Utilizing kidneys from a donor with bile-cast nephropathy.

Here we discuss the successful utilization of a pair of deceased donor kidneys with bile-cast nephropathy. The donor had a kidney donor profile index of 48% and an acute kidney injury requiring continuous renal replacement therapy. Peak donor bilirubin was 40.5 mg/dL, and renal wedge biopsies showed bile-cast nephropathy. Both recipients had delayed graft function lasting up to 4 weeks. The 4-month biopsies showed mild interstitial fibrosis, tubular atrophy, and a resolution of bile casts. These kidney allografts showed the reversible course of cholemic nephropathy and the potential for increasing the utilization of previously discarded kidneys.

Liver transplant outcomes using late allocation grafts.

Post-cross clamp late allocation (LA) liver allografts are at increased risk for discard for many reasons including logistical complexity. Nearest neighbor propensity score matching was used to match 2 standard allocation (SA) offers to every 1 LA liver offer performed at our center between 2015 and 2021. Propensity scores were based on a logistic regression model including recipient age, recipient sex, graft type (donation after circulatory death vs. donation after brain death), Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), and DRI score. During this time, 101 liver transplants (LT) were performed at our center using LA offers. In comparing LA and SA offers, there were no differences in recipient characteristics including indication for transplant ( p = 0.29), presence of PVT ( p = 0.19), TIPS ( p = 0.83), and HCC status ( p = 0.24). LA grafts came from younger donors (mean age 43.6 vs. 48.9 y, p = 0.009) and were more likely to come from regional or national Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) ( p < 0.001). Cold ischemia time was longer for LA grafts (median 8.5 vs 6.3 h, p < 0.001). Following LT, there were no differences between the 2 groups in intensive care unit ( p = 0.22) and hospital ( p = 0.49) lengths of stay, need for endoscopic interventions ( p = 0.55), or biliary strictures ( p = 0.21). Patient (HR 1.0, 95% CI, 0.47-2.15, p = 0.99) and graft (HR 1.23, 95% CI, 0.43-3.50, p = 0.70) survival did not vary between the LA and SA cohorts. One-year LA and SA patient survival was 95.1% and 95.0%; 1-year graft survival was 93.1% and 92.1%, respectively. Despite the additional logistical complexity and longer cold ischemia time, LT outcomes utilizing LA grafts are similar to those allocated by means of SA. Improving allocation policies specific to LA offers, as well as the sharing of best practices between transplant centers and OPOs, are opportunities to further help minimize unnecessary discards.

Reassessing Geographic, Logistical, and Cold Ischemia Cutoffs in Liver Transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Liver acceptance patterns vary significantly between transplant centers. Data pertaining to outcomes of livers declined by local and regional centers and allocated nationally remains limited. PROJECT AIM: The objective was to compare post-liver transplant outcomes between liver allografts transplanted as a result of national and local-regional allocation. DESIGN: This was a retrospective evaluation of 109 nationally allocated liver allografts used for transplant by a single center. Outcomes of nationally allocated grafts were compared to standard allocation grafts (N = 505) during the same period. RESULTS: Recipients of nationally allocated grafts had lower model for end stage liver disease scores (17 vs 22, P = .001). Nationally allocated grafts were more likely to be post-cross clamp offers (29.4% vs 13.4%, P = .001) and have longer cold ischemia times (median hours 7.8 vs 5.5, P = .001). Early allograft dysfunction was common (54.1% vs 52.5%, P = .75) and did not impact hospital length of stay (median 5 vs 6 days, P = .89). There were no differences in biliary complications (P = .11). There were no differences in patient (P = .88) or graft survival (P = .35). In a multivariate model, after accounting for differences in cold ischemia time and posttransplant biliary complications, nationally allocated grafts were not associated with increased risk for graft loss (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.4-1.8). Abnormal liver biopsy findings (33.0%) followed by donor donation after circulatory death status (22.9%) were the most common reasons for decline by local-regional centers. CONCLUSION: Despite longer cold ischemia times, patient and graft survival outcomes remain excellent and comparable to those seen from standard allocation grafts.

