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.     

Dual kidney transplantation from uncontrolled deceased donors after cardiac arrest: A possible option

Organ shortage is a major problem in organ transplantation. For this reason, transplantation teams have found it necessary to revisit their organ acceptance criteria. Uncontrolled deceased donors after cardiac arrest could increase the donor pool by 20%, but at the same time there is a greater risk of delayed graft function and primary non‐function. Dual kidney transplantation is an option when single kidney transplantation cannot be carried out because of lack of organ quality. We report for the first time our four first dual kidney transplantation from uncontrolled deceased donors after cardiac arrest with a follow up longer than 1 year. We described graft outcomes until 5 years, and histology at 3 and 12 months after transplantation. All organs were machine perfused in order to assess their quality leading to a single kidney transplantation or dual kidney transplantation decision. After 1 year of follow up, all grafts were functional with a mean estimated glomerular filtration rate of 44.5 ± 3.3 mL/min/1.73 m², and a mean inulin clearance of 43.7 ± 13.6 mL/mn/1.73 m². These findings suggest that dual kidney transplantation can represent a viable option for kidneys unsuitable for single kidney transplantation without increasing the rate of surgical complications. Successful transplantation is linked to histological, biological and donor clinical criteria, as well as perfusion parameters.     

In situ preservation of kidneys from donors after cardiac death: results and complications

OBJECTIVES: To describe the results and complications of in situ preservation (ISP) of kidneys from donors after cardiac death (DCD). BACKGROUND: DCD donors are increasingly being used to expand the pool of donor kidneys. ISP reduces warm ischemic injury which is associated with DCD donation. METHODS: Insertion of a double-balloon triple-lumen catheter allows selective perfusion of the abdominal aorta to preserve the kidneys in situ. From January 2001 until August 2005, 133 ISP procedures were initiated in our procurement area. RESULTS: Fifty-six (42%) ISP procedures led to transplantation; in the remaining 77 cases (58%), the donation procedure was abandoned or both kidneys were discarded because of ISP complications (n = 31), poor graft quality (n = 23), no consent for donation (n = 13), medical contraindications (n = 8), or unknown cause (n = 2). Increasing donor age (odds ratio (OR) 1.06 per year, P < 0.001) and uncontrolled DCD donation (OR 5.4, P < 0.001) were independently correlated with ISP complications. After transplantation, prolonged double-balloon triple-lumen catheter insertion time was an independent predictor of graft failure (OR 2.0, P = 0.05). Selected controlled DCD donors were managed by rapid laparotomy and direct aortic cannulation; graft survival of these kidneys was superior to kidneys from controlled DCD donors managed by ISP. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of initiated ISP procedures led to transplantation, resulting in a high workload compared with donation after brain death. The association between increasing catheter insertion time and inferior graft outcome emphasizes the need for fast and effective surgery. Therefore, rapid laparotomy with direct aortic cannulation is preferred over ISP in controlled DCD donation. Despite these limitations, we have expanded our donor pool 3- to 4-fold by procuring DCD kidneys that were preserved in situ.     

Kidney transplantation from donation after cardiac death donors: lack of impact of delayed graft function on post‐transplant outcomes

Singh RP, Farney AC, Rogers J, Zuckerman J, Reeves‐Daniel A, Hartmann E, Iskandar S, Adams P, Stratta RJ. Kidney transplantation from donation after cardiac death donors: lack of impact of delayed graft function on post‐transplant outcomes.
Clin Transplant 2011: 25: 255–264. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Introduction: Delayed graft function (DGF) is more common in recipients of kidney transplants from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors compared to donation after brain death (DBD) donors. Methods: Single‐center retrospective study to evaluate the impact of DGF on controlled (Maastricht category III) DCD donor kidney transplant outcomes. Results: From 10/01 to 6/08, 578 adult deceased donor kidney transplants were performed including 70 (12%) from DCD and 508 (88%) from DBD donors. Mean follow‐up was 36 months. DCD donor kidney transplants had significantly greater rates of DGF (57% DCD vs. 21% DBD, p < 0.0001)) and acute rejection (29% DCD vs. 16% DBD, p = 0.018) compared to DBD donor kidney transplants, but patient and graft survival rates were similar. DBD donor kidney transplants with DGF (n = 109) had significantly greater rates of death‐censored graft loss (12.5% DCD vs. 31% DBD), primary non‐function (0 DCD vs. 10% DBD) and higher 2 year mean serum creatinine levels (1.4 DCD vs. 2.7 mg/dL DBD) compared to DCD donor kidney transplants with DGF (n = 40, all p < 0.04). On univariate analysis, the presence of acute rejection and older donor age were the only significant risk factors for death‐censored graft loss in DCD donor kidney transplants, whereas DGF was not a risk factor. Conclusion: Despite higher rates of DGF and acute rejection in DCD donor kidney transplants, subsequent outcomes in DCD donor kidney transplants with DGF are better than in DBD donor kidney transplants experiencing DGF, and similar to outcomes in DCD donor kidney transplants without DGF.     

