Balanced crystalloid solution versus saline in deceased donor kidney transplantation (BEST-Fluids): a pragmatic, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Delayed graft function (DGF) is a major adverse complication of deceased donor kidney transplantation. Intravenous fluids are routinely given to patients receiving a transplant to maintain intravascular volume and optimise graft function. Saline (0·9% sodium chloride) is widely used but might increase the risk of DGF due to its high chloride content. We aimed to test our hypothesis that using a balanced low-chloride crystalloid solution (Plasma-Lyte 148) instead of saline would reduce the incidence of DGF. METHODS: BEST-Fluids was a pragmatic, registry-embedded, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial at 16 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Adults and children of any age receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant were eligible; those receiving a multi-organ transplant or weighing less than 20 kg were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using an adaptive minimisation algorithm to intravenous balanced crystalloid solution (Plasma-Lyte 148) or saline during surgery and up until 48 h after transplantation. Trial fluids were supplied in identical bags and clinicians determined the fluid volume, rate, and time of discontinuation. The primary outcome was DGF, defined as receiving dialysis within 7 days after transplantation. All participants who consented and received a transplant were included in the intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned eligible participants who commenced surgery and received trial fluids, whether or not they received a transplant. This study is registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, (ACTRN12617000358347), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03829488). FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2018, and Aug 10, 2020, 808 participants were randomly assigned to balanced crystalloid (n=404) or saline (n=404) and received a transplant (512 [63%] were male and 296 [37%] were female). One participant in the saline group withdrew before 7 days and was excluded, leaving 404 participants in the balanced crystalloid group and 403 in the saline group that were included in the primary analysis. DGF occurred in 121 (30%) of 404 participants in the balanced crystalloid group versus 160 (40%) of 403 in the saline group (adjusted relative risk 0·74 [95% CI 0·66 to 0·84; p<0·0001]; adjusted risk difference 10·1% [95% CI 3·5 to 16·6]). In the safety analysis, numbers of investigator-reported serious adverse events were similar in both groups, being reported in three (<1%) of 406 participants in the balanced crystalloid group versus five (1%) of 409 participants in the saline group (adjusted risk difference -0·5%, 95% CI -1·8 to 0·9; p=0·48). INTERPRETATION: Among patients receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant, intravenous fluid therapy with balanced crystalloid solution reduced the incidence of DGF compared with saline. Balanced crystalloid solution should be the standard-of-care intravenous fluid used in deceased donor kidney transplantation. FUNDING: Medical Research Future Fund and National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), Health Research Council (New Zealand), Royal Australasian College of Physicians, and Baxter.

The survival benefit of deceased donor kidney transplantation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, 2006-20: a retrospective national cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the survival benefit of kidney transplantation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people waitlisted for deceased donor kidney transplantation in Australia. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study; analysis of linked data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) registry, the Australia and New Zealand Organ Donation (ANZOD) registry, and OrganMatch (Australian Red Cross). SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: All adult Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (18 years or older) who commenced dialysis in Australia during 1 July 2006 - 31 December 2020 and were included in the kidney-only deceased donor transplant waiting list. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Survival benefit of deceased donor kidney transplantation relative to remaining on dialysis. RESULTS: Of the 4082 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who commenced dialysis, 450 were waitlisted for kidney transplants (11%), of whom 323 received deceased donor transplants. Transplantation was associated with a significant survival benefit compared with remaining on dialysis after the first 12 months (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.73). This benefit was similar to that for waitlisted non-Indigenous people who received deceased donor kidney transplants (adjusted HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57; Indigenous status interaction: P = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: From twelve months post-transplantation, deceased donor transplantation provides a survival benefit for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Our findings provide evidence that supports efforts to promote the waitlisting of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who are otherwise eligible for transplantation.

Assessing survival post-kidney transplantation in Australia: A multivariable prediction model.

