Local Expansion of Donation After Circulatory Death Kidney Transplant Activity Improves Waitlisted Outcomes and Addresses Inequities of Access to Transplantation

In the United Kingdom, donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidney transplant activity has increased rapidly, but marked regional variation persists. We report how increased DCD kidney transplant activity influenced waitlisted outcomes for a single center. Between 2002–2003 and 2011–2012, 430 (54%) DCD and 361 (46%) donation after brain death (DBD) kidney‐only transplants were performed at the Cambridge Transplant Centre, with a higher proportion of DCD donors fulfilling expanded criteria status (41% DCD vs. 32% DBD; p = 0.01). Compared with U.K. outcomes, for which the proportion of DCD:DBD kidney transplants performed is lower (25%; p < 0.0001), listed patients at our center waited less time for transplantation (645 vs. 1045 days; p < 0.0001), and our center had higher transplantation rates and lower numbers of waiting list deaths. This was most apparent for older patients (aged >65 years; waiting time 730 vs. 1357 days nationally; p < 0.001), who received predominantly DCD kidneys from older donors (mean donor age 64 years), whereas younger recipients received equal proportions of living donor, DBD and DCD kidney transplants. Death‐censored kidney graft survival was nevertheless comparable for younger and older recipients, although transplantation conferred a survival benefit from listing for only younger recipients. Local expansion in DCD kidney transplant activity improves survival outcomes for younger patients and addresses inequity of access to transplantation for older recipients.     

Impact of donor age on long‐term outcomes after delayed graft function: 10‐year follow‐up

Delayed graft function (DGF) has a negative impact on graft survival in donation after brain death (DBD) but not for donation after cardiac death (DCD) kidneys. However, older donor age is associated with graft loss in DCD transplants. We sought to examine the interaction between donor age and DGF in DBD kidneys. This is a single‐center, retrospective review of 657 consecutive DBD recipients transplanted between 1990 and 2005. We stratified the cohort by decades of donor age and studied the association between DGF and graft failure using Cox models. The risk of graft loss associated with DGF was not significantly increased for donor age below 60 years (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.12, 1.51, and 0.90, respectively, for age <40, 41–50 and 51–60 years) but significantly increased after 60 years (aHR 2.67; P = 0.019). Analysis of death‐censored graft failure yielded similar results for donor age below 60 years and showed a substantially increased risk with donors above 60 years (aHR 6.98, P = 0.002). This analysis reveals an unexpectedly high impact of older donor age on the association between DGF and renal transplant outcomes. Further research is needed to determine the best use of kidneys from donors above 60 years old, where DGF is expected.     

Does Expanded Criteria Donor Status Modify the Outcomes of Kidney Transplantation From Donors After Cardiac Death?

The outcomes of kidney transplants that simultaneously exhibit donation after cardiac death (DCD) and expanded criteria donor (ECD) characteristics have not been well studied. We examined the outcomes of DCD versus non‐DCD kidney transplants as a function of ECD status and the kidney donor risk index (KDRI). A cohort study of 67 816 deceased donor kidney transplant recipients (KTR), including 562 ECD/DCD KTR, from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2009 was conducted using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, the modestly increased risk of total graft failure in DCD versus non‐DCD KTR was not significantly modified by ECD status (hazard ratio1.07 [95% CI: 1.01, 1.15] for non‐ECD vs. 1.21 [95% CI: 1.04, 1.40] for ECD, p for interaction = 0.14).Moreover, the hazard ratios did not significantly vary by KDRI quintiles (p = 0.40). Similar trends were seen for death‐censored graft failure and death with graft function. In conclusion, ECD status or higher KDRI score did not appreciably increase the relative hazard of adverse graft and patient outcomes in DCD KTR. These findings suggest that the judicious use of ECD/DCD donor kidneys may be an appropriate strategy to expand the donor pool.     

