The prognostic utility of deceased donor implantation biopsy in determining function and graft survival after kidney transplantation

Transplantation

Volumn 89, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 559-566

  Cockfield, Sandra M ^a   Moore, Ronald B ^a   Todd, Gerald ^a   Solez, Kim ^a   Gourishankar, Sita ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Deceased donor; Graft survival; Implantation biopsy; Kidney transplant

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTERY INTIMA PROLIFERATION; ARTICLE; CHILD; COLD ISCHEMIA; DELAYED GRAFT FUNCTION; FEMALE; FIBROSING ALVEOLITIS; FOLLOW UP; GLOMERULOSCLEROSIS; GRAFT FAILURE; GRAFT RECIPIENT; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; HYALINE DEGENERATION; INFANT; KIDNEY BIOPSY; KIDNEY DONOR; KIDNEY FUNCTION; KIDNEY GRAFT; KIDNEY GRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION; RISK FACTOR; SEX DIFFERENCE;

AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGE FACTORS; BIOPSY; CADAVER; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GRAFT REJECTION; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HISTOCOMPATIBILITY TESTING; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSION; KIDNEY; KIDNEY DISEASES; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; PATIENT SELECTION; PROGNOSIS; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; TISSUE DONORS;

EID: 77949395190     PISSN: 00411337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181ca7e9b     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ojo AO, Hanson JA, Meier-Kriesche H-U, et al. Survival in recipients of marginal cadaveric donor kidneys compared with other recipients and wait-listed transplant candidates. J Am Soc Nephrol 2001; 12: 589.
2. Merion RM, Ashby VB, Wolfe RA, et al. Deceased-donor characteristics and the survival benefits of kidney transplantation. JAMA 2005; 294: 2726.
3. Savoye E, Tamarelle D, Chalem Y, et al. Survival benefits of kidney transplantation with expanded criteria deceased donors in patients aged 60 years and over. Transplantation 2007; 84: 1618.
4. Port FK, Bragg-Gresham JL, Metzger RA, et al. Donor characteristics associated with reduced graft survival: An approach to expanding the donor pool of kidney donors. Transplantation 2002; 74: 1281.
5. Metzger RA, Delmonico FL, Feng S, et al. Expanded criteria donors for kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 2003; 3(suppl 4): 114.
6. Schold JD, Kaplan B, Baliga RS, et al. The broad spectrum of quality in deceased donor kidneys. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 757.
7. Wolfe RA, McCullough KP, Schaubel DE, et al. Calculating life years from transplant (LYFT): Methods for kidney and kidney-pancreas candidates. Am J Transplant 2008; 8(Pt 2): 997-1011.
8. FreiU,NoeldekeJ,Machold-FabriziiV,etal. Prospective age-matching in elderly kidney transplant recipients\A 5-year analysis of the Euro-transplant Senior Program. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 50.
9. Nyberg SL, Matas AJ, Kremers WK, et al. Improved scoring system to assess adult donors for cadaver renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 715.
10. Irish WD, McCollum DA, Tesi RJ, et al. Normogram for predicting the likelihood of delayed graft function in adult cadaveric renal transplant recipients. J Am Soc Nephrol 2003; 14: 2967.
11. Remuzzi G, Cravedi P, Perna A, et al. Long-term outcome of renal transplantation from older donors. N Eng J Med 2006; 354: 342.
12. Gaber LW, Moore LW, Alloway RR, et al. Glomerulosclerosis as a determinant of posttransplant function of older donor kidneys and allo-grafts. Transplanation 1995; 60: 334.
13. Randhawa PS. Role of donor kidney biopsies in renal transplantation. Transplantation 2001; 71: 1361.
14. Pokorna E, Vitko S, Chadimova M, et al. Proportion of glomeruloscle-rosis in procurement wedge renal biopsy cannot alone discriminate for acceptance of marginal donors. Transplantation 2000; 69: 36.
15. Lu AD, Desai D, Myers B, et al. Severe glomerular sclerosis is not associated with poor outcome after kidney transplantation. AmJ Surg2000; 180: 470.
16. Escofet X, Osman H, Griffiths DFR, et al. The presence of glomerular sclerosis at time zero has a significant impact on function after cadaveric renal transplantation. Transplantation 2003; 75: 344.
17. Munivenkatappa RB, Schweitzer DJ, Papdimitriou JC, et al. The Maryland Aggregate Pathology Index: A deceased donor kidney biopsy scoring system for predicting graft failure. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 2316.