Application of an automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation device for kidney transplantation from uncontrolled donation after cardiac death donors in the emergency department

Morozumi J, Matsuno N, Sakurai E, Nakamura Y, Arai T, Ohta S. Application of an automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation device for kidney transplantation from uncontrolled donation after cardiac death donors in the emergency department.
Clin Transplant 2009 DOI: 10.1111/j.1399‐0012.2009.01140.x.
© 2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Vital‐organ transplantation has become acceptable as the treatment of choice for end‐stage organ failure. If the patient, facing the end of life, wishes to donate organs after cardiac arrest (CA), donation after cardiac death (DCD) is increasingly important for the realization of the patient’s desires after CA. In Japan, kidney transplantation from uncontrolled DCD donors, who are identified in modified Maastricht categories II or V, is one of the critical factors in expanding the donor pool. However, according to the forensic code for post‐mortems and the requirement of legal consent for transplantation, the time required to meet all procedural requirements has sometimes prohibited organ procurement from uncontrolled DCD donors. We have therefore attempted to use an automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) device and maintain arterial pressure for uncontrolled DCD donors during all interim procedures after sudden CA. Comparing kidneys procured from standard DCD donors (n = 10) and uncontrolled DCD donors (n = 4), significant differences were seen in warm ischemic time (WIT), defined as the time from CA to initiation of cooling in situ. However, our early experience showed good tolerance and viability of uncontrolled DCD kidneys. Immediate availability of an automated CPR device might provide a bridge to kidney procurement from uncontrolled DCD donors.     

Kidney Graft Outcome and Quality (After Transplantation) From Uncontrolled Deceased Donors After Cardiac Arrest

The use of uncontrolled deceased donors after cardiac arrest (uDDCA) has been developed in France to compensate for organ shortage. The quality of these kidneys remains unclear. We analyzed kidney graft function and histology from 27 uDDCA and compared them with kidneys from 30 extended criteria donors (ECD) and from 24 simultaneous pancreas kidney (SPK) donors as a control group of optimal deceased donors. Kidneys from ECD and SPK donors were preserved by static cold storage while kidneys from uDDCA were preserved by pulsatile perfusion. The uDDCA graft function at 3 years posttransplantation (estimated with MDRD and measured with inulin clearance) did not differ from that of the ECD group (eGFR 44.1 vs. 37.4 mL/min/1.73 m², p = 0.13; mGFR 44.6 vs. 36.1 mL/min/1.73 m², p = 0.07 in the uDDCA and ECD groups, respectively). The histological assessment of 3‐month and 1‐year protocol biopsies did not show differences for interstitial lesions between the uDDCA and ECD grafts (IF score at M3 was 30 vs. 28% and at M12 36 vs. 33%, p = NS). In conclusion, the results at 3 years with carefully selected and machine‐perfused uDDCA kidneys have been comparable to ECD kidneys and encourage continuation of this program and development of similar programs.     

Outcome of Kidney Transplantation With Transumbilical Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Donor Nephrectomy: A Single-Center Experience

AimThe aim of this study is to present the outcome of kidney transplantation after laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy (LESS DN) compared with conventional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) in a single-center experience.MethodsThis retrospective study compares data from the initial experience with 110 consecutive LESS DN donors and their recipients (group A) with 205 consecutive conventional LDN donors and their recipients (group B).ResultsThis study compared 110 LESS DNs completed in an 18-month period with 205 LDNs completed in the immediately preceding 42-month period. All procedures were performed by the same surgeon. In groups A and B, respectively, the incidence of immediate graft function was 90% vs 91.2%, slow graft function was 9% vs 5.3%, delayed graft function was 0.9% vs 2.9%, graft loss was 0.9% vs 2.9%, and death with a functioning graft was 0.9% vs 1.5%. The mean serum creatinine levels were 1.3 ± 0.93 mg/dL vs 1.4 ± 1.2 mg/dL (P = .447), 1.1 ± 0.33 mg/dL vs 1.2 ± 0.75 mg/dL (P = .184), and 1.05 ± 0.25 mg/dL vs 1.1 ± 0.39 mg/dL (P = .224) at 7, 30, and 365 days after transplantation. The estimated glomerular filtration rate at 1 year was 88 ± 18.2 vs 83 ± 12.2 mL/min/1.73 m² (P = .004). The mean donor operative times in groups A and B were 175.9 ± 24.9 minutes vs 199.88 ± 37.06 minutes (P = .0001), respectively, and the mean warm ischemia time was 5.2 ± 1.02 minutes vs 3.64 ± 1.38 minutes, respectively (P = .0001). The mean body mass index, the incidence of complex vascular anatomy, and the rate of complications were the same in the 2 donor groups.ConclusionsThe outcome of kidney transplantation after LESS DN is comparable to conventional LDN. LESS DN can be employed as the primary approach for kidney donation with low donor risk and without compromising recipient outcomes.     

