Long-term Kidney Transplant Survival Across the Globe.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes after kidney transplantation (KT), including access, wait time, and other issues around the globe, have been studied. However, issues do vary from one country to another. METHODS: We obtained data from several countries from North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia, including the number of patients awaiting KT from 2015, transplant rate per million population (pmp), proportion of living donor and deceased donor (LD/DD) KT, and posttransplant survival. We also sought opinions on key difficulties faced by each of these countries with respect to KT and long-term survival. RESULTS: Variation in access to KT across the globe was noted. Countries with the highest rates of KT pmp included the United States (79%) and Spain (71%). A higher proportion of LD transplants was noted in Japan (93%), India (85%), Singapore (63%), and South Korea (63%). A higher proportion of DD KTs was noted in Spain (90%), Brazil (90%), France (85%), Italy (85%), Finland (85%), Australia-New Zealand (80%), and the United States (77%). The 5-y graft survival for LD was highest in South Korea (95%), Singapore (94%), Italy (93%), Finland (93%), and Japan (93%), whereas for DD, it was South Korea (93%), Italy (88%), Japan (86%), and Singapore (86%). The common issues surrounding KTs are access and a limited number of LDs and DDs. Key issues identified for long-term survival were increasing age of donors and recipients, higher recipient comorbidity, and posttransplant events, such as alloimmune injury to the kidney, infection, cancer, and suboptimal adherence to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: A unified approach is necessary to improve issues surrounding KT as the demand continues to increase.

Factors influencing kidney transplantation rates: a study from the ERA Registry.

BACKGROUND: Large international differences exist in kidney transplantation (KT) rates. We aimed to investigate which factors may explain the total, deceased donor and living donor KT rates over the last decade. METHODS: KT experts from 39 European countries completed the Kidney Transplantation Rate Survey on measures and barriers and their potential effect on the KT rate in their country. In the analyses, countries were divided into low, middle and high KT rate countries based on the KT rate at the start of study period in 2010. RESULTS: Experts from low KT rate countries reported more frequently that they had taken measures regarding staff, equipment and facilities to increase the total KT rate compared with middle and high KT rate countries. For donor type-specific KT, the largest international differences in measures taken were reported for deceased donor KT, with middle and high KT rate countries taking more measures, such as the use of expanded criteria donor kidneys, the presence of transplantation coordinators and (inter)national exchange of donor kidneys. Once a measure was taken, experts' opinion on its success was similar across the low, middle and high KT rate countries. Experts from low KT rate countries more often reported potential barriers, such as patients' lack of knowledge and distrust in the healthcare system. CONCLUSIONS: Particularly in low KT rate countries, the KT rate might be stimulated by optimizing staff, equipment and facilities. In addition, all countries may benefit from measures specific to deceased and living donors.

Recommendations for living donor kidney transplantation.

This Guide for Living Donor Kidney Transplantation (LDKT) has been prepared with the sponsorship of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SEN), the Spanish Transplant Society (SET), and the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). It updates evidence to offer the best chronic renal failure treatment when a potential living donor is available. The core aim of this Guide is to supply clinicians who evaluate living donors and transplant recipients with the best decision-making tools, to optimise their outcomes. Moreover, the role of living donors in the current KT context should recover the level of importance it had until recently. To this end the new forms of incompatible HLA and/or ABO donation, as well as the paired donation which is possible in several hospitals with experience in LDKT, offer additional ways to treat renal patients with an incompatible donor. Good results in terms of patient and graft survival have expanded the range of circumstances under which living renal donors are accepted. Older donors are now accepted, as are others with factors that affect the decision, such as a borderline clinical history or alterations, which when evaluated may lead to an additional number of transplantations. This Guide does not forget that LDKT may lead to risk for the donor. Pre-donation evaluation has to centre on the problems which may arise over the short or long-term, and these have to be described to the potential donor so that they are able take them into account. Experience over recent years has led to progress in risk analysis, to protect donors' health. This aspect always has to be taken into account by LDKT programmes when evaluating potential donors. Finally, this Guide has been designed to aid decision-making, with recommendations and suggestions when uncertainties arise in pre-donation studies. Its overarching aim is to ensure that informed consent is based on high quality studies and information supplied to donors and recipients, offering the strongest possible guarantees.