AIM: Kidney transplantation remains the preferred standard of care for patients with kidney failure. Most patients do not access this treatment and wide variations exist in which patients access transplantation. We sought to develop a model to estimate post-kidney transplant survival to inform more accurate comparisons of access to kidney transplantation. METHODS: Development and validation of prediction models using demographic and clinical data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. Adult deceased donor kidney only transplant recipients between 2000 and 2020 were included. Cox proportional hazards regression methods were used with a primary outcome of patient survival. Models were evaluated using Harrell's C-statistic for discrimination, and calibration plots, predicted survival probabilities and Akaike Information Criterion for goodness-of-fit. RESULTS: The model development and validation cohorts included 11 302 participants. Most participants were male (62.8%) and Caucasian (79.2%). Glomerulonephritis was the most common cause of kidney disease (45.6%). The final model included recipient, donor, and transplant related variables. The model had good discrimination (C-statistic, 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.74 in the development cohort, 0.70; 95% CI 0.67-0.73 in the validation cohort and 0.72; 95% CI 0.69-0.75 in the temporal cohort) and was well calibrated. CONCLUSION: We developed a statistical model that predicts post-kidney transplant survival in Australian kidney failure patients. This model will aid in assessing the suitability of kidney transplantation for patients with kidney failure. Survival estimates can be used to make more informed comparisons of access to transplantation between units to better measure equity of access to organ transplantation.

The living kidney donor profile index fails to discriminate allograft survival: implications for its use in kidney paired donation programs.

The inclusion of blood group- and human leukocyte antigen-compatible donor and recipient pairs (CPs) in kidney paired donation (KPD) programs is a novel strategy to increase living donor (LD) transplantation. Transplantation from a donor with a better Living Donor Kidney Profile Index (LKDPI) may encourage CP participation in KPD programs. We undertook parallel analyses using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry to determine whether the LKDPI discriminates death-censored graft survival (DCGS) between LDs. Discrimination was assessed by the following: (1) the change in the Harrell C statistic with the sequential addition of variables in the LKDPI equation to reference models that included only recipient factors and (2) whether the LKDPI discriminated DCGS among pairs of prognosis-matched LD recipients. The addition of the LKDPI to reference models based on recipient variables increased the C statistic by only 0.02. Among prognosis-matched pairs, the C statistic in Cox models to determine the association of the LKDPI with DCGS was no better than chance alone (0.51 in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient and 0.54 in the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry cohorts). We conclude that the LKDPI does not discriminate DCGS and should not be used to promote CP participation in KPD programs.

Do patient decision aids help people who are facing decisions about solid organ transplantation? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Decisions about solid organ transplantation are complex. Patient decision aids (PDAs) enhance traditional education, by improving knowledge and supporting patients to align their values with treatments. There are increasing numbers of transplantation PDAs, however, it is unclear whether these are effective. We conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the impact of PDA use in transplantation. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases from database inception to October 26, 2020. We included primary studies of solid organ transplantation PDAs defined by the International Patient Decision Aids Standards. All comparators and reported outcomes were included. Mean difference in knowledge (before vs. after) was standardized on a 100-point scale. Pooled-effect for PDAs was calculated and compared to the standard of care for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyzed using random effects. Analysis of all other outcomes was limited due to heterogeneity (PROSPERO registration, CRD42020215940). RESULTS: Seven thousand four hundred and sixty-three studies were screened, 163 underwent full-text review, and 15 studies with 4278 participants were included. Nine studies were RCTs. Seven RCTs assessed knowledge; all demonstrated increased knowledge with PDA use (mean difference, 8.01;95%CI 4.69-11.34, p < .00001). There were many other outcomes, including behavior and acceptability, but these were too heterogenous and infrequently assessed for meaningful synthesis. CONCLUSIONS: This review found that PDAs increase knowledge compared to standard education, though the effect size is small. PDAs are mostly considered acceptable; however, it is difficult to determine whether they improve other decision-making components due to the limited evidence about non-knowledge-based outcomes.

Temporal validation of the Australian estimated post-transplant survival score.