Declining Medicare reimbursement in abdominal transplantation from 2000 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is a major payer for abdominal transplant services. Reimbursement reductions could have a major impact on the transplant surgical workforce and hospitals. Yet government reimbursement trends in abdominal transplantation have not been fully characterized. METHODS: We performed an economic analysis to characterize changes in inflation-adjusted trends in Medicare surgical reimbursement for abdominal transplant procedures. Using the Medicare Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool, we performed a procedure code-based surgical reimbursement rate analysis. Reimbursement rates were adjusted for inflation to calculate overall changes in reimbursement, overall year-over-year, 5-year year-over-year, and compound annual growth rate from 2000 to 2021. RESULTS: We observed declines in adjusted reimbursement of common abdominal transplant procedures, including liver (-32.4%), kidney with and without nephrectomy (-24.2% and -24.1%, respectively), and pancreas transplant (-15.2%) (all, P < .05). Overall, the yearly average change for liver, kidney with and without nephrectomy, and pancreas transplant were -1.54%, -1.15%, -1.15%, and -0.72%. Five-year annual change averaged -2.69%, -2.35%, -2.64%, and -2.43%, respectively. The overall average compound annual growth rate was -1.27%. CONCLUSION: This analysis depicts a worrisome reimbursement pattern for abdominal transplant procedures. Transplant surgeons, centers, and professional organizations should note these trends to advocate sustainable reimbursement policy and to preserve continued access to transplant services.

Distinct phenotypes of kidney transplant recipients aged 80 years or older in the USA by machine learning consensus clustering.

Objectives: This study aimed to identify distinct clusters of very elderly kidney transplant recipients aged ≥80 and assess clinical outcomes among these unique clusters. Design: Cohort study with machine learning (ML) consensus clustering approach. Setting and participants: All very elderly (age ≥80 at time of transplant) kidney transplant recipients in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database database from 2010 to 2019. Main outcome measures: Distinct clusters of very elderly kidney transplant recipients and their post-transplant outcomes including death-censored graft failure, overall mortality and acute allograft rejection among the assigned clusters. Results: Consensus cluster analysis was performed in 419 very elderly kidney transplant and identified three distinct clusters that best represented the clinical characteristics of very elderly kidney transplant recipients. Recipients in cluster 1 received standard Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) non-extended criteria donor (ECD) kidneys from deceased donors. Recipients in cluster 2 received kidneys from older, hypertensive ECD deceased donors with a KDPI score ≥85%. Kidneys for cluster 2 patients had longer cold ischaemia time and the highest use of machine perfusion. Recipients in clusters 1 and 2 were more likely to be on dialysis at the time of transplant (88.3%, 89.4%). Recipients in cluster 3 were more likely to be preemptive (39%) or had a dialysis duration less than 1 year (24%). These recipients received living donor kidney transplants. Cluster 3 had the most favourable post-transplant outcomes. Compared with cluster 3, cluster 1 had comparable survival but higher death-censored graft failure, while cluster 2 had lower patient survival, higher death-censored graft failure and more acute rejection. Conclusions: Our study used an unsupervised ML approach to cluster very elderly kidney transplant recipients into three clinically unique clusters with distinct post-transplant outcomes. These findings from an ML clustering approach provide additional understanding towards individualised medicine and opportunities to improve care for very elderly kidney transplant recipients.

Use of Machine Learning Consensus Clustering to Identify Distinct Subtypes of Black Kidney Transplant Recipients and Associated Outcomes.

Importance: Among kidney transplant recipients, Black patients continue to have worse graft function and reduced patient and graft survival. Better understanding of different phenotypes and subgroups of Black kidney transplant recipients may help the transplant community to identify individualized strategies to improve outcomes among these vulnerable groups. Objective: To cluster Black kidney transplant recipients in the US using an unsupervised machine learning approach. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study performed consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in Black kidney transplant recipients in the US from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019, in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database. Each cluster's key characteristics were identified using the standardized mean difference, and subsequently the posttransplant outcomes were compared among the clusters. Data were analyzed from June 9 to July 17, 2021. Exposure: Machine learning consensus clustering approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: Death-censored graft failure, patient death within 3 years after kidney transplant, and allograft rejection within 1 year after kidney transplant. Results: Consensus cluster analysis was performed for 22 687 Black kidney transplant recipients (mean [SD] age, 51.4 [12.6] years; 13 635 men [60%]), and 4 distinct clusters that best represented their clinical characteristics were identified. Cluster 1 was characterized by highly sensitized recipients of deceased donor kidney retransplants; cluster 2, by recipients of living donor kidney transplants with no or short prior dialysis; cluster 3, by young recipients with hypertension and without diabetes who received young deceased donor transplants with low kidney donor profile index scores; and cluster 4, by older recipients with diabetes who received kidneys from older donors with high kidney donor profile index scores and extended criteria donors. Cluster 2 had the most favorable outcomes in terms of death-censored graft failure, patient death, and allograft rejection. Compared with cluster 2, all other clusters had a higher risk of death-censored graft failure and death. Higher risk for rejection was found in clusters 1 and 3, but not cluster 4. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study using an unsupervised machine learning approach, the identification of clinically distinct clusters among Black kidney transplant recipients underscores the need for individualized care strategies to improve outcomes among vulnerable patient groups.

