Intermediate-term outcomes with expanded criteria deceased donors in kidney transplantation - A spectrum or specter of quality?

被引:97
作者
Stratta, RJ
Rohr, MS
Sundberg, AK
Farney, AC
Hartmann, EL
Moore, PS
Rogers, J
Iskandar, SS
Gautreaux, MD
Kiger, DF
Doares, W
Anderson, TK
Hairston, G
Adams, PL
机构
[1] Wake Forest Univ, Baptist Med Ctr, Dept Gen Surg, Winston Salem, NC 27157 USA
[2] Wake Forest Univ, Baptist Med Ctr, Dept Pharm, Winston Salem, NC 27157 USA
[3] Wake Forest Univ, Baptist Med Ctr, Dept Med, Winston Salem, NC 27157 USA
[4] Wake Forest Univ, Baptist Med Ctr, Dept Pathol, Winston Salem, NC 27157 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/01.sla.0000216302.43776.1a
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To compare intermediate-term outcomes in adult recipients of expanded criteria (ECD) versus concurrent standard criteria (SCD) deceased donor kidney transplants at a single center using a standardized approach. Summary Background Data: Expanded criteria donors (ECDs) are a source of kidneys that increase the donor organ pool, but the value of transplanting these kidneys has been questioned because of concerns regarding diminished survival and predicted poorer intermediate-term outcomes. Methods: Over a 47-month period, we performed 244 deceased donor kidney transplants into adult recipients, including 143 from SCDs and 101 from ECDs. Management algorithms were implemented to preserve nephron function, and recipient selection for an ECD kidney transplant was based on low immunologic risk. All patients received depleting antibody induction in combination with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil. A total of 188 patients (77%) had at least a 1-year follow-up. Results: ECDs were older, had a higher BMI, had an increased incidence of cerebrovascular brain death and preexisting donor hypertension, and had a lower estimated creatinine clearance (CrCl, all P < 0.01) compared with SCDs. Cold ischemic times were similar between groups, but more ECD kidneys were preserved with pulsatile perfusion (P < 0.01). ECD kidney recipients were older, less sensitized, had a lower BMI, had fewer 0-antigen mismatches, and had a shorter waiting time (all P < 0.01) compared with SCD kidney recipients. Actual patient (93%) and kidney graft (83%) survival rates were similar between groups with a mean follow-up of 24 months. The rates of delayed graft function (DGF), acute rejection, readmissions, operative complications, major infections, and resource utilization were comparable between groups. Renal function followed longitudinally was consistently better in SCD patients (P < 0.05). Black recipients had higher rates of DGF, acute rejection, and graft loss (P < 0.05), but the effects were less pronounced in the ECD group. Conclusions: By appropriate donor and recipient profiling and the use of management algorithms to project and protect renal function, excellent intermediate-term outcomes can be achieved with ECD kidney transplants that are comparable to SCD kidney transplants.
引用
收藏
页码:594 / 603
页数:10
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
Alexander JW, 1996, CLIN TRANSPLANT, V10, P1
[2]   When should expanded criteria donor kidneys be used for single versus dual kidney transplants? [J].
Alfrey, EJ ;
Lee, CM ;
Scandling, JD ;
Pavlakis, M ;
Markezich, AJ ;
Dafoe, DC .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1997, 64 (08) :1142-1146
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2002, UNOS POL 3 5 1 EXP C
[4]   United Network for Organ Sharing's expanded criteria donors: is stratification useful? [J].
Baskin-Bey, ES ;
Kremers, W ;
Stegall, MD ;
Nyberg, SL .
CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, 2005, 19 (03) :406-412
[5]   PREDICTION OF CREATININE CLEARANCE FROM SERUM CREATININE [J].
COCKCROFT, DW ;
GAULT, MH .
NEPHRON, 1976, 16 (01) :31-41
[6]  
COLLINS AJ, 2005, AM J KIDNEY DIS S, V45, P16
[7]   En-bloc kidney transplantation in the united states: An analysis of united network of organ sharing (UNOS) data from 1987 to 2003 [J].
Dharnidharka, VR ;
Stevens, G ;
Howard, RJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2005, 5 (06) :1513-1517
[8]   The presence of glomerular sclerosis at time zero has a significant impact on function after cadaveric renal transplantation [J].
Escofet, X ;
Osman, H ;
Griffiths, DFR ;
Woydag, S ;
Jurewicz, WA .
TRANSPLANTATION, 2003, 75 (03) :344-346
[9]   The risks, benefits, and costs of expanding donor criteria: A collaborative prospective three-year study [J].
Jacobbi, LM ;
McBride, VA ;
Etheredge, EE ;
McDonald, JC ;
Cooper, ES ;
Frey, D ;
Boudreaux, JP ;
Gonzalez, F ;
VanMeter, C ;
McMillan, R ;
Tesi, RJ .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1995, 60 (12) :1491-1496
[10]   The kidneys that nobody wanted - Support for the utilization of expanded criteria donors [J].
Lee, CM ;
Scandling, JD ;
Shen, GK ;
Salvatierra, O ;
Dafoe, DC ;
Alfrey, EJ .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1996, 62 (12) :1832-1841