Identification of expanded-criteria donor kidney grafts at lower risk of delayed graft function

Transplantation

Volumn 96, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 633-638

  Balaz, Peter ^a   Rokosny, Slavomir ^a   Wohlfahrtova, Mariana ^a   Wohlfahrt, Peter ^a,b,c   Bartonova, Anastazie ^a   Pokorna, Eva ^a   Honsova, Eva ^a   Viklicky, Ondrej ^a  

^a INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Czech Republic)

^b CHARLES UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^c ST ANNE S UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Czech Republic)

Author keywords

Biopsy; DGF; Donor; ECD; Kidney transplantation

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTERY INTIMA PROLIFERATION; ARTICLE; BANFF SCORE; BRAIN HYPOXIA; CONTROLLED STUDY; DELAYED GRAFT FUNCTION; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; EXPANDED CRITERIA DONOR; FEMALE; GLOMERULOSCLEROSIS; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; KIDNEY BIOPSY; KIDNEY FIBROSIS; KIDNEY GRAFT; KIDNEY TUBULE DISORDER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; ORGAN DONOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK REDUCTION; SCORING SYSTEM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY; DELAYED GRAFT FUNCTION; DONOR SELECTION; FEMALE; FIBROSIS; HUMANS; KIDNEY; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LINEAR MODELS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEPHRECTOMY; ODDS RATIO; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; TISSUE DONORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84885427757     PISSN: 00411337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e31829d9225     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Womer KL, Kaplan B. Recent developments in kidney transplantationV a critical assessment. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 1265.
2. Ojo AO, Wolfe RA, Held PJ, et al. Delayed graft function: risk factors and implications for renal allograft survival. Transplantation 1997; 63: 968.
3. Mannon RB, Kirk AD. Beyond histology: novel tools to diagnose al-lograft dysfunction. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2006; 1: 358.
4. Irish WD, McCollum DA, Tesi RJ, et al. Nomogram for predicting the likelihood of delayed graft function in adult cadaveric renal transplant recipients. J Am Soc Nephrol 2003; 14: 2967.
5. 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.
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. Gaber LW, Moore LW, Alloway RR, et al. Glomerulosclerosis as a determinant of posttransplant function of older donor renal allografts. Transplantation 1995; 60: 334.
8. Randhawa P. Role of donor kidney biopsies in renal transplantation. Transplantation 2001; 71: 1361.
9. Cosio FG, Grande JP, Wadei H, et al. Predicting subsequent decline in kidney allograft function from early surveillance biopsies. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 2464.
10. Metzger RA, Delmonico FL, Feng S, et al. Expanded criteria donors for kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 114.
11. El-Husseini A, Sabry A, Zahran A, et al. Can donor implantation renal biopsy predict long-term renal allograft outcome? Am J Nephrol 2007; 27: 144.
12. Snoeijs MG, Buurman WA, Christiaans MH, et al. Histological assessment of preimplantation biopsies may improve selection of kidneys from old donors after cardiac death. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 1844.
13. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837.
14. Delmonico FL, Burdick JF. Maximizing the success of transplantation with kidneys from older donors. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 411.
15. Yarlagadda SG, Coca SG, Formica RN Jr, et al. Association between delayed graft function and allograft and patient survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009; 24: 1039.
16. Nyberg SL, Matas AJ, Rogers M, et al. Donor scoring system for cadaveric renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2001; 1: 162.
17. Moore J, Tan K, Cockwell P, et al. Predicting early renal allograft function using clinical variables. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007; 22: 2669.
18. Nyberg SL, Baskin-Bey ES, Kremers W, et al. Improving the prediction of donor kidney quality: deceased donor score and resistive indices. Transplantation 2005; 80: 925.
19. Rao PS, Schaubel DE, Guidinger MK, et al. A comprehensive risk quantification score for deceased donor kidneys: the kidney donor risk index. Transplantation 2009; 88: 231.
20. Mengel M, Sis B. An appeal for zero-time biopsies in renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 2181.
21. 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.
22. Randhawa PS, Minervini MI, Lombardero M, et al. Biopsy of marginal donor kidneys: correlation of histologic findings with graft dysfunction. Transplantation 2000; 69: 1352.
23. Lopes JA, Moreso F, Riera L, et al. Evaluation of pre-implantation kidney biopsies: comparison of Banff criteria to a morphometric approach. Kidney Int 2005; 67: 1595.
24. Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin RB, et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 1999; 55: 713.
25. Remuzzi G, Cravedi P, Perna A, et al. Long-term outcome of renal transplantation from older donors. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 343.
26. Anglicheau D, Loupy A, Lefaucheur C, et al. A simple clinico- histopathological composite scoring system is highly predictive of graft outcomes in marginal donors. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 2325.
27. Mueller TF, Solez K, Mas V. Assessment of kidney organ quality and prediction of outcome at time of transplantation. Semin Immunopathol 2011; 33: 185.
28. Bajwa M, Cho YW, Pham PT, et al. Donor biopsy and kidney transplant outcomes: an analysis using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing (OPTN/UNOS) database. Transplantation 2007; 84: 1399.
29. Edwards EB, Posner MP, Maluf DG, et al. Reasons for non-use of recovered kidneys: the effect of donor glomerulosclerosis and creati-nine clearance on graft survival. Transplantation 2004; 77: 1411.
30. Verran D, Sheridan A, Barnwell A, et al. Biopsy of potential cadaveric renal allografts at the time of retrieval. Nephrology 2005; 10: 414.
31. Pokorna E, Vitko S, Chadimova M, et al. Proportion of glomer-ulosclerosis in procurement wedge renal biopsy cannot alone discriminate for acceptance of marginal donors. Transplantation 2000; 69: 36.
32. Yarlagadda SG, Coca SG, Garg AX, et al. Marked variation in the definition and diagnosis of delayed graft function: a systematic review. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008; 23: 2995.