Live donor kidney transplantation. Situation analysis and roadmap.

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option for end stage renal disease in terms of both patient and graft survival. However, figures on LDKT in Spain that had been continuously growing from 2005 to 2014, have experienced a continuous decrease in the last five years. One possible explanation for this decrease is that the significant increase in the number of deceased donors in Spain during the last years, both brain death and controlled circulatory death donors, might have generated the false idea that we have coped with the transplant needs. Moreover, a greater number of deceased donor kidney transplants have caused a heavy workload for the transplant teams. Furthermore, the transplant teams could have moved on to a more conservative approach to the information and assessment of patients and families considering the potential long-term risks for donors in recent papers. However, there is a significant variability in the LDKT rate among transplant centers and regions in Spain independent of their deceased donor rates. This fact and the fact that LDKT is usually a preemptive option for patients with advanced chronic renal failure, as time on dialysis is a negative independent factor for transplant outcomes, lead us to conclude that the decrease in LDKT depends on other factors. Thus, in the kidney transplant annual meeting held at ONT site in 2018, a working group was created to identify other causes for the decrease of LDKT in Spain and its relationship with the different steps of the process. The group was formed by transplant teams, a representative of the transplant group of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SENTRA), a representative of the Spanish Society of Transplants (SET) and representatives of the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). A self-evaluation survey that contains requests about the phases of the LDKT processes (information, donor work out, informed consent, surgeries, follow-up and human resources) were developed and sent to 33 LDKT teams. All the centers answered the questionnaire. The analysis of the answers has resulted in the creation of a national analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (SWOT) of the LDKT program in Spain and the development of recommendations targeted to improve every step of the donation process. The work performed, the conclusions and recommendations provided, have been reflected in the following report: Spanish living donor kidney transplant program assessment: recommendations for optimization. This document has also been reviewed by a panel of experts, representatives of the scientific societies (Spanish Society of Urology (AEU), Spanish Society of Nephrology Nursery (SEDEN), Spanish Society of Immunology (SEI/GETH)) and the patient association ALCER. Finally, the report has been submitted to public consultation, reaching ample consensus. In addition, the transplant competent authorities of the different regions in Spainhave adopted the report at institutional level. The work done and the recommendations to optimize LDKT are summarized in the present manuscript, organized by the different phases of the donation process.

An Analysis by the European Committee on Organ Transplantation of the Council of Europe Outlining the International Landscape of Donors and Recipients Sex in Solid Organ Transplantation.

Discrepancies in donation and transplantation by sex and gender have previously been reported. However, whether such differences are invariably the inevitable, unintended outcome of a legitimate process has yet to be determined. The European Committee on Organ Transplantation of the Council of Europe (CD-P-TO) is the committee that actively promotes the development of ethical, quality and safety standards in the field of transplantation in Europe. Whilst the ultimate objective is to shed light on the processes underlying potential gender inequities in transplantation, our initial goal was to represent the distribution by sex among organ donors and recipients in the CD-P-TO Member States and observer countries. Our survey confirms previous evidence that, in most countries, men represent the prevalent source of deceased donors (63.3% in 64 countries: 60.7% and 71.9% for donation after brain and circulatory death, respectively). In contrast, women represent the leading source of organs recovered from living kidney and liver donors (61.1% and 51.2% in 55 and 32 countries, respectively). Across countries, most recovered organs are transplanted into men (65% in 57 countries). These observations may be explained, at least in part, by the higher burden of certain diseases in men, childbearing related immune sensitization in women, and donor-recipient size mismatch. Future research should establish whether gender-related socially-constructed roles and socioeconomic status may play a detrimental role reducing the access of women to transplantation.