Diabetes after Kidney Donation

Kidney donors, similar to the general population, are at risk for development of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The course of donors who develop T2DM has not been studied. We surveyed 3777 kidney donors regarding the development of T2DM. Of the 2954 who responded, 154 developed T2DM 17.7 ± 9.0 years after donation. The multivariable risk of development of T2DM was associated with type 1 DM in the recipient, male gender and body mass index >30 kg/m² at time of donation. Compared to age, gender, duration after donation and body mass index (BMI)‐matched non‐diabetic donor controls; diabetic donors were more likely to have hypertension (70.8% vs. 36.2%, p = 0.005), proteinuria (18.8% vs. 3.9%, p < 0.0001) but had a similar serum creatinine. eGFR change after T2DM development was ?0.80 ± 0.94 mL/min/year, ?0.70 ± 0.86 in nondiabetic donors with similar duration after donation and ?0.61 ± 0.76 mL/min/year in age, gender, BMI and duration after donation matched nondiabetic donor controls. These preliminary and shor‐term data demonstrate that factors associated with T2DM in kidney donors are similar to those in the general population and donors screened carefully at the time of donation do not appear to have an acceleration of diabetic kidney disease.     

Analysis of Risk Factors for Allograft Outcome Comparing 2 Kidneys From the Same Donor in Separate Recipients

Background

An analysis of 2 kidney transplants from the same donor at the same center enables us to analyze the influence of risk factors on the outcome of the grafts in different recipients.

Improvements in kidney transplantation from donors after cardiac death

To reduce the growing waiting list for kidney transplantation, we explored the limits of kidney transplantation from donors after cardiac death by liberally accepting marginal donor kidneys for transplantation. As the percentage of primary non‐function (PNF) increased, we evaluated our transplantation program and implemented changes to reduce the high percentage of PNF in 2005, followed by a second evaluation over the period 2006–2009. Recipients of a kidney from a donor after cardiac death between 1998 and 2005 were analyzed, with PNF as outcome measure. During the period 2002–2005, the percentage of PNF increased and crossed the upper control limits of 12% which was considered as unacceptably high. After implementation of changes, this percentage was reduced to 5%, without changing the number of kidney transplantations from donors after cardiac death. Continuous monitoring of the quality of care is essential as the boundaries of organ donation and transplantation are sought. Meticulous donor, preservation, and recipient management make extension of the donor potential possible, with good results for the individual recipient. Liberal use of kidneys from donors after cardiac death may contribute to a reduction in the waiting list for kidney transplantation and dialysis associated mortality.     

Pre‐ and postdonation kidney function in donors of a kidney paired donation with unique criteria for donor glomerular filtration rate – a longitudinal cohort analysis

Baseline predonation estimated GFR (eGFR) appears to predict the risk of postdonation chronic kidney disease in live donors. New KIDGO guidelines recommend an eGFR ≥90 ml/min/1.73 m² as an acceptable level of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) for kidney donation. In the Australian Paired Kidney Exchange (AKX) program, all donors with a raw measured GFR (mGFR) ≥80 ml/min are deemed suitable for donation, but the significance of this selection indicator is unclear. We analysed the first 129 live donors in the AKX program with at least 1‐year follow‐up linking records in the AKX database and ANZDATA. There were 73 male and 56 female donors; mean (±SD) age was 53 ± 11 years. Predonation eGFR was 94 ± 13 ml/min/1.73 m², mGFR 99 ± 17 ml/min/1.73 m² and raw mGFR 108 ± 18 ml/min. Baseline eGFR was <80 ml/min/1.73 m² in 19 donors, and <90 ml/min/1.73 m² in 42 donors. At 1 year postdonation eGFR was 68 ± 15 ml/min/1.73 m² and the predicted eGFR at 30 years postdonation was on average 50 (29–83) ml/min/1.73 m². The hypothetical mean age at end‐stage kidney disease was estimated to be 145 (95% CI 120–263) years. Over 30% of AKX live donors would have been excluded from donation using KDIGO guidelines. Using AKX donor guidelines, the majority of donors with predicted eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m² 30‐year postdonation were aged ≥50 years. Long‐term outcome data on AKX donors with low eGFR will need careful monitoring.     

