recipients of donors greater than 45, but a greater percentage of older donors were transplanted to high risk and older recipients. Tragically, 24.3% of patients listed for liver transplantation died within 12 months without a transplant. This analysis shows that satisfactory graft survival can be achieved using older donors and that age in itself should not be a barrier to organ donation, providing that organ function is normal and that specific disease of the organ is absent.     

Survival of cadaveric renal allografts in Hispanic as compared with Caucasian recipients

Evaluation of allograft survival rates revealed a significantly better overall graft survival in Hispanic (n = 66) as compared with Caucasian (n = 38) recipients of primary cadaveric renal transplants. There were no significant differences between the Hispanic and Caucasian cadaveric recipient groups in terms of patient survival, pretransplant transfusion status, immunosuppressive protocols, rejection therapy, mean age, or frequency of diabetes mellitus. Cadaveric donor ethnic origin (i.e., Caucasian or Hispanic) did not significantly alter graft survival rates in either recipient ethnic group. Although Caucasian patients with splenectomies had better cadaveric graft survival than Caucasian graft recipients without splenectomies (P = .02), splenectomy had no significant effect on the renal allograft survival rate in Hispanics. Other factors that were evaluated and found not to correlate significantly with cadaveric graft survival rates were donor recipient HLA matching (A, B, or DR), and panel reactivities of recipient pregraft serum samples. In contrast to the superior cadaveric renal allograft survival in Hispanic as compared with Caucasian recipients, 1-haplotype-matched or 2-haplotype-matched living-related renal allografts had comparable graft survival rates in Caucasian and Hispanic recipients. These results indicate that Hispanics without splenectomy enjoy a cadaveric renal allograft survival rate superior to nonsegregated populations (treated with conventional immunosuppression) reported elsewhere.