AIMS: The Australian estimated post-transplant survival (EPTS-AU) prediction score was developed by re-fitting the United States of America EPTS, without diabetes, to the Australian and New Zealand kidney transplant population over 2002-2013. The EPTS-AU score incorporates age, previous transplantation and time on dialysis. Diabetes was excluded from the score, as this was not previously recorded in the Australian allocation system. In May 2021, the EPTS-AU prediction score was incorporated into the Australian kidney allocation algorithm to optimize utility for recipients (maximized benefit). We aimed to temporally validate the EPTS-AU prediction score to ensure it can be used for this purpose. METHODS: Using the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registry, we included adult recipients of deceased donor kidney-only transplants between 2014 and 2021. We constructed Cox models for patient survival. We assessed validation using measures of model fit (Akaike information criterion and misspecification), discrimination (Harrell's C statistic and Kaplan-Meier curves), and calibration (observed vs. predicted survival). RESULTS: Six thousand four hundred and two recipients were included in the analysis. The EPTS-AU had moderate discrimination with a C statistic of 0.69 (95% CI 0.67, 0.71), and clear delineation between Kaplan-Meier's survival curves of EPTS-AU. The EPTS was well calibrated with the predicted survivals equating with the observed survival outcomes for all prognostic groups. CONCLUSIONS: The EPTS-AU performs reasonably well in choosing between recipients (discrimination) and to predict a recipient's survival (calibration). Reassuringly, the score is functioning as intended to predict post-transplant survival for recipients as part of the national allocation algorithm.

The kidney failure risk equation predicts kidney failure: Validation in an Australian cohort.

AIMS: Predicting progression to kidney failure for patients with chronic kidney disease is essential for patient and clinicians' management decisions, patient prognosis, and service planning. The Tangri et al Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) was developed to predict the outcome of kidney failure. The KFRE has not been independently validated in an Australian Cohort. METHODS: Using data linkage of the Tasmanian Chronic Kidney Disease study (CKD.TASlink) and the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA), we externally validated the KFRE. We validated the 4, 6, and 8-variable KFRE at both 2 and 5 years. We assessed model fit (goodness of fit), discrimination (Harell's C statistic), and calibration (observed vs predicted survival). RESULTS: There were 18 170 in the cohort with 12 861 participants with 2 years and 8182 with 5 years outcomes. Of these 2607 people died and 285 progressed to kidney replacement therapy. The KFRE has excellent discrimination with C statistics of 0.96-0.98 at 2 years and 0.95-0.96 at 5 years. The calibration was adequate with well-performing Brier scores (0.004-0.01 at 2 years, 0.01-0.03 at 5 years) however the calibration curves, whilst adequate, indicate that predicted outcomes are systematically worse than observed. CONCLUSION: This external validation study demonstrates the KFRE performs well in an Australian population and can be used by clinicians and service planners for individualised risk prediction.

Factors influencing fertility rates in Australian women receiving kidney replacement therapy: analysis of linked Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry and perinatal data over 22 years.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy in women receiving kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is uncommon, and trends and factors influencing fertility rates remain poorly defined. METHODS: The Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) was linked to mandatory perinatal data sets (all births from 1991 to 2013, ≥20 weeks' gestation) in four Australian jurisdictions. Overall, age- and era-specific fertility rates were calculated based on general and KRT population denominators. RESULTS: From 2 948 084 births, 248 babies were born to 168 mothers receiving KRT (37 babies born to 31 dialysed mothers; 211 babies born to 137 transplanted mothers). Substantial agreement between ANZDATA and perinatal data sets was observed for birth events and outcomes. Transplanted women had higher fertility rates than dialysed women in all analyses, with 21.4 live births/1000 women/year [95% confidence interval (CI) 18.6-24.6] in transplanted women, 5.8 (95% CI 4.1-8.1) in dialysed women and 61.9 (95% CI 61.8-62.0) in the non-KRT cohort. Fertility rates for dialysed women rose in recent years. After adjusting for maternal age and treatment modality, Caucasian women had higher fertility rates, while women with pre-existing diabetes, or transplanted women with exposure to KRT for ≤3.0 years had lower rates. As expected, transplanted women with a pre-conception estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 or transplant-to-pregnancy interval of <1.0 year had lower fertility rates. Geographical location, socioeconomic status and primary disease (glomerulonephritis versus other) did not affect fertility rates. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of births to ANZDATA is sufficiently accurate to justify ongoing data collection. Rising fertility rates in dialysed women may indicate permissive attitudes towards pregnancy. Treatment modality, ethnicity, diabetes, pre-conception eGFR, transplant-to-pregnancy interval and duration of KRT exposure were associated with fertility rates. These factors should be considered when counselling women with kidney disease about parenthood.

Association Between Side of Living Kidney Donation and Post-Transplant Outcomes.