Short- and Long-Term Outcomes with the Use of Kidneys and Livers Donated after Cardiac Death

The shortage of deceased donor kidneys and livers for transplantation has prompted the use of organs from donors deceased after cardiac death (DCD). We used the UNOS database to examine patient and graft survival following transplantation of DCD organs compared to those following grafts from donors deceased after brain death (DBD; for livers, grafts from donors < 60 years old were labeled '< 60 yrs'). Of 44035 deceased donor kidney transplant recipients, 1177 (3%) received a DCD kidney. There was no difference in patient or graft survival at 5 years (DCD vs. DBD: 81.3% vs. 80.8% and 66.9% vs. 66.5%; p = 0.70 and p = 0.52 respectively). Of 24688-deceased donor liver transplant recipients, 345 (1.4%) were from DCD donors and 20289 (82%) were from '< 60 yrs' DBD donors. Three-year patient and graft survival were inferior in the DCD group (DCD vs. '< 60 yrs' DBD: 77% vs. 80% and 65% vs. 75%; p = 0.016 and p < 0.0001 respectively) but were comparable to current alternatives, '>/= 60 yrs' DBD livers (donor age >/= 60) and split livers. DCD livers are a reasonable option when death is imminent. Our study demonstrates good outcomes using DCD kidneys and livers and encourages their use.     

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.     

Is estimated donor glomerular filtration rate before death a better predictor of decreased-donor kidney function?

The worldwide shortage of deceased-donor kidneys for transplantation has become a serious issue in the past decade, leading to study of marginal donors. However, both the availability and the utility of kidneys from deceased donors are still unclear. The aim of the present study was to evaluate another method to estimate donor kidney function rather than using donor creatinine (Cr). We studied 129 recipients of deceased-donor kidneys from Maastriche donor categories III and IV. We analyzed donor Cr levels before death and recipient Cr levels at 1 year after transplant, as well as estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR). There was no significant difference in donor Cr levels at admission to the hospital and before death according to eGFR at 1 year after transplantation: <30 mL/min/1.73 m² versus ≧30 mL/min/1.73 m². However, recipients whose donors showed lower average eGFR levels on admission displayed better renal function at 1 year after transplant (P = .025). In conclusion, donor Cr levels before death was a less useful measurement to relate to recipient renal function; eGFR provided a better index.     

Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation: Donor-Recipient Function Correlation

Background

With the rising prevalence of living-donor kidney transplantation, evaluation of factors correlated with renal function in the donor-recipient pair constitutes a main goal for kidney transplantation clinicians. Our objective was to analyze the more relevant donor characteristics that contribute to donor and recipient estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR) after 1 year.

Rate,Factors, and Outcome of Delayed Graft Function After Kidney Transplantation of Deceased Donors

BackgroundDelayed graft function (DGF) is a frequent complication after kidney transplantation affecting long-term outcome.Patients and methodsA total of 525 consecutive recipients (age 54.2 ± 13.4 years, 33% female) of kidneys from deceased donors transplanted between 2005 and 2012 were retrospectively examined. DGF was defined as the need of dialysis within the first week after transplantation.ResultsDGF developed in 21.1% (n = 111). Factors associated with DGF (P ≤ .035, respectively) were recipient body mass index, C-reactive protein of the recipient, residual diuresis, cold ischemia time, donor age, and diuresis in the first hour after transplantation. Median duration of DGF was 16 (2-66) days. Patients after DGF had a significantly lower GFR compared with recipients without DGF either after 3 (32.9 ± 16.5 vs 46.3 ± 18.4 mL/min/1.73 m²) or after 12 months (38.9 ± 19.3 vs 48.6 ± 20.4 mL/min/1.73 m², P < .001, resp.). During DGF, 12.4% developed BANFF II and 18.0% BANFF I rejection, 20.2% had signs of transplant glomerulitis (first biopsy), and 16.2% (n = 18) remained on dialysis.ConclusionDGF affects 1 out of 5 kidney transplants from deceased donors. Minimizing modifiable risk factors, in particular immunologic risk, may ameliorate the incidence and outcome of DGF. The outcome of DGF depends mainly on the diagnosis of any rejection and worsens upon detection of transplant glomerulitis and pronounced interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IFTA).     

