Deceased Organ Donation From Pediatric Donors: Does the Literature Really Help Us? Implication for More Powerful Guidelines

Background

Brain-dead pediatric donors have always been the focus of attention because of the higher quality, utility, and possibility of their organ donation. However, donors under the age of 5 years always necessitate making more challenging management efforts, which are not clearly implied in most parts of the guidelines.

Kidney Transplantation From Old Deceased Donors: Impact of Uric Acid Level—A Quarter-Century of Experience in One Transplant Center

Background

The long-term burden of higher donor age on graft function and survival after kidney transplantation remains uncertain. Because both recipient and donor characteristics have evolved and the general population age is on the increase, we looked at the causes of kidney graft outcome.

How Safe Is It to Transplant Organs from Deceased Donors with Primary Intracranial Malignancy? An Analysis of UK Registry Data

Patients dying from primary intracranial malignancy are a potential source of organs for transplantation. However, a perceived risk of tumor transfer to the organ recipient has limited their use. We evaluated the risk of tumor transmission by reviewing the incidence in patients transplanted in the UK. Information from the UK Transplant Registry was combined with that from the national cancer registries of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to identify all organ donors between 1985 and 2001 inclusive with a primary intracranial malignancy and to identify the occurrence of posttransplant malignancy in the recipients of the organs transplanted. Of 11 799 organ donors in the study period, 179 were identified as having had a primary intracranial malignancy, including 33 with high‐grade malignancy (24 grade IV gliomas and 9 medulloblastomas). A total of 448 recipients of 495 organs from 177 of these donors were identified. No transmission of donor intracranial malignancy occurred. Organs from patients dying from primary intracranial malignancy, including those with high‐grade tumors, should be considered for transplantation and the small risk of tumor transmission should be balanced against the likely mortality for potential recipients who remain on the transplant waiting list.     

Has the Expansion in Extended Criteria Deceased Donors Led to a Different Type of Delayed Graft Function and Poorer Outcomes?

Objectives

There has been considerable change in the practice of deceased kidney transplantation in the past 15 years, with more extreme phenotypes implanted. The aim of this study was to determine whether increased use of expanded criteria donors (extended criteria donors and donors after circulatory death) affected clinical outcomes, including the incidence and pattern of delayed graft function.

Donors with malignancies-risk or chance?

The disparity between organ demand and organ supply in renal transplantation has led transplant physicians to pursue a variety of options for increasing the number of donor kidneys. One option is to use kidneys from living or deceased donors who have been diagnosed with a malignant tumor, either of the kidney itself or of other origin. Today, there is an increasing body of evidence in favor of accepting kidneys from donors with renal or ureteral malignancy. This review article, based on a Medline and PubMed search, presents options and strategies for deciding under which circumstances these kidneys may be considered for transplantation. The decision depends on donor tumor characteristics and recipient issues but also on surgical and urological knowledge.     

Do Living Kidney Donors Have CKD?

Living kidney donor transplantation is an increasingly used treatment for end-stage renal disease because it both confers excellent outcomes to transplant recipients, and is considered a safe procedure for prospective donors. The short- and long-term safety of prospective donors is paramount to the continued success of living donation. Although the initial experience with living kidney donors mostly included the healthiest donors, increasing need for organs and secular trends in the general population have subtly reshaped prevailing suitability criteria for donation. As the practice of living donation evolved over time, our understanding of kidney disease has also changed as we embraced the framework of the K-DOQI guidelines. It is not uncommon for donors to fit into some of the K-DOQI guidelines paradigms of risk and disease; however, whether there is a true biological consequence or whether it is a merely semantic conundrum remains unclear. Regardless, this is an important issue, and therefore future efforts should aim at addressing this matter.     

Deceased organ donation in Brazil: how can we improve?

