Abstract:SummaryKidneys from uncontrolled donors after cardiac death (DCD) expand the donor pool, but are associated with more primary nonfunction (PNF) and delayed graft function (DGF) compared with more conventional donor kidneys. It remains unclear, which factors influence outcome of uncontrolled donation. Therefore, we studied which donor, graft, and recipient characteristics are associated with PNF in a large cohort study. The association between different characteristics and short-term graft function was analyzed… Show more
“…7 In our cohort, roughly 60 uDCD kidneys and 170 cDCD were machine perfused between 2002 and 2012. Management of machine perfusion of DCD was done as described by Hoogland et al 4,7 Viability testing was not used to determine organ suitability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, lately, there has been growing interest in the potential of uDCD kidneys. 4-7 In some European countries like Spain and France, transplantation with uDCD kidneys is a more common practice, and promising results with uDCD have been reported. 8-15 After the pioneering work of the Maastricht Transplantation Center, the practice of transplanting uDCD kidneys has been implemented throughout all Dutch transplant centers.…”
Background. Organ shortage persists despite a high rate of donation after circulatory death (DCD) in the Netherlands. The median waiting time for a deceased donor kidney in 2013 was 3.5 years. Most DCD kidneys are from controlled DCD (cDCD; Maastricht category III). Experience with uncontrolled donors after cardiac death (uDCD), that is, donors with an unexpected and irreversible cardiac arrest (Maastricht categories I and II), is increasing; and its effect on transplant outcomes needs evaluation. Methods. We used the Dutch Organ Transplantation Registry to include recipients (≥18 years old) from all Dutch centers who received transplants from 2002 to 2012 with a first DCD kidney. We compared transplant outcome in uDCD (n = 97) and cDCD (n = 1441). Results. Primary nonfunction in uDCD was higher than in the cDCD (19.6% vs 9.6%, P < 0.001, respectively). Delayed graft function was also higher in uDCD than in cDCD, but not significantly (73.7% vs 63.3%, P = .074, respectively). If censored for primary nonfunction, estimated glomerular filtration rates after 1 year and 5 years were comparable between uDCD and cDCD (1 year: uDCD, 44.3 (23.4) mL/min/m 2 and cDCD, 45.8 (24.1) mL/min/m
“…7 In our cohort, roughly 60 uDCD kidneys and 170 cDCD were machine perfused between 2002 and 2012. Management of machine perfusion of DCD was done as described by Hoogland et al 4,7 Viability testing was not used to determine organ suitability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, lately, there has been growing interest in the potential of uDCD kidneys. 4-7 In some European countries like Spain and France, transplantation with uDCD kidneys is a more common practice, and promising results with uDCD have been reported. 8-15 After the pioneering work of the Maastricht Transplantation Center, the practice of transplanting uDCD kidneys has been implemented throughout all Dutch transplant centers.…”
Background. Organ shortage persists despite a high rate of donation after circulatory death (DCD) in the Netherlands. The median waiting time for a deceased donor kidney in 2013 was 3.5 years. Most DCD kidneys are from controlled DCD (cDCD; Maastricht category III). Experience with uncontrolled donors after cardiac death (uDCD), that is, donors with an unexpected and irreversible cardiac arrest (Maastricht categories I and II), is increasing; and its effect on transplant outcomes needs evaluation. Methods. We used the Dutch Organ Transplantation Registry to include recipients (≥18 years old) from all Dutch centers who received transplants from 2002 to 2012 with a first DCD kidney. We compared transplant outcome in uDCD (n = 97) and cDCD (n = 1441). Results. Primary nonfunction in uDCD was higher than in the cDCD (19.6% vs 9.6%, P < 0.001, respectively). Delayed graft function was also higher in uDCD than in cDCD, but not significantly (73.7% vs 63.3%, P = .074, respectively). If censored for primary nonfunction, estimated glomerular filtration rates after 1 year and 5 years were comparable between uDCD and cDCD (1 year: uDCD, 44.3 (23.4) mL/min/m 2 and cDCD, 45.8 (24.1) mL/min/m
“…Pieter Hoogland et al 8 reported the outcome of the earliest series of uDCD kidney transplants (n = 135) from 1981 to 2009 in the Netherlands: the DGF rate was 61% and the PNF rate 22%. All kidneys were flushed in situ with HTK solution and the majority preserved by HMP with Belzer UW solution from 1985.…”