Kidney transplant from uncontrolled donation after circulatory death donors maintained by nECMO has long‐term outcomes comparable to standard criteria donation after brain death

Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD) increases organ availability for kidney transplant (KT) with short‐term outcomes similar to those obtained from donation after brain death (DBD) donors. However, heterogeneous results in the long term have been reported. We compared 10‐year outcomes between 237 KT recipients from uDCD donors maintained by normothermic extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (nECMO) and 237 patients undergoing KT from standard criteria DBD donors during the same period at our institution. We further analyzed risk factors for death‐censored graft survival in the uDCD group. Delayed graft function (DGF) was more common in the uDCD group (73.4% vs 46.4%; P < .01), although glomerular filtration rates at the end of follow‐up were similar in the 2 groups. uDCD and DBD groups had similar rates for 10‐year death‐censored graft (82.1% vs 80.4%; P = .623) and recipient survival (86.2% vs 87.6%; P = .454). Donor age >50 years was associated with graft loss in the uDCD group (hazard ratio: 1.91; P = .058), whereas the occurrence of DGF showed no significant effect. uDCD KT under nECMO support resulted in similar graft function and long‐term outcomes compared with KT from standard criteria DBD donors. Increased donor age could negatively affect graft survival after uDCD donation.     

Negative impact of prolonged cold storage time before machine perfusion preservation in donation after circulatory death kidney transplantation

Kidney grafts are often preserved initially in static cold storage (CS) and subsequently on hypothermic machine perfusion (MP). However, the impact of CS/MP time on transplant outcome remains unclear. We evaluated the effect of prolonged CS/MP time in a single‐center retrospective cohort of 59 donation after circulatory death (DCD) and 177 matched donation after brain death (DBD) kidney‐alone transplant recipients. With mean overall CS/MP times of 6.0 h/30.0 h, overall incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) was higher in DCD transplants (30.5%) than DBD transplants (7.3%, P < 0.0001). In logistic regression, DCD recipient (P < 0.0001), longer CS time (P = 0.0002), male recipient (P = 0.02), and longer MP time (P = 0.08) were associated with higher DGF incidence. In evaluating the joint effects of donor type (DBD vs. DCD), CS time (<6 vs. ≥6 h), and MP time (<36 vs. ≥36 h) on DGF incidence, one clearly sees an unfavorable effect of MP time ≥36 h (P = 0.003) across each donor type and CS time stratum, whereas the unfavorable effect of CS time ≥6 h (P = 0.01) is primarily seen among DCD recipients. Prolonged cold ischemia time had no unfavorable effect on renal function or graft survival at 12mo post‐transplant. Long CS/MP time detrimentally affects early DCD/DBD kidney transplant outcome when grafts were mainly preserved by MP; prolonged CS time before MP has a particularly negative impact in DCD kidney transplantation.     

Duration of delayed graft function and outcomes after kidney transplantation from controlled donation after circulatory death donors: a retrospective study

The impact of the duration of delayed graft function (DGF) on graft survival is poorly characterized in controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) donor kidney transplantation. A retrospective analysis was performed on 225 DCD donor kidney transplants between 2011 and 2016. When patients with primary nonfunction were excluded (n = 9), 141 recipients (65%) had DGF, with median (IQR) duration of dialysis dependency of 6 (2–11.75) days. Longer duration of dialysis dependency was associated with lower estimated glomerular filtration rate at 1 year, and a higher rate of acute rejection. On Kaplan–Meier analysis, the presence of DGF was associated with lower graft survival (log‐rank test P = 0.034), though duration of DGF was not (P = 0.723). However, multivariable Cox regression analysis found that only acute rejection was independently associated with lower graft survival [HR (95% CI) 4.302 (1.617–11.450); P = 0.003], whereas the presence of DGF and DGF duration were not. In controlled DCD kidney transplantation, DGF duration itself may not be independently associated with graft survival; rather, it may be that acute rejection associated with prolonged DGF is the poor prognostic factor.     