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the registry data from one organ procurement organization obtained between January 1 and December 31, 2005. RESULTS: Among the 378 potential deceased donors, 182 (48.2%) were lost, mainly due to clinical conditions (27%) or cardiac arrest (19.3%). Of the remaining 196 (51.8%) potential donors, family consent was obtained in 94 cases (48%). Family refusal was higher for potential donors aged between 18 and 59 years (70%). Of the 94 donors, 72 (77%) had their organs harvested. Cardiac arrest before harvesting (56.5%) and positive viral serology (26%) were the main reasons for further losses. The mean donor age was 40 years and 51% were men. Causes of death were cerebral vascular accidents (55.5%), cranium encephalic traumas (29%), and gun shot wounds (8%). The rate of organ donation was 100% for kidneys and livers, 96% for hearts, 86% for pancreatas, 76% for lungs, and 74% for corneas. After assessment of organ viability, 94% of corneas, 91% of kidneys, and 88% of livers were transplanted, but only 52% of pancreata and 42% of hearts. The most frequent causes of discarded organs were age and concomitant donor infection. CONCLUSION: Areas for potential improvements are: (1) earlier identification and adequate maintenance of potential donors; (2) campaigns for organ donation; and (3) careful evaluation of donated organs and selection of a suitable population to increase utilization of expanded criteria organs.     

Safety of Kidney Transplantation Using Anti-HBc–Positive Donors

BackgroundProspective studies evaluating the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmission in transplants of kidneys from hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc)–positive/hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs)–negative donors are still lacking. The objective of this study was to assess the safety of kidney transplantation with the use of anti-HBc–positive donors.MethodsThis prospective case series study included 50 kidney transplant recipients from anti-HBc–positive donors with or without anti-HBs positivity. Recipients were required to test positive for anti-HBs (titers >10 mUI/mL), regardless of anti-HBc status, and negative for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). Recipient and donor data were retrieved from medical records, databases, and organ procurement organization sheets. Liver function tests were performed at progressively increasing post-transplantation intervals. Complete serologic tests for HBV were performed before transplantation, 3 and 6 months after transplantation, and annually thereafter.ResultsSix months after transplantation, all recipients were negative for HBsAg, HBeAg, anti-HBe, and anti-HBcIgM. No seroconversion was observed among the 20 patients who received kidneys from anti-HBc–positive/anti-HBs–negative donors. No patient showed elevated liver enzymes during follow-up.ConclusionsKidney transplantation using organs from anti-HBcIgG–positive donors (even when they are concurrently anti-HBs negative) in anti-HBs–positive recipients is a safe procedure and may be considered as a way to expand the donor pool.     

Are We Taking Proper Care of Living Donors? A Follow-up Study of Living Kidney Donors in Poland and Further Management Proposal

Objective

The first kidney transplantation was performed in Poland in 1966. Since that time approximately 11,000 patients have undergone the procedure, but most of them have received the kidney from deceased donors; only 342 procedures utilized living donors (LD; 2.7%). The aim of this study was to review the results of a LD follow-up in Poland.

Patients and Methods

A questionnaire was sent to 11 centers that had performed 197 LD kidney transplantations during the last 10 years. The donors, who were all genetically or emotionally related, were 23 to 61 years old. No donor showed an abnormality regarding cardiovascular function or metabolic abnormalities.

Results

The 6 centers that responded reported data on 118 donors. In 2 centers no donor follow-up was available. Eleven of 118 donors did not attend the control visits. Follow-up of the remaining donors ranged from 2 to 8 years. Four donors died at 4 to 5 years after nephrectomy due to cerebral hemorrhage, brain tumor, stomach cancer, or car accident. The overall mean serum creatinine had increased from 0.8 to 1.25 mg/dL, but 2 patients displayed a value >2 mg/dL. The calculated creatinine clearance (MDRD formula) had decreased from 95 to 65 mL/min (P < .05). In 3 donors proteinuria (>0.6 g/24 h) was observed at 3 to 5 years after donation. Of 3 patients who experienced mild hypertension, 2 required treatment. The remaining donors showed normal blood pressures.

