Does Normothermic Machine Perfusion Still Provide an Advantage for Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation? A Systematic Review and Preliminary Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Hunter Kauffman, Sarah Harter, Takayuki Yamamoto
{"title":"Does Normothermic Machine Perfusion Still Provide an Advantage for Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation? A Systematic Review and Preliminary Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Hunter Kauffman, Sarah Harter, Takayuki Yamamoto","doi":"10.1111/aor.14958","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with end-stage renal disease often face prolonged waiting times for kidney transplants. Historically, the use of marginal kidneys was limited due to suboptimal preservation methods. Normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) preserves physiological activity during the preservation process, potentially improving graft function and viability, expanding the use of marginal kidneys. While preliminary results are promising, NMP has not yet undergone sufficient clinical trials to determine whether it offers advantages over more widely used techniques. The aim of this systematic review is to assess several outcomes between kidneys that underwent NMP compared to traditional preservation methods after kidney transplant.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials, case series, and studies comparing NMP with hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) or static cold storage (SCS) were included. The primary outcome assessed was delayed graft function (DGF). Secondary outcomes included primary non-function (PNF), acute rejection, and 1-year graft survival.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight NMP studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed significant differences in DGF between NMP and control (HMP or SCS) groups (OR: 0.47 [0.22, 0.99], p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between NMP and controls for PNF, acute rejection, or 1-year graft survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that NMP yields similar adverse outcome rates compared to traditional methods. Notably, NMP could be associated with reduced rates of DGF. While NMP is a promising technique for renal allograft preservation, further randomized controlled trials are necessary to definitively establish its benefits over conventional preservation methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":8450,"journal":{"name":"Artificial organs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial organs","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.14958","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with end-stage renal disease often face prolonged waiting times for kidney transplants. Historically, the use of marginal kidneys was limited due to suboptimal preservation methods. Normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) preserves physiological activity during the preservation process, potentially improving graft function and viability, expanding the use of marginal kidneys. While preliminary results are promising, NMP has not yet undergone sufficient clinical trials to determine whether it offers advantages over more widely used techniques. The aim of this systematic review is to assess several outcomes between kidneys that underwent NMP compared to traditional preservation methods after kidney transplant.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials, case series, and studies comparing NMP with hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) or static cold storage (SCS) were included. The primary outcome assessed was delayed graft function (DGF). Secondary outcomes included primary non-function (PNF), acute rejection, and 1-year graft survival.

Results: Eight NMP studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed significant differences in DGF between NMP and control (HMP or SCS) groups (OR: 0.47 [0.22, 0.99], p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between NMP and controls for PNF, acute rejection, or 1-year graft survival.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that NMP yields similar adverse outcome rates compared to traditional methods. Notably, NMP could be associated with reduced rates of DGF. While NMP is a promising technique for renal allograft preservation, further randomized controlled trials are necessary to definitively establish its benefits over conventional preservation methods.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Artificial organs
Artificial organs 工程技术-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
303
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Artificial Organs is the official peer reviewed journal of The International Federation for Artificial Organs (Members of the Federation are: The American Society for Artificial Internal Organs, The European Society for Artificial Organs, and The Japanese Society for Artificial Organs), The International Faculty for Artificial Organs, the International Society for Rotary Blood Pumps, The International Society for Pediatric Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Support, and the Vienna International Workshop on Functional Electrical Stimulation. Artificial Organs publishes original research articles dealing with developments in artificial organs applications and treatment modalities and their clinical applications worldwide. Membership in the Societies listed above is not a prerequisite for publication. Articles are published without charge to the author except for color figures and excess page charges as noted.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信