Long-Term Complications After Nephrectomy for Living Donor Transplant

BackgroundLiving donor kidney transplant represents the best treatment option for patients with end-stage kidney disease; however, it has been associated with possible risks to the donor. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of kidney donation in the donor's estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), blood pressure, and proteinuria and related risk factors.Patients and MethodsA single-center, retrospective study, including all living donors who underwent nephrectomy between January 2000 and December 2019, was performed. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected. Risk factors for a decrease in eGFR >30 mL/min/1.73 m² one year after donation were assessed.ResultsEighty-six donors were included with a mean age of 46.7 ± 9.07 years. The mean follow-up was 105.6 ± 65.4 months, and 35 patients (41%) had more than 10 years of follow-up. No significant difference was found in proteinuria or body mass index (P > .1) before and after the donation. The prevalence of hypertension was higher after kidney donation (9.3% vs 22.1%; P < .001). A mean reduction in the eGFR in the first year of 37 ± 12 mL/min/1.73 m², followed by stabilization in the following years, was observed. The only variable that was significantly associated with a decline in GFR >30 mL/min/1.73 m² was a lower predonation eGFR, with a cutoff value established at 100 mL/min/1.73 m² for our sample.DiscussionLiving donor nephrectomy appears to be an acceptably safe intervention. Predonation eGFR influences the adaptative response after nephrectomy; however, other variables did not have an impact on long-term outcome in our population.     

Higher Renal Allograft Function in Deceased-Donor Kidney Transplantation Rather Than in Living-Related Kidney Transplantation

Objectives

To compare the clinical outcome of kidney transplantation from living-related and deceased donors.

Single versus dual renal transplantation from donors with significant arteriosclerosis on pre-implant biopsy

Abstract: Background: Transplantation of kidneys from donor with arteriosclerosis seen on pre‐implantation biopsy has not been well studied. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 20 dual kidney transplant (DKT) and 28 single (SKT) kidney transplant recipients with ≥12 months follow‐up from donors with moderate arteriosclerosis (≥25% luminal diameter narrowing). Results: Death censored graft survival was 100% and 79%, respectively (p = 0.0339). DKT recipients had significantly lower mean creatinine levels at one, three, six, and nine months and spent somewhat less time on the waiting list (181 ± 160 vs. 318 ± 306 d, p = 0.1429). DKT patients received kidneys from significantly older donors (64 ± 7 vs. 54 ± 11 yr; p = 0.0012), proportionately more expanded criteria donors (95% vs. 54%; p = 0.0029), and more donors with hypertension (81% vs. 48%, p = 0.0344) and death related to cerebrovascular accident (100% vs. 71%, p = 0.0143); however, more DKT kidneys underwent machine perfusion (95% vs. 57%, p = 0.0068). Baseline recipient variables were comparable between the two groups including age, race, gender, retransplantation, and HLA mismatch. Pre‐implant biopsy was notable for similar frequencies of moderate interstitial fibrosis (10% vs. 14%, respectively) and glomerulosclerosis. Conclusion: Among recipients of deceased‐donor kidneys with >25% arteriosclerosis, short‐term outcomes after DKT were superior to that of SKT grafts. This approach may help to expand the donor‐organ pool while optimizing outcomes.     

Use of Tissue Plasminogen Activator in Liver Transplantation from Donation After Cardiac Death Donors

Ischemic‐type biliary stricture (ITBS) occurs in up to 50% after liver transplantation (LT) from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors. Thrombus formation in the peribiliary microcirculation is a postulated mechanism. The aim was to describe our experience of tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) administration in DCD‐LT. TPA was injected into the donor hepatic artery on the backtable (n = 22). Two recipients developed ITBS including one graft failure. Although excessive postreperfusion bleeding was seen in 14 recipients, the amount of TPA was comparable between those with and without excessive bleeding (6.4 ± 2.8 vs. 6.6 ± 2.8 mg, p = 0.78). However, donor age (41 ± 12 vs. 29 ± 9 years, p = 0.02), donor BMI (26.3 ± 5.5 vs. 21.7 ± 3.6 kg/m², p = 0.03), previous laparotomy (50% vs. 0%, p = 0.02) and lactate after portal reperfusion (6.3 ± 4.6 vs. 2.8 ± 0.9 mmol/L, p = 0.005) were significantly greater in recipients with excessive bleeding. In conclusion, the use of TPA may lower the risk of ITBS‐related graft failure in DCD‐LT. Excessive bleeding may be related to poor graft quality and previous laparotomy rather than the amount of TPA. Further studies are needed in larger population.