Conclusions

Since 2007, when the Living Donor Registry was introduced by law, transplant centers have been obliged to report data on each LD procedure together with follow-up data. All donors are life-insured (by Alianz SA) for 3 months from the time of transplantation. Stepwise interventional reno- and cardioprotection programs have been introduced after nephrectomy for LD, especially those with metabolic abnormalities at the time of donation.     

Does Procurement Technique Affect Posttransplant Graft Function in Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation?

Introduction

Various techniques have been described deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) procurement. One is a technique whereby almost total dissection is done in the porta hepatis and perihepatic detachment is carried out before cross-clamping the donor aorta. In another approach, after the donor aorta is cross-clamped, rapid and minimal en bloc dissection is performed with minimal manipulation. We evaluated early posttransplant graft function among liver procurement techniques.

Method

Between January 2008 and August 2012, we performed 45 consecutive adult DDLTs. One patient was excluded from this analysis due to early death from sepsis after transplantation. The 44 included patients were divided into two cohorts according to the procurement technique: A warm dissection (n = 23; 52%) and a cold dissection group (n = 21; 48%). We compared early posttransplant graft function using the aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), total bilirubin (T-bil), and prothrombin time (PT) values of the two groups from the first to seventh postoperative day.

Result

The AST values in the warm group were significantly greater than those in the cold group on postoperative days 3 and 5. In addition, the ALT values in the warm group were greater than those in the cold group on postoperative days 4, 5, and 6. Moreover, the T-bil values in the warm group were greater than those in the cold group on postoperative days 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. However, there were no differences in PT values.

Conclusion

During liver procurement for DDLT, rapid en bloc procurement with minimal manipulation after clamping the donor aorta achieved better early graft function posttransplantation.     

Role of Transforming Growth Factor-β in Hypertensive Living Kidney Donors

Background

Transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) is involved in the pathogenesis of hypertension and the development of hypertensive target organ damage. TGF-β may promote blood pressure elevation through several mechanisms. The identification of risk factors of hypertension in living kidney donors may provide proper postoperative management.

Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation in Elderly Patients: Is There a Difference in Outcomes?

Introduction

There is a paucity of data on long-term outcomes of older kidney recipients. Our aim was to compare the early and long-term outcomes of deceased donor kidney transplantation in patients aged ≥60 years with outcomes in younger recipients.

Materials and Methods

From 1998 to 2005, we performed 271 deceased donor kidney transplants. There were 76 recepients (28.1%) >60 years old. Older candidates were carefully selected based on their physiologic, cardiac, and performance status. Demographic data, including clinical characteristics, early complications, mortality, and patient and graft survival rates, were collected and analyzed.

Results

Older patients had comparable perioperative mortality and morbidity, incidence of delayed graft function (DGF), length of stay, and readmissions compared with younger patients. The rates of acute rejection and major infections were also comparable between the 2 study groups. Among older recipients, 25/76 (32.1%) patients received extended criteria donor kidneys compared with only 35/195 (17.9%) of younger patients (P < .001). Nevertheless, equivalent 1-, 3-, and 5-year allograft survival rates were observed in elderly and young patients; 91.5% versus, 92.5%, 78.5% versus 81.9%, and 75.6% versus 78.5%, respectively. Overall patient survival was also comparable in both groups.

Conclusion

Kidney transplantation in appropriately selected elderly recipients provides equivalent outcomes compared with those observed in younger patients. These observations support the notion that older recipients should not lose access to deceased donor kidney transplantation in the effort to achieve a perceived gain in social utility.     

Donors with central nervous system malignancies: are they truly safe?