18. Seron D, Carrera M, Grino JM, et al. Relationship between donor interstitial surface and post-transplant function. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1993; 8: 539.
19. Randhawa PS, Minervini MI, Lombardero M, et al. Biopsy of marginal donor kidneys: Correlation of histologic features with graft dysfunction. Transplantation 2000; 69: 1352.
20. Lopes JA, Moreso F, Riera L, et al. Evaluation of pre-implantation kidney biopsies: Comparison of Banff criteria to a morphometric technique.
21. Wang H, Kjellstrand C, Cockfield SM, et al. On the influence of sample size on the prognostic accuracy and reproducibility of renal transplant biopsy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1998; 13: 165.
22. Pokorna E, Vitko S, Chadimova M, et al. Adverse effect of donor arte-riolosclerosis on graft outcome after renal transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2000; 15: 705.
23. Bosmans J-L, Woestenburg A, Ysebaert DK, et al. Fibrous intimal thickening at implantation as a risk factor for the outcome of cadaveric renal allografts. Transplantation 2000; 69: 2388.
24. Minakawa R, Tyden G, Lindholm B, et al. Donor kidney vasculopathy: Impact on outcome in kidney transplantation. Transplant Immunol 1996; 4: 309.
25. Taub HC, Greenstein SM, Lerner SE, et al. Reassessment of the value of post-vascularization biopsy performed at renal transplantation: The effects of arteriosclerosis. J Urol 1994; 151: 575.
26. Karpinski J, Lajoie G, Cattran D, et al. Outcome of kidney transplantation from high-risk donors is determined by both structure and function. Transplantation 1999; 67: 1162.
27. Ugarte R, Kraus E, Montgomery RA, et al. Excellent outcomes after transplantation of deceased donor kidneys with high terminal creati-nine and mild pathologic lesions. Transplantation 2005; 80: 794.
28. Ibernon M, Gonzalez-Segura C, Moreso F, et al. Donor structural and functional parameters are independent predictors ofrenal function at 3 months. Transplant Proc 2007; 39: 2095.
29. Edwards EB, Posner MP, Maluf DG, et al. Reasons for non-use of recovered kidneys: The effect of donor glomerulosclerosis and creatinine clearance on graft survival. Transplanation 2004; 77: 1411.
30. Bajwa M, Cho YW, Pham P-T, et al. Donor biopsy and kidney transplant outcomes: An analysis using the Organ Procurement and Trans-planation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing (OPTN/ UNOS) database. Transplantation 2007; 84: 1399.
31. Sung RS, Christensen LL, Leichtman AB, et al. Determinants of discard of expanded criteria donor kidneys: Impact of biopsy and machine perfusion. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 783.
32. Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin RB, et al. The Banff 1997 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 1997; 55: 713.
33. Martin JE, Sheaff MT. Renal ageing. J Pathol 2007; 211: 198.
34. Sis B, Dadras F, Khoshjou F, et al. Reproducibility studies on arteriolar hyaline thickening scoring in calcineurin inhibitor-treated renal allo-graft recipients. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1444.
35. Sund S, Reisaeter AV, Fauchald P, et al. Living donor kidney transplants: A biopsy study 1 year after transplantation, compared with baseline changes and correlations to kidney function at 1 and 3 years. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1999; 14: 2445.
36. Haas M, Segev D, Racusen LC, et al. Arteriosclerosis in kidneys from healthy live donors: Comparison of wedge and needle core periopera-tive biopsies. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2008; 132: 37.
37. Tracy RE, Veloz-Duran M, Deigle T, et al. Two variants of nephrosclerosis separately related to age and blood pressure. Am J Pathol 1988; 131: 270.
38. Cecka JM, Cohen B, Rosendale J, et al. Could more effective use of kidneys recovered from older deceased donors result in more kidney transplants for older patients? Transplantation 2006; 81: 966.
39. Corwin HL, Schwartz MM, Lewis EJ. The importance of sample size in the interpretation of the renal biopsy. Am J Nephrol 1998; 8: 85.
40. Muruve NA, Steinbecker KM, Luger AM. Are wedge biopsies of cadaveric kidneys obtained at procurement reliable? Transplantation 2000; 69: 2384.
41. Lee CM, Scandling JD, Pavlakis M, et al. A review of the kidneys that nobody wanted: Determinants of optimal outcome. Transplanation 1998; 65: 213.
42. Mueller TF, Reeve J,Jhangri GS,etal. The transcriptome ofthe implant biopsy identifies donor kidneys at increased risk of delayed graft function. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 78.