Background: Right-sided living donor kidneys have longer renal arteries and shorter veins that make vascular anastomosis more challenging. We sought to determine whether recipients of right-sided living donor kidneys have worse outcomes than left-sided kidney recipients. Methods: An observational analysis of the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) was undertaken. We used adjusted logistic regression to determine the association between side and delayed graft function (DGF) and time-stratified adjusted cox regression models for graft and patient survivals. Results: Between 2004 and 2018, 4,050 living donor kidney transplants were conducted with 696 (17.2%) using right kidneys. With reference to left kidneys, the adjusted OR (95% CI) for DGF was 2.01 (1.31-3.09) for recipients with right kidneys. Within 30 days, 46 allografts (1.4%) were lost, with major causes of overall graft loss being technical, primary non-function and death. Recipients of right donor kidneys experienced a greater risk of early graft loss (aHR 2.02 [95% CI 1.06-3.86], p = 0.03), but not beyond 30 days (aHR 0.97 [95% CI 0.80-1.19], p = 0.8]). Conclusion: Technical challenge is the most common cause of early graft loss. The risk of early graft loss among recipients who received right kidneys is doubled compared to those who received left living donor kidneys.

Paediatric kidney transplants from donors aged 1 year and under: an analysis of the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry from 1963 to 2018.

Kidneys from very small donors have the potential to significantly expand the donor pool. We describe the collective experience of transplantation using kidneys from donors aged ≤1 year in Australian and New Zealand. The ANZDATA registry was analysed on all deceased donor kidney transplants from donors aged ≤1 year. We compared recipient characteristics and outcomes between 1963-1999 and 2000-2018. From 1963 to 1999, 16 transplants were performed [9 (56%) adults, 7 (44%) children]. Death-censored graft survival was 50% and 43% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Patient survival was 90% and 87% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. From 2000 to 2018, 26 transplants were performed [25 (96%) adults, 1 (4%) children]. Mean creatinine was 73 µmol/l ±49.1 at 5 years. Death-censored graft survival was 85% at 1 and 5 years. Patient survival was 100% at 1 and 5 years. Thrombosis was the cause of graft loss in 12% of recipients in the first era from 1963 to 1999, and 8% of recipients in the second era from 2000 to 2018. We advocate the judicious use of these small paediatric grafts from donors ≤1 year old. Optimal selection of donor and recipients may lead to greater acceptance and success of transplantation from very young donors.

Death after Kidney Transplantation: An Analysis by Era and Time Post-Transplant.

BACKGROUND: Mortality risk after kidney transplantation can vary significantly during the post-transplant course. A contemporary assessment of trends in all-cause and cause-specific mortality at different periods post-transplant is required to better inform patients, clinicians, researchers, and policy makers. METHODS: We included all first kidney-only transplant recipients from 1980 through 2018 from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. We compared adjusted death rates per 5-year intervals, using a piecewise exponential survival model, stratified by time post-transplant or time post-graft failure. RESULTS: Of 23,210 recipients, 4765 died with a functioning graft. Risk of death declined over successive eras, at all periods post-transplant. Reductions in early deaths were most marked; however, recipients ≥10 years post-transplant were 20% less likely to die in the current era compared with preceding eras (2015-2018 versus 2005-2009, adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.90). In 2015-2018, cardiovascular disease was the most common cause of death, particularly in months 0-3 post-transplant (1.18 per 100 patient-years). Cancer deaths were rare early post-transplant, but frequent at later time points (0.93 per 100 patient-years ≥10 years post-transplant). Among 3657 patients with first graft loss, 2472 died and were not retransplanted. Death was common in the first year after graft failure, and the cause was most commonly cardiovascular (50%). CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in death early and late post-transplant over the past 40 years represent a major achievement. Reductions in cause-specific mortality at all time points post-transplant are also apparent. However, relatively greater reductions in cardiovascular death have increased the prominence of late cancer deaths.

Patient and center characteristics associated with kidney transplant outcomes: a binational registry analysis.