Malignancies in Deceased Organ Donors: The Spanish Experience.

BACKGROUND: To better define the risk of malignancy transmission through organ transplantation, we review the Spanish experience on donor malignancies. METHODS: We analyzed the outcomes of recipients of organs obtained from deceased donors diagnosed with a malignancy during 2013-2018. The risk of malignancy transmission was classified as proposed by the Council of Europe. RESULTS: Of 10 076 utilized deceased donors, 349 (3.5%) were diagnosed with a malignancy. Of those, 275 had a past (n = 168) or current (n = 107) history of malignancy known before the transplantation of organs into 651 recipients. Ten malignancies met high-risk criteria. No donor-transmitted cancer (DTC) was reported after a median follow-up of 24 (interquartile range [IQR]: 19-25) mo. The other 74 donors were diagnosed with a malignancy after transplantation. Within this group, 64 donors (22 with malignancies of high or unacceptable risk) whose organs were transplanted into 126 recipients did not result in a DTC after a median follow-up of 26 (IQR: 22-37) mo, though a prophylactic transplantectomy was performed in 5 patients. The remaining 10 donors transmitted an occult malignancy to 16 of 25 recipients, consisting of lung cancer (n = 9), duodenal adenocarcinoma (n = 2), renal cell carcinoma (n = 2), extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 1), prostate cancer (n = 1), and undifferentiated cancer (n = 1). After a median follow-up of 14 (IQR: 11-24) mo following diagnosis, the evolution was fatal in 9 recipients. In total, of 802 recipients at risk, 16 (2%) developed a DTC, which corresponds to 6 cases per 10 000 organ transplants. CONCLUSIONS: Current standards may overestimate the risk of malignancy transmission. DTC is an infrequent but difficult to eliminate complication.

Trasplante renal de donante vivo. Análisis de situación y hoja de ruta / Live donor kidney transplantation. Situation analysis and roadmap

El trasplante renal de donante vivo (TRDV) es la opción terapéutica con las mejores expectativas de supervivencia para el injerto y para el paciente con insuficiencia renal terminal; sin embargo, este tipo de trasplantes ha experimentado un descenso progresivo en los últimos años en España.Entre las posibles explicaciones del descenso de actividad se encuentra la coincidencia en el tiempo con un aumento en el número de donantes renales fallecidos, tanto por muerte encefálica como por asistolia controlada, que podría haber generado una falsa impresión de ausencia de necesidad del TRDV. Además, la disponibilidad de un mayor número de riñones para trasplante habría supuesto un incremento en la carga de trabajo de los profesionales que pudiera enlentecer los procesos de donación en vida. Otro posible argumento radica en un posible cambio de actitud hacia posturas más conservadoras a la hora de informar a pacientes y a familiares acerca de esta opción terapéutica, a raíz de los artículos publicados respecto al riesgo de la donación a largo plazo. Sin embargo, existe una importantísima variabilidad en la actividad entre centros y comunidades autónomas, no explicada por el volumen de trasplante procedente de otros tipos de donante. Este dato, unido a que la indicación de donación renal en vida se realiza de manera mayoritaria en situación de enfermedad renal crónica avanzada (ERCA) y que el tiempo en diálisis es un factor pronóstico negativo respecto a la supervivencia postrasplante, permite concluir que el descenso depende además de otros factores. ... (AU)