BACKGROUND: In an era of organ shortage, the use of expanded or marginal donors has been attempted to increase transplantation rates and diminish waiting list mortality. One strategy is the use of organs from patients with a history of or active central nervous system (CNS) tumor. METHODS: Sixty-two recipients were identified as the recipients of organs from donors with a history of or active CNS malignancy. Patient demographics, donor tumor management, incidence of tumor transmission, and patient survival were examined. RESULTS: Of the organs recovered and transplanted from donors with astrocytoma, 14 were associated with at least one risk factor including high-grade tumor (n=4), prior surgery (n=5), radiation therapy (n=4), and systemic chemotherapy (n=4). One tumor transmission was identified at 20 months posttransplant with the patient expiring from metastatic disease. Twenty-six organs were transplanted from glioblastoma patients with 15 demonstrating risk factors including high-grade tumor (n=9) and prior surgery (n=10). Eight transmissions were identified with a range of 2 to 15 months posttransplant, with seven patients dying as the result of metastatic disease. Seven organs were used from donors with a medulloblastoma. Three transmissions were identified at a range of 5 to 7 months, all associated with ventriculoperitoneal shunts. Two medulloblastoma recipients died as the result of metastatic disease, whereas the third is alive with diffuse disease. The rate of donor tumor transmission, in the absence of risk factors, was 7%, whereas in the presence of one or more risk factor this rate dramatically rose to 53% (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Organs from donors with CNS tumors can be used with a low risk of donor tumor transmission in the absence of the following risk factors: high-grade tumors, ventriculoperitoneal or ventriculoatrial shunts, prior craniotomy, and systemic chemotherapy.     

Effect of Donor–Recipient Age Gradient on Graft Outcomes in Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation

Purpose

Donor age is a well-known factor influencing graft function after deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). However, the effect of donors older than recipients on graft outcomes remains unclear. This study investigated the relationship between the donor–recipient age gradient (DRAG) and posttransplant outcomes after DDLT.

Methods

We included 164 adult recipients who underwent DDLT between May 1996 and April 2011. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the value of DRAG: Negative (DRAG −20 to −1; n = 99) versus positive (DRAG 0–20; n = 65). Medical records were reviewed and laboratory data were retrospectively collected.

Results

The median age of donors and recipients was 43 (range, 10–80) and 46 (range, 19–67) years, respectively. The mean follow-up time was 57.4 months. A positive DRAG had a negative effect on levels of alkaline phosphatase until 2 weeks after transplantation. However, the positive group showed a lower incidence of hepatitis B viral disease recurrence. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates were 80.4%, 76.8%, and 71.4% in the negative group, and 65.8%, 58.4%, and 56.3% in the positive group, respectively. The positive DRAG group showed significantly inferior graft survival compared with the negative DRAG group (P = .036).

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that donors older than recipients had a deleterious effect on graft outcomes. DRAG could be a meaningful determinant of graft survival among DDLT recipients.     

Estimated or Measured GFR in Living Kidney Donors Work‐up?

The value of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in living kidney donors screening is unclear. A recently published web‐based application derived from large cohorts, but not living donors, calculates the probability of a measured GFR (mGFR) lower than a determined threshold. Our objectives were to validate the clinical utility of this tool in a cohort of living donors and to test two other strategies based on chronic kidney disease epidemiology collaboration (CKD‐EPI) and on MDRD‐eGFR. GFR was measured using ⁵¹Cr‐ ethylene‐diamine tetraacetic acid urinary clearance in 311 potential living kidney donors (178 women, mean age 50 ± 11.6 years). The web‐based tool was used to predict those with mGFR < 80 mL/min/1.73 m². Inputs to the application were sex, age, ethnicity, and plasma creatinine. In our cohort, a web‐based probability of mGFR <90 mL/min/1.73 m² higher than 2% had 100% sensitivity for detection of actual mGFR <80 mL/min/1.73 m². The positive predictive value was 0.19. A CKD‐EPI‐eGFR threshold of 104 mL/min/1.73 m² and an MDRD‐eGFR threshold of 100 mL/min/1.73 m² had 100% sensitivity to detect donors with actual mGFR <80 mL/min/1.73 m². We obtained similar results in an external cohort of 354 living donors. We confirm the usefulness of the web‐based application to identify potential donors who should benefit from GFR measurement.