Between March 2012 and August 2013, 591 quality forms were filled out for abdominal organs in the Netherlands. In 133 cases (23%), there was a discrepancy between the evaluation from the procuring and transplanting surgeons. Injuries were seen in 148 (25%) organs of which 12 (2%) led to discarding of the organ: one of 133 (0.8%) livers, five of 38 (13%) pancreata and six of 420 (1.4%) kidneys (P < 0.001). Higher donor BMI was a risk factor for procurement-related injury in all organs (OR: 1.06, P = 0.011) and donor after cardiac death (DCD) donation in liver procurement (OR: 2.31, P = 0.034). DCD donation is also associated with more pancreata being discarded due to injury (OR: 10.333, P = 0.046). A higher procurement volume in a centre was associated with less injury in pancreata (OR = -0.95, P = 0.013) and kidneys (OR = -0.91, P = 0.012). The quality form system efficiently monitors the quality of organ procurement. Although there is a relatively high rate of organ injury, the discard rate is low and it does not significantly affect 1-year graft survival for any organ. We identified higher BMI as a risk factor for injury in abdominal organs and DCD as a risk factor in livers. A higher procurement volume is associated with fewer injuries.

The P-PASS has no predictive value for pancreas graft survival and should not be used in clinical decision making. The PDRI is a significant predictor of pancreas graft survival but should be used carefully, because good results can be achieved with grafts from high-PDRI donors.

This study has shown excellent results in patient and pancreas graft survivals after 30 years of pancreas transplantation in a high volume center. Different donor, transplant, and recipient related risk factors influence pancreas graft survival. Even with higher risk pancreas donors, good results can be achieved.

Summary Complete graft thrombosis is the leading cause of early graft loss following pancreas transplantation. Partial thrombosis is usually subclinical and discovered on routine imaging. Treatment options may vary in such cases. We describe the incidence and relevance of partial graft thrombosis in a large transplant center. All consecutive pancreas transplantation at our center (2004–2015) were included in this study. Radiological follow‐up, type and quantity of thrombosis prophylaxis, complications and, graft and patient survival were collected. Partial thrombosis and follow‐up were also studied. All 230 pancreas transplantations were included in the analysis. Computed tomography was performed in most cases (89.1%). Early graft failure occurred in 23 patients (13/23 due to graft thrombosis, 3/23 bleeding, 1/23 anastomotic leakage, 6/23 secondary to antibody mediated rejection). There was evidence of partial thrombosis in 59 cases (26%), of which the majority was treated with heparin and a vitamin K antagonist with graft preservation in 57/59 patients (97%). Thrombosis is the leading cause of early graft loss following pancreas transplantation. Computed tomography allows for early detection of partial thrombosis, which is usually subclinical. Partial graft thrombosis occurs in about 25% of all cases. In this series, treatment with anticoagulant therapy (heparin and vitamin K antagonist) resulted in graft preservation in almost all cases.

The sickest-first principle in donor-liver allocation can be implemented by allocating organs to patients with cirrhosis with the highest Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. For patients with other risk factors, standard exceptions (SEs) and nonstandard exceptions (NSEs) have been developed. We investigated whether this system of matched MELD scores achieves similar outcomes on the liver transplant waiting list for various diagnostic groups in Eurotransplant (ET) countries with MELD-based individual allocation (Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany). A retrospective analysis of the ET wait-list outflow from December 2006 until December 2015 was conducted to investigate the relation of the unified MELD-based allocation to the risk of a negative wait-list outcome (death on the waiting list or delisting as too sick) as opposed to a positive wait-list outcome (transplantation or delisting as recovered). A total of 16,926 patients left the waiting list with a positive (11,580) or negative (5346) outcome; 3548 patients had a SE, and 330 had a NSE. A negative outcome was more common among patients without a SE or NSE (34.3%) than among patients with a SE (22.6%) or NSE (18.6%; P < 0.001). Analysis by model-based recursive partitioning detected 5 risk groups with different relations of matched MELD to a negative outcome. In Germany, we found the following: (1) no SE or NSE, SE for biliary sepsis (BS); (2) SE for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), hepatopulmonary syndrome (HPS), or portopulmonary hypertension (PPH); and (3) SE for primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) or polycystic liver disease (PcLD). In Belgium and the Netherlands, we found the following: (4) SE or NSE, or SE for HPS or PPH; and (5) SE for BS, HCC, PcLD, or PSC. In conclusion, SEs and NSEs do not even out risks across different diagnostic groups. Patients with SEs or NSEs appear advantaged toward patients with cirrhosis without SEs or NSEs. Liver Transplantation 23 1256-1265 2017 AASLD.

Patient and graft survival after pancreas transplantation are superior in higher volume centers. High volume centers have good results, even though they transplant organs with the highest PDRI.

Pancreas transplantation from DCD donors yields comparable results to DBD donors when PDRI of DCD is relatively low. Most DCD donors are younger donors with trauma as cause of death. These DCD pancreas grafts may be a better option to cope with increasing organ shortages than exploring the limits with older (and higher PDRI) DBD donors.

Professional abdominal organ recovery with certification has been mandatory in the Netherlands since 2010. This study analyses the effects of certification (January 2010-September 2015) on pancreas transplantation and compares it to an era before certification (February 2002-May 2008) for surgical injuries and the number of pancreases transplanted. A total of 264 cases were analysed. Eighty-four recovered pancreases (31.8%) with surgically injuries were encountered. Forty-six of those were surgically salvaged for transplantation, resulting in a total of 226 (85.6%) being transplanted. It was found that certified surgeons recovered grafts from older donors (36.8 vs. 33.3; P = 0.021), more often from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors (18% vs. 0%; P < 0.001) and had less surgical injuries (21.6% vs. 41.0%; P < 0.001). Certification (OR: 0.285; P < 0.001) and surgeons from a pancreas transplant centre (OR: 0.420; P = 0.002) were independent risk factors for surgical organ injury. Predictors for proceeding to the actual pancreas transplantation were a recovering surgeon from a pancreas transplantation centre (OR: 3.230; P = 0.003), certification (OR: 3.750; P = 0.004), donation after brain death (DBD) (OR: 8.313; P = 0.002) and donor body mass index (BMI) (OR: 0.851; P = 0.023). It is concluded that certification in abdominal organ recovery will limit the number of surgical injuries in pancreas grafts which will translate in more pancreases available for transplantation.