This registry-based study evaluated the contribution of center characteristics to kidney transplant outcomes in adult first kidney transplant recipients in Australia and New Zealand between 2004 and 2014. Primary outcomes were mortality and graft failure, and secondary outcomes were transplant complications. Overall, 6970 transplants from 17 centers were included. For deceased donor transplants, 5-year patient and graft survival rates varied considerably (81.0-93.9% and 72.2-88.3%, respectively). Variations in mortality and graft failure were partially reduced after adjustment for patient characteristics (1% and 20% reductions) and more markedly reduced after adjustment for center characteristics (41% and 55% reductions). For living donor transplants, 5-year patient and graft survival rates varied (89.7-100% and 79.2-96.9%, respectively). Centers with high average total ischemic times (>14 h) were associated with higher mortality for both deceased (adjusted hazard ratio [(AHR] 2.24, 95% CI 1.21-4.13) and living donor transplants (AHR 1.76, 95% CI 1.02-3.04). Small center size (<35 new kidney transplants/year) was associated with a lower hazard of mortality for living donor kidney transplants (AHR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28-0.81). No center characteristic was associated with graft failure. The appreciable variations in deceased donor kidney transplant recipient and graft survival outcomes across centers were attributable to center effects.

Long-Term Outcomes after Acute Rejection in Kidney Transplant Recipients: An ANZDATA Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Declining rates of acute rejection (AR) and the high rate of 1-year graft survival among patients with AR have prompted re-examination of AR as an outcome in the clinic and in trials. Yet AR and its treatment may directly or indirectly affect longer-term outcomes for kidney transplant recipients. METHODS: To understand the long-term effect of AR on outcomes, we analyzed data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, including 13,614 recipients of a primary kidney-only transplant between 1997 and 2017 with at least 6 months of graft function. The associations between AR within 6 months post-transplant and subsequent cause-specific graft loss and death were determined using Cox models adjusted for baseline donor, recipient, and transplant characteristics. RESULTS: AR occurred in 2906 recipients (21.4%) and was associated with graft loss attributed to chronic allograft nephropathy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.23 to 1.56) and recurrent AR beyond month 6 (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.39 to 2.46). Early AR was also associated with death with a functioning graft (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.36), and with death due to cardiovascular disease (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.53) and cancer (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.64). Sensitivity analyses restricted to subgroups with either biopsy-proven, antibody-mediated, or vascular rejection, or stratified by treatment response produced similar results. CONCLUSIONS: AR is associated with increased risks of longer-term graft failure and death, particularly death from cardiovascular disease and cancer. The results suggest AR remains an important short-term outcome to monitor in kidney transplantation and clinical trials.

Quantifying lead time bias when estimating patient survival in preemptive living kidney donor transplantation.

Preemptive kidney transplantation is the preferred initial renal replacement therapy, by avoiding dialysis and reportedly maximizing patient survival. Lead time bias may account for some or all of the observed survival advantage, but the impact of this has not been quantified. Using the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registry, we included adult recipients of living donor kidney transplants during 1998-2017. Patients were transplanted preemptively (n = 1435) or after receiving up to 6 months of dialysis (n = 712). We created a matched cohort using propensity scores, and accounted for lead time (dialysis and estimated predialysis) using left-truncated Cox models with the primary outcome of patient survival. The median eGFR at transplantation was 6.9 mL/min per 1.73 m2 in the non-pre-emptive, and 9.6 mL/min per 1.73 m2 in the preemptive group. In the matched cohort (n = 1398), preemptive transplantation was not associated with a survival advantage hazard ratio (HR) for preemptive vs non-pre-emptive 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-1.61). Accounting for lead time moved the point estimates toward a survival disadvantage for preemptive transplantation (eg, HR assuming 4 mL/min per 1.73 m2 /year eGFR decline, 1.21 [0.85, 1.73]), but in all cases the 95% CIs crossed 1. The optimal timing of preemptive living donor kidney transplantation requires further study.

External validation of the US and UK kidney donor risk indices for deceased donor kidney transplant survival in the Australian and New Zealand population.