Section: Kidney Preservation Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Evidence from the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Europe has demonstrated that shipping kidneys is safe with CITs of up to 16 h. However, this increases the risk of DGF, which may reduce graft and patient survival and increase incidences of acute rejection. 12,[34][35][36][37] Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation Rates of DGF in deceased donor kidney transplantation range from 10% in standard donation after brain death (DBD) kidneys to 93% in uDCD 4,7,8,10,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]27,38 (Table 1). The outcomes of graft and patient survival at 1 y are good but slightly lower in comparison to living donor kidneys.…”
Section: Kidney Donors Live Donor Kidney Transplantationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5,6 The use of uncontrolled DCD (uDCD) donors is also increasing, with firmly established programs in several European countries. 7,8 ECD, controlled DCD (cDCD), and uDCD kidneys are all particularly susceptible to CI. [9][10][11] Efforts are made to limit the preservation interval where possible.…”
The use of cold preservation solutions to rapidly flush and cool the kidney followed by static cold storage in ice has been the standard kidney preservation technique for the last 50 y. Nonetheless, changing donor demographics that include organs from extended criteria donors and donation after circulatory death donors have led to the adoption of more diverse techniques of preservation. Comparison of hypothermic machine perfusion and static cold storage techniques for deceased donor kidneys has long been debated and is still contested by some. The recent modification of hypothermic machine perfusion techniques with the addition of oxygen or perfusion at subnormothermic or near-normothermic temperatures are promising strategies that are emerging in clinical practice. In addition, the use of normothermic regional perfusion to resuscitate abdominal organs of donation after circulatory death donors in situ before cold flushing is also increasingly being utilized. This review provides a synopsis of the different types of preservation techniques including their mechanistic effects and the outcome of their application in clinical practice for different types of donor kidney.
The continuing shortage of deceased donor organs for transplantation, and the limited number of potential donors after brain death, has led to a resurgence of interest in donation after circulatory death (DCD). The processes of warm and cold ischemia threaten the viability of DCD organs, but these can be minimized by well-organized DCD pathways and new techniques of in-situ organ preservation and ex-situ resuscitation and repair post-explantation. Transplantation survival after DCD is comparable to donation after brain death despite higher rates of primary non-function and delayed graft function. Countries with successfully implemented DCD programs have achieved this primarily through the establishment of national ethical, professional and legal frameworks to address both public and professional concerns with all aspects of the DCD pathway. There remains a worldwide shortage in organ availability, and it seems unlikely that expanding standard DCD programs in isolation will be sufficient to address this. It is therefore likely that reliance on extended criteria donors will increase, with the attendant imperative to minimize ischemic injury to candidate organs. Normothermic regional perfusion and ex-situ perfusion techniques allow enhanced preservation, assessment, resuscitation and/or repair of damaged organs as a way of improving overall organ quality and preventing the unnecessary discarding of DCD organs. This review will outline exemplar controlled and uncontrolled DCD pathways, highlighting practical and logistical considerations that minimize warm and cold ischemia times while addressing potential ethical concerns. Future perspectives will also be discussed. Take home message Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is an effective means of expanding the potential donor pool, and has comparable transplantation survival to donation after brain death despite higher rates of primary nonfunction and delayed graft function. Countries with successfully implemented DCD programs have achieved this primarily through the establishment of national ethical, professional and legal frameworks to address both public and professional concerns with all aspects of the DCD pathway.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.