Kidney donor profile index and post-transplant health care utilization: Implications for value of transplant care delivery.

BACKGROUND: Centers discard high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) allografts, potentially related to delayed graft function and prolonged hospital use by kidney transplant recipients (KTR). We sought to determine whether high KDPI KTRs have excess health care utilization. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study from a high-volume center analyzing KTRs from January 3, 2011 to April 12, 2015 (n = 652). We measured differences in hospital use, emergency visits, and outpatient visits within the first 90 days between low (≤85%) versus high KDPI (>85%) KTRs, as well as long-term graft function and patient survival. RESULTS: High (n = 107) and low KDPI (n = 545) KTRs had similar length of stay (median = 3 days, P = .66), and readmission rates at 7, 30, and 90 days after surgery (all, P > .05). High KDPI kidneys were not associated with excess utilization of the hospital, emergency services, outpatient transplant clinics, or ambulatory infusion visits on univariate or multivariate analysis (all, P > .05). Low KDPI KTRs had significantly better eGFR at 2 years (Low vs. High KDPI: 60.35 vs. 41.54 ml/min, P < .001), but similar 3-year patient and graft survival (both, P > .09). CONCLUSIONS: High and low KDPI KTRs demonstrated similar 90-day risk-adjusted health care utilization, which should encourage use of high KDPI kidneys.

Correlation of Chronic Histologic Changes on Preimplantation Frozen Section Biopsy With Transplant Outcomes After Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation.

CONTEXT.­: It is unclear if preimplantation frozen section biopsy correlates with outcomes after deceased donor kidney transplantation. OBJECTIVE.­: To assess if chronic histologic changes on the preimplant frozen section correlates with graft loss and estimated glomerular filtration rate independently of kidney donor profile index (KDPI). DESIGN.­: Seven hundred three preimplantation biopsies were reviewed and a Banff sum score was calculated using glomerular sclerosis, interstitial fibrosis, vascular intimal thickening, and arteriolar hyalinosis. The posttransplant outcomes were compared for preimplantation biopsy Banff sum 0-1, 2-3, and 4-9. The cohort was also stratified by KDPI 85 or less versus more than 85. RESULTS.­: For the entire biopsy cohort, graft survival, estimated glomerular filtration rate at 1 year, and chronic changes on a 1-year posttransplant biopsy were superior in the group with preimplantation Banff sum 0-1. After stratifying by KDPI, the Banff sum no longer correlated with graft survival. In a univariate mode, using the Banff sum score as a continuous variable, a higher Banff sum score was significantly associated with graft failure (P = .03); however, after adjusting the KDPI, the Banff sum score no longer correlated with graft failure (P = .45). The 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate and 1-year biopsy changes were superior in the group with Banff sum 0-1 only in the cohort with KDPI 85 or less. CONCLUSIONS.­: In donor kidneys used for transplant, preimplantation biopsy chronic changes correlate with estimated glomerular filtration rate and biopsy findings at 1 year, but biopsies with mostly mild chronicity and Banff sum scores less than or equal to 5 did not impact graft survival beyond KDPI.

North American Practice-Based Recommendations for Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts in Portal Hypertension.

Complications of portal hypertension, including ascites, gastrointestinal bleeding, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatic encephalopathy, are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite few high-quality randomized controlled trials to guide therapeutic decisions, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation has emerged as a crucial therapeutic option to treat complications of portal hypertension. In North America, the decision to perform TIPS involves gastroenterologists, hepatologists, and interventional radiologists, but TIPS creation is performed by interventional radiologists. This is in contrast to other parts of the world where TIPS creation is performed primarily by hepatologists. Thus, the successful use of TIPS in North America is dependent on a multidisciplinary approach and technical expertise, so as to optimize outcomes. Recently, new procedural techniques, TIPS stent technology, and indications for TIPS have emerged. As a result, practices and outcomes vary greatly across institutions and significant knowledge gaps exist. In this consensus statement, the Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches group critically reviews the application of TIPS in the management of portal hypertension. Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches convened a multidisciplinary group of North American experts from hepatology, interventional radiology, transplant surgery, nephrology, cardiology, pulmonology, and hematology to critically review existing literature and develop practice-based recommendations for the use of TIPS in patients with any cause of portal hypertension in terms of candidate selection, procedural best practices and, post-TIPS management; and to develop areas of consensus for TIPS indications and the prevention of complications. Finally, future research directions are identified related to TIPS for the management of portal hypertension.

