Preservation Fluid Bacteriology in Kidney Transplantation: Comparing Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death With Donation After Brain Death.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Transplant International Pub Date : 2025-07-25 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/ti.2025.14855
Alberto Costa Silva, Teresa Pina-Vaz, Ana Pinho, Inês Ferreira, Ana Cerqueira, Manuela Bustorff, Susana Sampaio, Roberto Roncon-Albuquerque, Margarida Rios, Manuel Pestana, Carlos Martins-Silva, Tiago Antunes-Lopes, João Alturas Silva
{"title":"Preservation Fluid Bacteriology in Kidney Transplantation: Comparing Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death With Donation After Brain Death.","authors":"Alberto Costa Silva, Teresa Pina-Vaz, Ana Pinho, Inês Ferreira, Ana Cerqueira, Manuela Bustorff, Susana Sampaio, Roberto Roncon-Albuquerque, Margarida Rios, Manuel Pestana, Carlos Martins-Silva, Tiago Antunes-Lopes, João Alturas Silva","doi":"10.3389/ti.2025.14855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Infectious complications remain a significant concern in organ transplantation, and preservation fluid (PF) has been identified as a potential source of microbial contamination. However, the clinical relevance of positive PF cultures, especially in kidney transplants from uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD), is not clearly established. This study aims to evaluate and compare the incidence and clinical implications of positive PF cultures in kidney transplants from uDCD and donation after brain death (DBD) donors. A prospective, single-center study was conducted, involving 497 kidney transplants-147 from uDCD and 350 from DBD donors. PF samples were systematically collected at the time of transplantation, cultured, and analyzed. The type of bacteria identified guided antibiotic treatment decisions. Recipients were monitored for the development of bacteremia within the first post-transplant week. Positive PF cultures were significantly more frequent in uDCD transplants (32.0%) compared to DBD (13.7%) (p < 0.001). Coagulase-negative staphylococci predominated in both groups. Despite this, bacteremia rates were comparable-8.5% in uDCD and 6.3% in DBD (p = 0.673)-with no culture-concordant cases. Antibiotics were administered to 10.6% of uDCD and 22.9% of DBD recipients (p = 0.110). Although uDCD kidneys had higher PF contamination, the clinical impact was minimal.</p>","PeriodicalId":23343,"journal":{"name":"Transplant International","volume":"38 ","pages":"14855"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12331530/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplant International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/ti.2025.14855","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Infectious complications remain a significant concern in organ transplantation, and preservation fluid (PF) has been identified as a potential source of microbial contamination. However, the clinical relevance of positive PF cultures, especially in kidney transplants from uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD), is not clearly established. This study aims to evaluate and compare the incidence and clinical implications of positive PF cultures in kidney transplants from uDCD and donation after brain death (DBD) donors. A prospective, single-center study was conducted, involving 497 kidney transplants-147 from uDCD and 350 from DBD donors. PF samples were systematically collected at the time of transplantation, cultured, and analyzed. The type of bacteria identified guided antibiotic treatment decisions. Recipients were monitored for the development of bacteremia within the first post-transplant week. Positive PF cultures were significantly more frequent in uDCD transplants (32.0%) compared to DBD (13.7%) (p < 0.001). Coagulase-negative staphylococci predominated in both groups. Despite this, bacteremia rates were comparable-8.5% in uDCD and 6.3% in DBD (p = 0.673)-with no culture-concordant cases. Antibiotics were administered to 10.6% of uDCD and 22.9% of DBD recipients (p = 0.110). Although uDCD kidneys had higher PF contamination, the clinical impact was minimal.

Abstract Image

肾移植中的保存液细菌学:比较循环死亡后无控制捐赠与脑死亡后捐赠。
感染并发症在器官移植中仍然是一个重要的问题,保存液(PF)已被确定为微生物污染的潜在来源。然而,PF阳性培养的临床相关性,特别是在循环死亡(uDCD)后非受控捐赠肾移植中的临床相关性尚未明确确立。本研究旨在评估和比较脑死亡(DBD)供者肾移植和脑死亡(DBD)供者肾移植中PF阳性培养的发生率和临床意义。进行了一项前瞻性单中心研究,涉及497例肾脏移植-147例来自uDCD, 350例来自DBD供者。在移植时系统地收集PF样本,培养和分析。鉴定出的细菌类型指导了抗生素治疗的决定。在移植后第一周内监测受者菌血症的发展情况。与DBD(13.7%)相比,uDCD移植中PF阳性培养的频率(32.0%)显著更高(p < 0.001)。两组均以凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌为主。尽管如此,菌血症率是相当的- uDCD为8.5%,DBD为6.3% (p = 0.673)-没有培养一致的病例。10.6%的uDCD接受者和22.9%的DBD接受者使用抗生素(p = 0.110)。虽然uDCD肾脏有较高的PF污染,但临床影响很小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Transplant International
Transplant International 医学-外科
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
6.50%
发文量
211
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The aim of the journal is to serve as a forum for the exchange of scientific information in the form of original and high quality papers in the field of transplantation. Clinical and experimental studies, as well as editorials, letters to the editors, and, occasionally, reviews on the biology, physiology, and immunology of transplantation of tissues and organs, are published. Publishing time for the latter is approximately six months, provided major revisions are not needed. The journal is published in yearly volumes, each volume containing twelve issues. Papers submitted to the journal are subject to peer review.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信