OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes in recipients of expanded criteria donor (ECD) versus standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys at a single center using a standardized approach with similar immunosuppression. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Expanded criteria deceased organ donors (ECD) are a source of kidneys that permit more patients to benefit from transplantation. ECD is defined as all deceased donors older than 60 years and donors older than 50 years with 2 of the following: hypertension, stroke as the cause of death, or pre-retrieval serum creatinine (SCr) greater than 1.5 mg/dl. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 90 recipients of adult deceased donor kidneys transplanted from October 1, 2001 to February 17, 2003, including 37 (41%) from ECDs and 53 (59%) from SCDs. ECD kidneys were used by matching estimated renal functional mass to recipient need, including the use of dual kidney transplants (n = 7). ECD kidney recipients were further selected on the basis of older age, HLA-matching, low allosensitization, and low body mass index. All patients received a similar immunosuppressive regimen. Minimum follow up was 9 months. RESULTS: There were significant differences in donor and recipient characteristics between ECD and SCD transplants. Patient (99%) and kidney graft survival (88%) rates and morbidity were similar between the 2 groups, with a mean follow-up of 16 months. Initial graft function and the mean 1-week and 1-, 3-, 6-, 12-, and 18-month SCr levels were similar among groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ECD kidneys at our center effectively doubled our transplant volume within 1 year. A systematic approach to ECD kidneys based on nephron mass matching and nephron sparing measures may provide optimal utilization with short-term outcomes and renal function comparable to SCD kidneys.
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes in recipients of expanded criteria donor (ECD) versus standard criteria donor (SCD) kidneys at a single center using a standardized approach with similar immunosuppression. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Expanded criteria deceased organ donors (ECD) are a source of kidneys that permit more patients to benefit from transplantation. ECD is defined as all deceased donors older than 60 years and donors older than 50 years with 2 of the following: hypertension, stroke as the cause of death, or pre-retrieval serum creatinine (SCr) greater than 1.5 mg/dl. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 90 recipients of adult deceased donor kidneys transplanted from October 1, 2001 to February 17, 2003, including 37 (41%) from ECDs and 53 (59%) from SCDs. ECD kidneys were used by matching estimated renal functional mass to recipient need, including the use of dual kidney transplants (n = 7). ECD kidney recipients were further selected on the basis of older age, HLA-matching, low allosensitization, and low body mass index. All patients received a similar immunosuppressive regimen. Minimum follow up was 9 months. RESULTS: There were significant differences in donor and recipient characteristics between ECD and SCD transplants. Patient (99%) and kidney graft survival (88%) rates and morbidity were similar between the 2 groups, with a mean follow-up of 16 months. Initial graft function and the mean 1-week and 1-, 3-, 6-, 12-, and 18-month SCr levels were similar among groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ECD kidneys at our center effectively doubled our transplant volume within 1 year. A systematic approach to ECD kidneys based on nephron mass matching and nephron sparing measures may provide optimal utilization with short-term outcomes and renal function comparable to SCD kidneys.
Authors: J F Whiting; R S Woodward; E Y Zavala; D S Cohen; J E Martin; G G Singer; J A Lowell; M R First; D C Brennan; M A Schnitzler Journal: Transplantation Date: 2000-09-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: R A Wolfe; V B Ashby; E L Milford; A O Ojo; R E Ettenger; L Y Agodoa; P J Held; F K Port Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-12-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: P S Randhawa; M I Minervini; M Lombardero; R Duquesnoy; J Fung; R Shapiro; M Jordan; C Vivas; V Scantlebury; A Demetris Journal: Transplantation Date: 2000-04-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: M M Polyak; B O Arrington; W T Stubenbord; J Boykin; T Brown; M A Jean-Jacques; J Estevez; S Kapur; M Kinkhabwala Journal: Transplantation Date: 2000-01-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: A D Lu; J T Carter; R J Weinstein; R J Stratta; R J Taylor; V D Bowers; L E Ratner; K D Chavin; L B Johnson; P C Kuo; E H Cole; D C Dafoe; E J Alfrey Journal: Transplantation Date: 2000-01-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Johan W DE Fijter; Marko J K Mallat; Ilias I N Doxiadis; Jan Ringers; Frits R Rosendaal; Frans H J Claas; Leendert C Paul Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Akinlolu O Ojo; Julie A Hanson; Herwig-Ulf Meier-Kriesche; Chike N Okechukwu; Robert A Wolfe; Alan B Leichtman; Lawrence Y Agodoa; Bruce Kaplan; Friedrich K Port Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Robert J Stratta; Michael S Rohr; Aimee K Sundberg; Alan C Farney; Erica L Hartmann; Phillip S Moore; Jeffrey Rogers; Samy S Iskandar; Michael D Gautreaux; David F Kiger; William Doares; Teresa K Anderson; Gloria Hairston; Patricia L Adams Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Sumit Mohan; Mariana C Chiles; Rachel E Patzer; Stephen O Pastan; S Ali Husain; Dustin J Carpenter; Geoffrey K Dube; R John Crew; Lloyd E Ratner; David J Cohen Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2018-05-05 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Mazen Hassanain; Eve Simoneau; Suhail A Doi; Murad Aljiffry; Abdulla Aloraini; Ahmad Madkhali; Peter Metrakos Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Connie J Wang; Shahzad Shafique; Johanna McCullagh; Dennis A Diederich; Franz T Winklhofer; James B Wetmore Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2011-03-03 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: S Mohan; B Tanriover; N Ali; R J Crew; G K Dube; J Radhakrishnan; M A Hardy; L E Ratner; W McClellan; D Cohen Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: J M Smith; S W Biggins; D G Haselby; W R Kim; J Wedd; K Lamb; B Thompson; D L Segev; S Gustafson; R Kandaswamy; P G Stock; A J Matas; C J Samana; E F Sleeman; D Stewart; A Harper; E Edwards; J J Snyder; B L Kasiske; A K Israni Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2012-11-16 Impact factor: 8.086