Alloantibodies after simultaneous liver-kidney transplant: A story of primary nonfunction, retransplantation, and antibody-mediated rejection.

Simultaneous liver-kidney transplant (SLKT) in the presence of antihuman leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor-specific antibodies (DSA) is a well-accepted practice. Herein, we describe the evolution of alloantibodies in a patient who received an SLKT. The pre-SLKT serum sample showed multiple strong DSA. As expected, all DSA cleared in a sample collected 4 days after the SLKT. Because of the primary nonfunction of the liver in the SLKT, the patient had a second liver transplant 4 days later. An abrupt increase in DSA levels against the kidney was detected 10 days after the second liver transplant. These DSA were refractory to treatment, and the transplanted kidney was lost due to antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). A detailed study of the HLA epitopes recognized by DSA and, after normalization with third-party alloantibodies to address the effect of multiple transfusions and liver allograft neutralization, showed that the elimination of these antibodies depended on the HLA antigens expressed by the transplanted liver cells. The return of DSA after removal of the first transplanted liver was associated with AMR in the transplanted kidney.

Successful outcomes with transplanting kidneys from deceased donors with acute kidney injuryon temporary renal replacement therapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine outcomes with transplanting kidneys from deceased donors with severe acute kidney injury requiring acute renal replacement therapy (RRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 172 recipients received a kidney from donors with acute kidney injury stage 3 (AKIN3) requiring RRT. We compared the study group to 528 recipients who received a kidney from donors with AKIN stage 3 not on RRT and 463 recipients who received < 85% Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) AKIN stage 0 kidney. RESULTS: The study group donors were younger compared to the 2 control groups. Despite higher DGF in the study group, the length of hospital stay and acute rejection were similar. Death censored graft survival (96% AKIN3-RRT vs. 97%AKIN3 no RRT vs. 96% KDPI < 85% AKIN0, P = 0.26) and patient survival with functioning graft at 1 year (95% across all groups, P = 0.402) were similar. The estimated glomerular filtration rate were similar across the 3 groups after first month. Interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy score ≥ 2 on protocol biopsy at time 0, 4 and 12 months were similar. Primary nonfunction was rare and associated with high KDPI. CONCLUSIONS: Transplanting selected kidneys from deceased donors with AKIN3 requiring RRT is safe and has good outcomes.

Endarterectomy for Iliac Occlusive Disease during Kidney Transplantation: A Multicenter Experience.

Little is known about the surgical challenges and outcomes of kidney transplantation (KT) in the face of severe iliac occlusive disease (IOD). We aim to examine our institution's experience and outcomes compared with all KT patients. Retrospective review of our multi-institutional transplant database identified patients with IOD requiring vascular surgery involvement for iliac artery endarterectomy at time of KT from 2000 to 2018. Clinical data, imaging studies, and surgical outcomes of 22 consecutive patients were reviewed. Our primary end-point was allograft survival. Secondary end-points included mortality and perioperative complications. A total of 6,757 KT were performed at our three sites (Florida, Arizona, and Minnesota); there were 22 (0.32%) patients receiving a KT with concomitant IOD requiring iliac artery endarterectomy. Mean patient age was 61.45 ± 7 years. There were 13 (59.1%) male patients. The most common etiology of renal failure was diabetic nephropathy in 10 patients (45.5%) followed by a combination of hypertensive/diabetic nephropathy in five patients (22.7%), and hypertensive nephrosclerosis in three patients (13.6%). The majority ( n = 16, 72.7%) of patients received renal allografts from deceased donors and six (27.3%) were recipients from living donors. Mean time from dialysis to transplantation was 2.9 ± 2.9 years. Mean follow-up was 3.5 ± 2.5 years. Mean length of hospital stay was 6.3 ± 4.3 days (range: 3-18 days). Graft loss within 90 days occurred in two (9.1%) patients, one due to renal vein thrombosis and another due to acute tubular necrosis. Overall allograft survival was 90.1% at 1-year and 86.4% at 3-year follow-up. Overall mortality occurred in 6 (27.3%) patients. Perioperative complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade 2-4) occurred in 13 (59.1%) patients, including 10 (45.5%) with acute blood loss anemia requiring transfusion, 2 (9.1%) reoperations for hematoma evacuation, 1 (4.5%) ischemic colitis requiring total abdominal colectomy, and 1 (4.5%) renal vein thrombosis requiring nephrectomy. IOD patients selected for KT are not common and although challenging, they have similar outcomes to our standard KT patients. The 1- and 3-year allograft survivals were 90.1 and 86.4% versus 96.0 and 90.3% in the general KT patient population. With these excellent outcomes, we recommend expanding the criteria for KT to include patients with IOD with prior vascular surgery consultation to prevent progression of IOD or prevention of wait list removal in select patients who are otherwise good candidates for KT.