Experience in renal and extrarenal transplantation with donation after cardiac death donors with selective use of extracorporeal support

BACKGROUND: Most reports of donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors are exclusive to kidney transplantation and report high rates of delayed graft function (DGF). STUDY DESIGN: From April 1, 2003, to October 3, 2007, we performed 53 kidney transplantations and 4 simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantations from DCD donors. All DCD donor kidneys were managed with pulsatile perfusion preservation, and all simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation donors were managed with extracorporeal support. RESULTS: Of 53 DCD kidney transplantations, 44 (83%) were from standard criteria donors (SCD) and 9 (17%) from expanded criteria donors (ECD). With a mean followup of 12 months, actual patient and kidney graft survival rates were 94% and 87%, respectively. Patient and graft survival rates were 100% in the 4 simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantations. Incidence of DGF was 57% (60% without versus 20% with extracorporeal support, p = 0.036). Comparison of the 53 DCD donor kidney transplantations with 316 concurrent donation after brain death (DBD) donor adult kidney transplantations (178 SCD, 138 ECD) revealed no differences in demographics or outcomes, except that the DCD donor group had fewer ECDs (17% DCD versus 44% DBD; p = 0.0002), fewer 0-antigen mismatch kidney transplantations (7.5% DCD versus 19% DBD; p = 0.05), and more kidneys preserved with pulsatile perfusion (100% DCD versus 52% DBD; p < 0.0001). Incidences of DGF (57% DCD versus 19% DBD; p < 0.0001) and acute rejection (19% DCD versus 10% DBD; p = 0.10) were higher in the DCD donor group, which resulted in a longer initial length of stay (mean 11 days DCD versus 8.0 days DBD; p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high incidence of DGF in the absence of extracorporeal support and greater initial resource use, comparable short-term results can be achieved with DCD and DBD donor kidney transplantations.     

The duration of asystolic ischemia determines the risk of graft failure after circulatory‐dead donor kidney transplantation: A Eurotransplant cohort study

Circulatory death donor (DCD) kidney transplantations are steadily increasing. Consensus reports recommend limiting donor warm ischemia time (DWIT) in DCD donation, although an independent effect on graft outcome has not been demonstrated. We investigated death‐censored graft survival in 18 065 recipients of deceased‐donor kidney transplants in the Eurotransplant region: 1059 DCD and 17 006 brain‐dead donor (DBD) kidney recipients. DWIT was defined as time from circulatory arrest until cold flush. DCD donation was an independent risk factor for graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% CI 1.10‐1.46), due to an increased risk of primary nonfunction (62/1059 vs 560/17 006; P < .0001). With DWIT in the model, DCD donation was no longer a risk factor, demonstrating that DWIT explains the inferior graft survival of DCD kidneys. Indeed, DCD transplants with short DWIT have graft survival comparable to that of standard‐criteria DBD transplants (P = .59). DWIT also associated with graft failure in DCDs (adjusted HR 1.20 per 10‐minute increase, 95% CI 1.03‐1.42). At 5 years after transplantation, graft failure occurred in 14 of 133 recipients (10.5%) with DWIT <10 minutes, 139 of 555 recipients (25.0%) with DWIT between 10 and 19 minutes, and 117 of 371 recipients (31.5%) with DWIT ≥20 minutes. These findings support the expert opinion–based guidelines to limit DWIT.     

Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death: A cohort study of data from a long‐standing deceased‐donor kidney transplantation program

Despite good long‐term outcomes of kidney transplants from controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors, there are few uncontrolled DCD (uDCD) programs. This longitudinal study compares outcomes for all uDCD (N = 774) and all donation after brain death (DBD) (N = 613) kidney transplants performed from 1996 to 2015 at our center. DBD transplants were divided into those from standard‐criteria (SCD) (N = 366) and expanded‐criteria (N = 247) brain‐dead donors (ECD). One‐, 5‐, and 10‐year graft survival rates were 91.7%, 85.7%, and 80.6% for SCD; 86.0%, 75.8%, and 61.4% for ECD; and 85.1%, 78.1%, and 72.2% for uDCD, respectively. Graft survival was worse in recipients of uDCD kidneys than of SCD (P = .004) but better than in transplants from ECD (P = .021). The main cause of graft loss in the uDCD transplants was primary nonfunction. Through logistic regression, donor death due to pulmonary embolism (OR 4.31, 95% CI 1.65‐11.23), extrahospital CPR time ≥75 minutes (OR1.94, 95%CI 1.18‐3.22), and in‐hospital CPR time ≥50 minutes (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.09‐2.93) emerged as predictive factors of primary nonunction. According to the outcomes of our long‐standing kidney transplantation program, uDCD could help expand the kidney donor pool.     