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option for end stage renal disease in terms of both patient and graft survival. However, figures on LDKT in Spain that had been continuously growing from 2005 to 2014, have experienced a continuous decrease in the last five years.One possible explanation for this decrease is that the significant increase in the number of deceased donors in Spain during the last years, both brain death and controlled circulatory death donors, might have generated the false idea that we have coped with the transplant needs. Moreover, a greater number of deceased donor kidney transplants have caused a heavy workload for the transplant teams.Furthermore, the transplant teams could have moved on to a more conservative approach to the information and assessment of patients and families considering the potential long-term risks for donors in recent papers. However, there is a significant variability in the LDKT rate among transplant centers and regions in Spain independent of their deceased donor rates. This fact and the fact that LDKT is usually a preemptive option for patients with advanced chronic renal failure, as time on dialysis is a negative independent factor for transplant outcomes, lead us to conclude that the decrease in LDKT depends on other factors.Thus, in the kidney transplant annual meeting held at ONT site in 2018, a working group was created to identify other causes for the decrease of LDKT in Spain and its relationship with the different steps of the process. The group was formed by transplant teams, a representative of the transplant group of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SENTRA), a representative of the Spanish Society of Transplants (SET) and representatives of the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). ... (AU)

Live donor kidney transplantation. Situation analysis and roadmap. / Trasplante renal de donante vivo. Análisis de situación y hoja de ruta.

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option for end stage renal disease in terms of both patient and graft survival. However, figures on LDKT in Spain that had been continuously growing from 2005 to 2014, have experienced a continuous decrease in the last five years. One possible explanation for this decrease is that the significant increase in the number of deceased donors in Spain during the last years, both brain death and controlled circulatory death donors, might have generated the false idea that we have coped with the transplant needs. Moreover, a greater number of deceased donor kidney transplants have caused a heavy workload for the transplant teams. Furthermore, the transplant teams could have moved on to a more conservative approach to the information and assessment of patients and families considering the potential long-term risks for donors in recent papers. However, there is a significant variability in the LDKT rate among transplant centers and regions in Spain independent of their deceased donor rates. This fact and the fact that LDKT is usually a preemptive option for patients with advanced chronic renal failure, as time on dialysis is a negative independent factor for transplant outcomes, lead us to conclude that the decrease in LDKT depends on other factors. Thus, in the kidney transplant annual meeting held at ONT site in 2018, a working group was created to identify other causes for the decrease of LDKT in Spain and its relationship with the different steps of the process. The group was formed by transplant teams, a representative of the transplant group of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SENTRA), a representative of the Spanish Society of Transplants (SET) and representatives of the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). A self-evaluation survey that contains requests about the phases of the LDKT processes (information, donor work out, informed consent, surgeries, follow-up and human resources) were developed and sent to 33 LDKT teams. All the centers answered the questionnaire. The analysis of the answers has resulted in the creation of a national analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (SWOT) of the LDKT program in Spain and the development of recommendations targeted to improve every step of the donation process. The work performed, the conclusions and recommendations provided, have been reflected in the following report: Spanish living donor kidney transplant program assessment: recommendations for optimization. This document has also been reviewed by a panel of experts, representatives of the scientific societies (Spanish Society of Urology (AEU), Spanish Society of Nephrology Nursery (SEDEN), Spanish Society of Immunology (SEI/GETH)) and the patient association ALCER. Finally, the report has been submitted to public consultation, reaching ample consensus. In addition, the transplant competent authorities of the different regions in Spain have adopted the report at institutional level. The work done and the recommendations to optimize LDKT are summarized in the present manuscript, organized by the different phases of the donation process.

Organ donation and transplantation: a multi-stakeholder call to action.

Although overall donation and transplantation activity is higher in Europe than on other continents, differences between European countries in almost every aspect of transplantation activity (for example, in the number of transplantations, the number of people with a functioning graft, in rates of living versus deceased donation, and in the use of expanded criteria donors) suggest that there is ample room for improvement. Herein we review the policy and clinical measures that should be considered to increase access to transplantation and improve post-transplantation outcomes. This Roadmap, generated by a group of major European stakeholders collaborating within a Thematic Network, presents an outline of the challenges to increasing transplantation rates and proposes 12 key areas along with specific measures that should be considered to promote transplantation. This framework can be adopted by countries and institutions that are interested in advancing transplantation, both within and outside the European Union. Within this framework, a priority ranking of initiatives is suggested that could serve as the basis for a new European Union Action Plan on Organ Donation and Transplantation.