BACKGROUND: The US Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) and the UK KDRI were developed to estimate the risk of graft failure following kidney transplantation. Neither score has been validated in the Australian and New Zealand (ANZ) population. METHODS: Using data from the Australia and New Zealand Organ Donor (ANZOD) and Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registries, we included all adult deceased donor kidney-only transplants performed in ANZ from 2005 to 2016 (n = 6405). The KDRI was calculated using both the US donor-only and UK formulae. Three Cox models were constructed (Model 1: KDRI only; Model 2: Model 1 + transplant characteristics; Model 3: Model 2 + recipient characteristics) and compared using Harrell's C-statistics for the outcomes of death-censored graft survival and overall graft survival. RESULTS: Both scores were strongly associated with death-censored and overall graft survival (P < 0.0001 in all models). In the KDRI-only models, discrimination of death-censored graft survival was moderately good with C-statistics of 0.63 and 0.59 for the US and UK scores, respectively. Adjusting for transplant characteristics resulted in marginal improvements of the US KDRI to 0.65 and the UK KDRI to 0.63. The addition of recipient characteristics again resulted in marginal improvements of the US KDRI to 0.70 and the UK KDRI to 0.68. Similar trends were seen for the discrimination of overall graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: The US and UK KDRI scores were moderately good at discriminating death-censored and overall graft survival in the ANZ population, with the US score performing slightly better in all models.

Risk factors for and outcomes of delayed graft function in live donor kidney transplantation - a retrospective study.

Delayed graft function (DGF) in deceased donor kidney transplantation is associated with worse outcomes. DGF has been less well studied in live donor transplantation. We aimed to examine the risk factors for DGF, and associations between DGF and short- and long-term outcomes in live donor kidney transplant recipients. Using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registry, we included live donor kidney transplants performed in Australia and New Zealand over 2004-2015 and excluded pediatric recipients (n = 440), pathological donors (n = 97), grafts that failed in the first week (as a proxy for primary non function; n = 38), and grafts with missing DGF data (n = 46). We used multivariable logistic regression to identify the risk factors for DGF and the association between DGF and rejection at 6 months; Cox proportional hazards models to examine the relationship between DGF and patient and graft survival; and linear regression to examine the association between DGF and eGFR at 1 year. DGF occurred in 77 (2.3%) of 3358 transplants. Risk factors for DGF included right-sided kidney [odds ratio (OR) 2.00 (95% CI 1.18, 3.40)], donor BMI [OR 1.06 per kg/m2 (95% CI 1.01, 1.12)]; increasing time on dialysis and total ischemic time [OR 1.09 per hour (1.00, 1.17)]. DGF was associated with increased risk of rejection at 6 months [OR 2.37 (95% CI 1.41, 3.97)], worse patient survival [HR 2.14 (95% CI 1.21, 3.80)] and graft survival [HR 1.98 (95% CI 1.27, 3.10)], and worse renal function at 1 year [Coefficient -9.57 (95% CI -13.5, -5.64)]. DGF is uncommon after live donor kidney transplantation, but associated with significantly worse outcomes. The only modifiable risk factors identified were kidney side and total ischemic time.

Impending challenges of the burden of end-stage kidney disease in Australia.

Sex and age-specific incidence rates of patients with treated end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in Australia are comparable to those in European countries, but substantially lower compared with those in the United States, Canada and many Asian countries. The incidence rates of treated ESKD in Australia increase with advancing age; however, the incidence of ESKD is likely to be underestimated because a proportion of patients with ESKD (about 50%) remain untreated. Late referral to nephrologists has reduced over the past decade, temporally associated with improved ESKD recognition. However, late referral still occurs in one in five Australians with ESKD. One in two Australians with ESKD has diabetes, with up to 35% of cases directly attributed to diabetes. Mortality rates for patients with ESKD remain substantially higher compared with the age-matched general population, although there has been a significant improvement in survival over time. Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the two most common causes of death in patients with ESKD.

Access to waitlisting for deceased donor kidney transplantation in Australia.

AIM: A detailed analysis of waitlisting for deceased donor kidney transplantation in Australia has not previously been reported. We aimed to determine if patient characteristics associated with waitlisting identify areas of potential inequality in access to transplantation in Australia. METHODS: A competing risk time-to-event model was used to determine predictors of waitlisting for all adult incident renal replacement therapy patients in Australia between 2006 and 2015. Secondary analysis was performed to determine predictors of overall access to transplantation (using a combined outcome of waitlisting and living donor transplantation). RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 21 231 patients with a median age of 63 years. Overall, 4361 (20.5%) were waitlisted and 1239 (5.8%) received a living donor transplant without being previously waitlisted. Primary analysis revealed that medical comorbidities, older age, smoking status and body mass index were all significant predictors of waitlisting and that and there was variation in waitlisting practice across states Despite adjustment for the above factors, demographic characteristics, including Indigenous ethnicity (subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) 0.46 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38-0.55)), female gender (SHR 0.85 (95% CI 0.80, 0.91)) and residence in a regional area (SHR 0.88 (95% CI 0.81-0.95)) were also associated with a lower likelihood of waitlisting. Secondary analysis showed younger age and higher socio-economic advantage were additional predictors of overall access to transplantation, driven by higher rates of living donor transplantation. CONCLUSION: Demographic as well as clinical characteristics are associated with reduced likelihood of waitlisting for kidney transplantation in Australia. Further analysis and auditing should be considered to determine if this reflects other unmeasured factors or highlights a need to address inequality.