Transplant outcomes using kidneys from high KDPI acute kidney injury donors.

Kidney transplant (KT) outcomes from high kidney donor profile index (KDPI ≥85%) donors with acute kidney injury (AKI) remain underreported. KT from 172 high KDPI Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) stage 0-1 donors and 76 high KDPI AKIN stage 2-3 donors from a single center were retrospectively assessed. The AKIN 2-3 cohort had more delayed graft function (71% vs. 37%, p < .001). At one year, there were no differences in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (44 ± 17 vs. 46 ± 18, p = .42) or fibrosis on protocol biopsy (ci, p = .85). Donor terminal creatinine (p = .59) and length of delayed graft function (p = .39) did not impact one-year eGFR. There were more primary nonfunction (PNF) events in the high KDPI AKIN 2-3 group (5.3% vs. 0.6%, p = .02). With a median follow-up of 3.8 years, one-year death-censored graft failure was 3.5% for AKIN 0-1 and 14.5% for AKIN 2-3 (HR 2.40, 95% CI 1.24-4.63, p = .01). Although AKIN stage 2-3 high KDPI kidneys had comparable one-year eGFR to AKIN stage 0-1 high KDPI kidneys, there were more PNF occurrences and one-year death-censored graft survival was reduced. Given these findings, additional precautions should be undertaken when assessing and utilizing kidneys from severe AKI high KDPI donors.

Outcomes of kidney retransplantation in recipients with prior posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders: An analysis of the 2000-2019 UNOS/OPTN database.

This study utilized the UNOS database to assess clinical outcomes after kidney retransplantation in patients with a history of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD). Among second kidney transplant patients from 2000 to 2019, 254 had history of PTLD in their first kidney transplant, whereas 28,113 did not. After a second kidney transplant, PTLD occurred in 2.8% and 0.8% of patients with and without history of PTLD, respectively (p = .001). Over a median follow-up time of 4.5 years after a second kidney transplant, 5-year death-censored graft failure was 9.5% vs. 12.6% (p = .21), all-cause mortality was 8.3% vs. 11.8% (p = .51), and 1-year acute rejection was 11.0% vs. 9.3% (p = .36) in the PTLD vs. non-PTLD groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in death-censored graft failure, mortality, and acute rejection between PTLD and non-PTLD groups in adjusted analysis and after propensity score matching. We conclude that graft survival, patient survival, and acute rejection after kidney retransplantation are comparable between patients with and without history of PTLD, but PTLD occurrence after kidney retransplantation remains higher in patients with history of PTLD.

Robot Assisted Renal Allograft Nephrectomy: Initial Case Series and Description of Technique.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes and perioperative complication rates following robot- assisted transplant nephrectomy ((RATN). METHODS: All patients who underwent RATN at our institution were included. No exclusion criteria were applied. Clinical records were retrospectively reviewed and reported. This included preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes. Complications were reported utilizing the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Descriptive statistics were reported using frequencies and percentages for categorical variables, means and standard deviation for continuous variables. RESULTS: Between July 2014 and April 2018, 15 patients underwent RATN. Most patients had the transplant in the right iliac fossa (13/15). Ten patients underwent a concomitant procedure. The total operative time for the entire cohort was 336 (±102) minutes (including cases who had concomitant procedures) and 259 (±46 minutes) when cases with concomitant procedures were excluded. Mean estimated blood loss was 383 (±444) mL. Postoperatively, 3 patients required blood transfusion. Average hospital stay was 4 (±2.7) days. Most patients had finding consistent with graft rejection on final pathology. There were 5 complications; 3 of which were minor (grade 2 = 2 and grade 3 = 1); one patient had a wound infection requiring dressing (3A) and one patient died due to pulmonary embolism following discharge. Limitations include small series and retrospective nature of the study. CONCLUSION: This case series demonstrate that RATN is technically feasible. With continued experience and larger case series, the robotic approach may provide a minimally invasive alternative to open allograft nephrectomy.

Simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation from donation after cardiac death donors: an updated perspective.

Outcomes of both donation after cardiac death (DCD) liver and kidney transplants are improving. Experience in simultaneous liver-kidney transplant (SLK) using DCD donors, however, remains limited. In an updated cohort (2010-2018), outcomes of 30 DCD SLK and 131 donation after brain death (DBD) SLK from Mayo Clinic Arizona and Mayo Clinic Minnesota were reviewed. The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was lower in the DCD SLK group (23 vs 29, P = .01). Kidney delayed graft function (DGF) rates were similar between the 2 groups (P = .11), although the duration of DGF was longer for DCD SLK recipients (20 vs 4 days, P = .01). Liver allograft (93.3% vs 93.1%, P = .29), kidney allograft (93.3% vs 93.1%, P = .91), and patient (96.7% vs 95.4%, P = .70) 1-year survival rates were similar. At 1 year, there were no differences in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (57.7 ± 18.2 vs 56.3 ± 17.7, P = .75) or progression of fibrosis (ci) on protocol kidney biopsy (P = .67). A higher incidence of biliary complications was observed in the DCD SLK group, with ischemic cholangiopathy being the most common (10.0% vs 0.0%, P = .03). The majority of biliary complications resolved with endoscopic management. With appropriate selection, DCD SLK recipients can have results equivalent to those of DBD SLK recipients.

Acute Kidney Injury Patterns Following Transplantation of Steatotic Liver Allografts.

BACKGROUND: Steatotic grafts are increasingly being used for liver transplant (LT); however, the impact of graft steatosis on renal function has not been well described. METHODS: A total of 511 allografts from Mayo Clinic Arizona and Minnesota were assessed. We evaluated post-LT acute kidney injury (AKI) patterns, perioperative variables and one-year outcomes for patients receiving moderately steatotic allografts (>30% macrovesicular steatosis, n = 40) and compared them to non-steatotic graft recipients. RESULTS: Post-LT AKI occurred in 52.5% of steatotic graft recipients versus 16.7% in non-steatotic recipients (p < 0.001). Ten percent of steatotic graft recipients required new dialysis post-LT (p = 0.003). At five years, there were no differences for AKI vs. no AKI patient survival (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.08-10.6, p = 0.95) or allograft survival (HR 1.73, 95% CI 0.23-13.23, p = 0.59) for those using steatotic grafts. Lipopeliosis on biopsy was common in those who developed AKI (61.0% vs. 31.6%, p = 0.04), particularly when the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) was ≥20 (88.9%; p = 0.04). Lipopeliosis was a predictor of post-LT AKI (OR 6.0, 95% CI 1.1-34.6, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: One-year outcomes for moderately steatotic grafts are satisfactory; however, a higher percentage of post-LT AKI and initiation of dialysis can be expected. Presence of lipopeliosis on biopsy appears to be predictive of post-LT AKI.

Transplanting kidneys from donation after cardiac death donors with acute kidney injury.

Donation after cardiac death (DCD) and acute kidney injury (AKI) donors have historically been considered independent risk factors for delayed graft function (DGF), allograft failure, and inferior outcomes. With growing experience, updated analyses have shown good outcomes. There continues to be limited data, however, on outcomes specific to DCD donors who have AKI. Primary outcomes for this study were post-kidney transplant patient and allograft survival comparing two donor groups: DCD AKIN stage 2-3 and DBD AKIN stage 2-3. In comparing these groups, there were no short- or long-term differences in patient (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-1.93, P = .83) or allograft survival (HR 1.47, 95% CI 0.64-2.97, P = .32). In multivariate models, the DCD/DBD status had no significant impact on the estimated GFR (eGFR) at 1 (P = .38), 2 (P = .60), and 3 years (P = .52). DGF (57.9% vs 67.9%, P = .09), rejection (12.1% vs 13.9%, P = .12), and progression of interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy (IFTA) on protocol biopsy (P = .16) were similar between the two groups. With careful selection, good outcomes can be achieved utilizing severe AKI DCD kidneys. Historic concerns regarding primary nonfunction, DGF resulting in interstitial fibrosis and rejection, and inferior outcomes were not observed. Given the ongoing organ shortage, increased effort should be undertaken to further utilize these donors.