Unprecedented increase of West Nile virus neuroinvasive disease, Spain, summer 2020.

Cases of West Nile neuroinvasive disease (WNND) in Spain increased in summer 2020. Here we report on this increase and the local, regional and national public health measures taken in response. We analysed data from regional surveillance networks and the National Epidemiological Surveillance Network, both for human and animal West Nile virus (WNV) infection. During the 2020 season, a total of 77 human cases of WNV infection (median age 65 years; 60% males) were detected in the south-west of Spain; 72 (94%) of these cases developed WNND, presenting as meningoencephalitis, seven of which were fatal. In the previous two decades, only six human cases of WNND were detected in Spain. Reduced activities for vector control this season, together with other factors, might have contributed to the massive increase. Public health measures including vector control, campaigns to raise awareness among physicians and the general population, and interventions to ensure the safety of donations of blood products, organs, cells and tissues were effective to reduce transmission. Going forward, maintenance of vector control activities and an update of the vector-borne diseases response plan in Spain is needed.

Executive summary of the Consensus Statement of the Transplant Infection Study Group (GESITRA) of the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC) and the National Transplant Organization (ONT) on the Selection Criteria of Donors of Solid Organs in relation to Infectious Diseases / Resumen ejecutivo de la Declaración de consenso del Grupo de Estudio de la Infección en el Trasplante (GESITRA) de la Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica (SEIMC) y la Organización Nacional de Trasplantes (ONT) sobre los criterios de selección de donantes de órganos sólidos en relación con las enfermedades infecciosas

The immunosuppressive treatment that recipients receive from a solid organ transplantation hinders the defensive response to infection. Its transmission from the donor can cause dysfunction or loss of the graft and even death of the recipient if proper preventive measures are not established. This potential risk should be thoroughly evaluated to minimise the risk of infection transmission from donor to recipient, especially with organ transplantation from donors with infections, without increasing graft dysfunction and morbidity and mortality in the recipient. This document aims to review current knowledge about infection screening in potential donors and offer clinical and microbiological recommendations about the use of organs from donors with infection based on available scientific evidence

El tratamiento inmunosupresor que recibe el receptor de un trasplante de órgano sólido dificulta la respuesta defensiva frente a la infección. La transmisión de la misma desde un donante puede provocar la disfunción o pérdida del injerto e, incluso, la muerte del receptor si no se establecen las medidas preventivas oportunas. Este riesgo potencial debe ser evaluado minuciosamente para minimizar el riesgo de transmisión de infección del donante al receptor, especialmente con el trasplante de órganos de donantes con infecciones, sin aumentar la disfunción del injerto y la morbimortalidad en el receptor. Este documento pretende revisar los conocimientos actuales sobre la detección sistemática de infecciones en los donantes potenciales y ofrecer recomendaciones clínicas y microbiológicas acerca del uso de órganos procedentes de donantes con infección basadas en la evidencia científica disponible

Selection criteria of solid organ donors in relation to infectious diseases: A Spanish consensus.

The immunosuppressive treatment that recipients receive from a solid organ transplantation hinders the defensive response to infection. Its transmission from the donor can cause dysfunction or loss of the graft and even death of the recipient if proper preventive measures are not established. This potential risk should be thoroughly evaluated to minimise the risk of infection transmission from donor to recipient, especially with organ transplantation from donors with infections, without increasing graft dysfunction and morbidity and mortality in the recipient. This document aims to review current knowledge about infection screening in potential donors and offer clinical and microbiological recommendations about the use of organs from donors with infection based on available scientific evidence.

Executive summary of the Consensus Statement of the Transplant Infection Study Group (GESITRA) of the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC) and the National Transplant Organization (ONT) on the Selection Criteria of Donors of Solid Organs in relation to Infectious Diseases.