Risk Predictors and Causes of Technique Failure Within the First Year of Peritoneal Dialysis: An Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) Study.

BACKGROUND: Concern regarding technique failure is a major barrier to increased uptake of peritoneal dialysis (PD), and the first year of therapy is a particularly vulnerable time. STUDY DESIGN: A cohort study using competing-risk regression analyses to identify the key risk factors and risk periods for early transfer to hemodialysis therapy or death in incident PD patients. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: All adult patients who initiated PD therapy in Australia and New Zealand in 2000 through 2014. PREDICTORS: Patient demographics and comorbid conditions, duration of prior renal replacement therapy, timing of referral, PD modality, dialysis era, and center size. OUTCOMES: Technique failure within the first year, defined as transfer to hemodialysis therapy for more than 30 days or death. RESULTS: Of 16,748 patients included in the study, 4,389 developed early technique failure. Factors associated with increased risk included age older than 70 years, diabetes or vascular disease, prior renal replacement therapy, late referral to a nephrology service, or management in a smaller center. Asian or other race and use of continuous ambulatory PD were associated with reduced risk, as was initiation of PD therapy in 2010 through 2014. Although the risk for technique failure due to death or infection was constant during the first year, mechanical and other causes accounted for a greater number of cases within the initial 9 months of treatment. LIMITATIONS: Potential for residual confounding due to limited data for residual kidney function, dialysis prescription, and socioeconomic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Several modifiable and nonmodifiable factors are associated with early technique failure in PD. Targeted interventions should be considered in high-risk patients to avoid the consequences of an unplanned transfer to hemodialysis therapy or death.

Center Effects and Peritoneal Dialysis Peritonitis Outcomes: Analysis of a National Registry.

BACKGROUND: Peritonitis is a common cause of technique failure in peritoneal dialysis (PD). Dialysis center-level characteristics may influence PD peritonitis outcomes independent of patient-level characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Using Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) data, all incident Australian PD patients who had peritonitis from 2004 through 2014 were included. PREDICTORS: Patient- (including demographic data, causal organisms, and comorbid conditions) and center- (including center size, proportion of patients treated with PD, and summary measures related to type, cause, and outcome of peritonitis episodes) level predictors. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENT: The primary outcome was cure of peritonitis with antibiotics. Secondary outcomes were peritonitis-related catheter removal, hemodialysis therapy transfer, peritonitis relapse/recurrence, hospitalization, and mortality. Outcomes were analyzed using multilevel mixed logistic regression. RESULTS: The study included 9,100 episodes of peritonitis among 4,428 patients across 51 centers. Cure with antibiotics was achieved in 6,285 (69%) peritonitis episodes and varied between 38% and 86% across centers. Centers with higher proportions of dialysis patients treated with PD (>29%) had significantly higher odds of peritonitis cure (adjusted OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.04-1.40) and lower odds of catheter removal (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.97), hemodialysis therapy transfer (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.97), and peritonitis relapse/recurrence (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.98). Centers with higher proportions of peritonitis episodes receiving empirical antibiotics covering both Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms had higher odds of cure with antibiotics (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.06-1.42). Patient-level characteristics associated with higher odds of cure were younger age and less virulent causative organisms (coagulase-negative staphylococci, streptococci, and culture negative). The variation in odds of cure across centers was 9% higher after adjustment for patient-level characteristics, but 66% lower after adjustment for center-level characteristics. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study design using registry data. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that center effects contribute substantially to the appreciable variation in PD peritonitis outcomes that exist across PD centers within Australia.