The deceased donor score system in kidney transplants from deceased donors after cardiac death

A clinical score to identify kidneys from donors after cardiac death (DCD) with a high risk of dysfunction following transplantation could be a useful tool to guide the introduction of new algorithms for the preservation of these organs and improve their outcome after transplantation. We investigated whether the deceased donor score (DDS) system could identify DCD kidneys with higher risk of early post‐transplant dysfunction. The DDS was validated in a cohort of 168 kidney transplants from donors after brain death (DBD) and then applied to a cohort of 56 kidney transplants from DCD. In the DBD cohort, the DDS grade predicted the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) and levels of serum creatinine at 3 and 12 months post‐transplant. Similarly, in the DCD cohort, the DDS grade correlated with DGF and also predicted the levels of serum creatinine at 3 and 12 months. Interestingly, the DDS identified a subgroup of marginal DCD kidneys in which minimization of cold ischemia time produced better early clinical outcome. These results highlight the impact of early interventions on clinical outcome of marginal DCD kidneys and open the possibility of using the DDS to identify those kidneys that may benefit most from therapeutic interventions before transplantation.     

Successful Transplantation of Kidneys From Elderly Circulatory Death Donors by Using Microscopic and Macroscopic Characteristics to Guide Single or Dual Implantation

Most kidneys from potential elderly circulatory death (DCD) donors are declined. We report single center outcomes for kidneys transplanted from DCD donors over 70 years old, using preimplantation biopsy Remuzzi grading to inform implantation as single or dual transplants. Between 2009 and 2012, 43 single transplants and 12 dual transplants were performed from elderly DCD donors. Remuzzi scores were higher for dual than single implants (4.4 vs. 3.4, p < 0.001), indicating more severe baseline injury. Donor and recipient characteristics for both groups were otherwise similar. Early graft loss from renal vein thrombosis occurred in two singly implanted kidneys, and in one dual‐implanted kidney; its pair continued to function satisfactorily. Death‐censored graft survival at 3 years was comparable for the two groups (single 94%; dual 100%), as was 1 year eGFR. Delayed graft function occurred less frequently in the dual‐implant group (25% vs. 65%, p = 0.010). Using this approach, we performed proportionally more kidney transplants from elderly DCD donors (23.4%) than the rest of the United Kingdom (7.3%, p < 0.001), with graft outcomes comparable to those achieved nationally for all deceased‐donor kidney transplants. Preimplantation biopsy analysis is associated with acceptable transplant outcomes for elderly DCD kidneys and may increase transplant numbers from an underutilized donor pool.     

Risk Factors for Graft Survival After Liver Transplantation from Donation After Cardiac Death Donors: An Analysis of OPTN/UNOS Data

Due to increasing use of allografts from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors, we evaluated DCD liver transplants and impact of recipient and donor factors on graft survival. Liver transplants from DCD donors reported to UNOS were analyzed against donation after brain death (DBD) donor liver transplants performed between 1996 and 2003. We defined a recipient cumulative relative risk (RCRR) using significant risk factors identified from a Cox regression analysis: age; medical condition at transplantation; regraft status; dialysis received and serum creatinine. Graft survival from DCD donors (71% at 1 year and 60% at 3 years) were significantly inferior to DBD donors (80% at 1 year and 72% at 3 years, p < 0.001). Low-risk recipients (RCRR < or = 1.5) with low-risk DCD livers (DWIT < 30 min and CIT < 10 h, n = 226) achieved graft survival rates (81% and 67% at 1 and 3 years, respectively) not significantly different from recipients with DBD allografts (80% and 72% at 1 and 3 years, respectively, log-rank p = 0.23). Liver allografts from DCD donors may be used to increase the cadaveric donor pool, with favorable graft survival rates achieved when low-risk grafts are transplanted in a low-risk setting. Whether transplantation of these organs in low-risk recipients provides a survival benefit compared to the waiting list is unknown.     

How important is the duration of the brain death period for the outcome in kidney transplantation?