The immunosuppressive treatment that recipients receive from a solid organ transplantation hinders the defensive response to infection. Its transmission from the donor can cause dysfunction or loss of the graft and even death of the recipient if proper preventive measures are not established. This potential risk should be thoroughly evaluated to minimise the risk of infection transmission from donor to recipient, especially with organ transplantation from donors with infections, without increasing graft dysfunction and morbidity and mortality in the recipient. This document aims to review current knowledge about infection screening in potential donors and offer clinical and microbiological recommendations about the use of organs from donors with infection based on available scientific evidence.

Vascularized composite allotransplantation - a Council of Europe position paper.

After more than 120 hand-upper extremity and 37 face transplant procedures performed worldwide, vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) now falls under the scope of organ transplant legislation in Europe and the United States. While in the USA, VCA has been considered as standard care since 2014, VCA in Europe is still performed through clinical research trials, except in United Kingdom. However, after two decades of favourable experience with upper extremity transplantation (UET), professionals in Europe are proposing hand allotransplantation as "controlled standard" care, as opposed to face transplantation (FT), which is still a challenging activity. The European Committee on Organ Transplantation (CD-P-TO) has elaborated a position paper to provide recommendations concerning regulatory aspects for UET and FT. It is aimed at Health Authorities in charge of the oversight - and coordination - of organ donation and transplantation, and at professional groups to help them manage such complex and costly programs dedicated to properly selected patients.

Donor-derived multiorgan transmission of mixed P. malariae and P. ovale infection: Impact of globalization on post-transplant infections.

A 57-year-old man was admitted with fever and thrombocytopenia 1 month after renal transplantation. He had never received a blood transfusion or travelled outside Spain. A peripheral blood smear revealed Plasmodium malariae and P. ovale parasites, diagnosis confirmed later by malaria PCR. The donor, from Equatorial Guinea, had negative thick and thin blood smears and rapid malaria antigen test prior to organ donation. Peripheral blood malaria PCR was not performed during donor screening. The second renal recipient and the liver recipient were evaluated and were found to be asymptomatic. Thick and thin films and rapid malaria diagnostic tests were negative for both patients and blood for malaria PCR was sent to the referral laboratory. The index patient was treated with oral chloroquine diphosphate, with a favorable outcome and was considered cured. Malaria PCR was negative for the other renal recipient and positive for P. malariae and P. ovale curtisi for the liver transplant patient. Both were treated with oral chloroquine and the liver recipient also completed treatment with primaquine phosphate. This reported case of multiorgan transmission of mixed malaria infection highlights the importance of PCR-based tests for Plasmodium in the screening of donors from endemic areas.

Evolution of Deceased Organ Donation Activity Versus Efficiency Over a 15-year Period: An International Comparison.

BACKGROUND: The donation rate (DR) per million population is not ideal for an efficiency comparison of national deceased organ donation programs. The DR does not account for variabilities in the potential for deceased donation which mainly depends on fatalities from causes leading to brain death. In this study, the donation activity was put into relation to the mortality from selected causes. Based on that metric, this study assesses the efficiency of different donation programs. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 2001 to 2015 deceased organ donation and mortality registry data. Included are 27 Council of Europe countries, as well as the United States. A donor conversion index (DCI) was calculated for assessing donation program efficiency over time and in international comparisons. RESULTS: According to the DCI and of the countries included in the study, Spain, France, and the United States had the most efficient donation programs in 2015. Even though mortality from the selected causes decreased in most countries during the study period, differences in international comparisons persist. This indicates that the potential for deceased organ donation and its conversion into actual donation is far from being similar internationally. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the DR, the DCI takes into account the potential for deceased organ donation, and therefore is a more accurate metric of performance. National donation programs could optimize performance by identifying the areas where most potential is lost, and by implementing measures to tackle these issues.