In kidney transplantation, graft survival using grafts from donation after brain death (DBD) donors is inferior to results after living donation. However, little is known about the effect of the duration of brain death (BDdur) on outcome after transplantation. This is a retrospective Organ Procurement and Transplant Network analysis using kidney donor and recipient data from 1994 to 2006. BDdur was calculated as the period between brain death declaration and aortic cross clamp. Effects of BDdur on delayed graft function (DGF), acute rejection and graft failure were calculated using binary logistic regression and Cox regression models. Median BDdur was 23.8 h. Longer BDdur decreased the risk for DGF and 1‐ and 3‐year graft failure slightly, but not for acute rejection. In multivariate analysis, donor age and acute rejection were confounders. However, in a multivariate subgroup analysis of donors aged ≤55 years BDdur independently predicted DGF; each hour of BDdur decreasing the risk of DGF with 0.4% (P = 0.008). Longer BDdur is not detrimental and in fact slightly beneficial in DBD donors ≤55 years of age, reducing the chance of DGF in the recipient. This finding may have an impact on organ retrieval procedures, as no rush but rather an improved donor management prior to retrieval will benefit donor kidney viability.     

Expanding the Donor Kidney Pool: Utility of Renal Allografts Procured in a Setting of Uncontrolled Cardiac Death

The chronic shortage of deceased kidney donors has led to increased utilization of donation after cardiac death (DCD) kidneys, the majority of which are procured in a controlled setting. The objective of this study is to evaluate transplantation outcomes from uncontrolled DCD (uDCD) donors and evaluate their utility as a source of donor kidneys. From January 1995 to December 2004, 75,865 kidney-alone transplants from donation after brain death (DBD) donors and 2136 transplants from DCD donors were reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing. Among the DCD transplants, 1814 were from controlled and 216 from uncontrolled DCD donors. The log-rank test was used to compare survival curves. The incidence of delayed graft function in controlled DCD (cDCD) was 42% and in uDCD kidneys was 51%, compared to only 24% in kidneys from DBD donors (p < 0.001). The overall graft and patient survival of DCD donors was similar to that of DBD donor kidneys (p = 0.66; p = 0.88). Despite longer donor warm and cold ischemic times, overall graft and patient survival of uDCD donors was comparable to that of cDCD donors (p = 0.65, p = 0.99). Concerted efforts should be focused on procurement of uDCD donors, which can provide another source of quality deceased donor kidneys.     

Donor kidney disease and transplant outcome for kidneys donated after cardiac death

Background:

Although outcomes of kidney transplants following donation after cardiac death (DCD) and donation after brainstem death (DBD) are similar, generally only optimal younger DCD donors are considered. This study examined the impact of pre‐existing donor kidney disease on the outcome of DCD transplants.

Methods:

This retrospective study compared the outcome of all DCD kidney transplants performed during 1996–2006 with contemporaneous kidney transplants from DBD donors. Implantation biopsies were scored for glomerular, tubular, parenchymal and vascular disease (global histology score). There were 104 DCD and 104 DBD kidney transplants.

Results:

Delayed graft function (DGF) occurred more frequently in DCD than DBD kidneys (64·4 versus 28·8 per cent; P < 0·001). Long‐term graft outcome was similar. The only donor factor that influenced outcome was baseline kidney disease, which was similar in both groups, even though DCD donors were younger, with a higher predonation estimated glomerular filtration rate. The global histology score predicted DGF (odds ratio 1·85 per unit; P = 0·006) and graft failure (relative risk 1·55 per unit; P = 0·001), although there was no difference for DCD and DBD kidneys.

Conclusion:

Transplant outcomes for DCD and DBD kidneys are comparable. Baseline donor kidney disease influences DGF and graft survival but the impact is no greater for DCD kidneys. Copyright © 2009 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Optimal donation of kidney transplants after controlled circulatory death

Controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) is used for “extended criteria” donors with poorer kidney transplant outcomes. The French cDCD program started in 2015 and is characterized by normothermic regional perfusion, hypothermic machine perfusion, and short cold ischemia time. We compared the outcomes of kidney transplantation from cDCD and brain-dead (DBD) donors, matching cDCD and DBD kidney transplants by propensity scoring for donor and recipient characteristics. The matching process retained 442 of 499 cDCD and 809 of 6185 DBD transplantations. The DGF rate was 20% in cDCD recipients compared with 28% in DBD recipients (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12–1.82). When DBD transplants were ranked by cold ischemia time and machine perfusion use and compared with cDCD transplants, the aRR of DGF was higher for DBD transplants without machine perfusion, regardless of the cold ischemia time (aRR with cold ischemia time <18 h, 1.57; 95% CI 1.20–2.03, vs aRR with cold ischemia time ≥18 h, 1.79; 95% CI 1.31–2.44). The 1-year graft survival rate was similar in both groups. Early outcome was better for kidney transplants from cDCD than from matched DBD transplants with this French protocol.     

Transplanting kidneys from donation after cardiac death donors with acute kidney injury

Donation after cardiac death (DCD) and acute kidney injury (AKI) donors have historically been considered independent risk factors for delayed graft function (DGF), allograft failure, and inferior outcomes. With growing experience, updated analyses have shown good outcomes. There continues to be limited data, however, on outcomes specific to DCD donors who have AKI. Primary outcomes for this study were post–kidney transplant patient and allograft survival comparing two donor groups: DCD AKIN stage 2‐3 and DBD AKIN stage 2‐3. In comparing these groups, there were no short‐ or long‐term differences in patient (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54‐1.93, P = .83) or allograft survival (HR 1.47, 95% CI 0.64‐2.97, P = .32). In multivariate models, the DCD/DBD status had no significant impact on the estimated GFR (eGFR) at 1 (P = .38), 2 (P = .60), and 3 years (P = .52). DGF (57.9% vs 67.9%, P = .09), rejection (12.1% vs 13.9%, P = .12), and progression of interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy (IFTA) on protocol biopsy (P = .16) were similar between the two groups. With careful selection, good outcomes can be achieved utilizing severe AKI DCD kidneys. Historic concerns regarding primary nonfunction, DGF resulting in interstitial fibrosis and rejection, and inferior outcomes were not observed. Given the ongoing organ shortage, increased effort should be undertaken to further utilize these donors.     

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.     

Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation from donation after cardiac death: successful long-term outcomes

OBJECTIVE: The outcomes of simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplantation with donor organs procured from donation after cardiac death (DCD) are compared with transplants performed with donor organs recovered from donation after brain death (DBD). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Concerns exist regarding the utilization of pancreata obtained from DCD donors. While it is known that DCD kidneys will have a higher rate of DGF, long-term functional graft survival data for DCD pancreata have not been reported. METHODS: A retrospective review of all DCD SPK transplants performed at a single center was undertaken. RESULTS: Patient, pancreas, and kidney survival at 5 years were similar between DCD and DBD organs. Pancreas function and outcomes were indistinguishable between the 2 modes of procurement. As expected, the DCD kidneys had an elevated rate of DGF, which had no significant long-term clinical impact. CONCLUSION: SPK transplantation using selected DCD donors is a safe and viable method to expand the organ pool for transplantation.     

Kidney donation after circulatory death in a country with a high number of brain dead donors: 10-year experience in Belgium

Worldwide shortage of standard brain dead donors (DBD) has revived the use of kidneys donated after circulatory death (DCD). We reviewed the Belgian DCD kidney transplant (KT) experience since its reintroduction in 2000. Risk factors for delayed graft function (DGF) were identified using multivariate analysis. Five-year patient/graft survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. The evolution of the kidney donor type and the impact of DCDs on the total KT activity in Belgium were compared with the Netherlands. Between 2000 and 2009, 287 DCD KT were performed. Primary nonfunction occurred in 1% and DGF in 31%. Five-year patient and death-censored graft survival were 93% and 95%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, cold storage (versus machine perfusion), cold ischemic time, and histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solution were independent risk factors for the development of DGF. Despite an increased number of DCD donations and transplantations, the total number of deceased KT did not increase significantly. This could suggest a shift from DBDs to DCDs. To increase KT activity, Belgium should further expand controlled DCD programs while simultaneously improve the identification of all potential DBDs and avoid their referral for donation as DCDs before brain death occurs. Furthermore, living donation remains underused.