Evaluations and utilizations of extended criteria donor kidneys

Zhi-gang Wang, Fei Xu, Lei Liu, Jinfeng Li, W. Shang
{"title":"Evaluations and utilizations of extended criteria donor kidneys","authors":"Zhi-gang Wang, Fei Xu, Lei Liu, Jinfeng Li, W. Shang","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0254-1785.2019.10.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo explore the evaluations and recipient selection methods of extended criteria donor (ECD) kidney donation in the death of citizens and analyze the transplantation outcomes. \n \n \nMethods \nFrom January to September 2019, the clinical data of donor-recipients were retrospectively studied. The recipients of ECD donor kidneys not evaluated for kidney zero puncture assessment from January 2014 to July 2016 were group A1 and those receiving standard donor kidney (SCD) belonged to group A2. From August 2016 to March 2019, all DCD donors were routinely evaluated for kidney zero puncture and those receiving ECD recipients fell into Group B1 and those receiving SCD belonged to Group B2. Analysis was performed for ECD/SCD donor renal zero puncture pathological features and lesion degree and utilization of ECD donor kidney; donor-recipient body surface area (BSA) ratio and lesion degree of ECD donor kidney on recipient selecting and matching. Serum creatinine value, perioperative adverse events and 1-year follow-up of human/kidney survival rate in each group were compared at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year. \n \n \nResults \nA total of 108, 264, 306 and 416 recipients were recruited into A1, A2, B1 and B2 groups respectively. The ECD donor renal utilization rate was 88.5% vs 93.3% during two time periods. According to the 2016 Banff standard, glomerular sclerosis (GS), renal interstitial fibrosis (Ci) and intimal fibrosis thickening (Cv), small arterial intimal hyalinization (ah), tubular atrophy (ct) and acute tubular injury (ati) accounted for more than B1 group than B2 group (P<0.05). The severity of ECD donor kidney disease, BSA ratio <1.1 group and ≥1.1 group 1 week, 1 month, 3 months postoperative blood creatinine value was lower than the former while declining amplitude of blood creatinine was higher. A significant difference existed in the degree of moderate lesions in donor kidney (P<0.05). After 1 year, serum creatinine value of B1 group was lower than that of A1 group (P<0.05). \n \n \nConclusions \nThe quality of ECD donor kidney is obviously inferior to that of SCD donor kidney. The Banff donor kidney criterion is an effective mode of evaluating the quality of ECD donor kidney. Based upon the extent of Banff's nephropathy, the ratio of donor/recipient BSA is an important selecting method for ECD donors to receive kidneys and recipients, ultimately improving graft utilization and recipient transplantation. \n \n \nKey words: \nKidney transplantation; Renal needle biopsy; Body surface area","PeriodicalId":9885,"journal":{"name":"Chineae Journal of Organ Transplantation","volume":"29 1","pages":"601-605"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chineae Journal of Organ Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0254-1785.2019.10.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective To explore the evaluations and recipient selection methods of extended criteria donor (ECD) kidney donation in the death of citizens and analyze the transplantation outcomes. Methods From January to September 2019, the clinical data of donor-recipients were retrospectively studied. The recipients of ECD donor kidneys not evaluated for kidney zero puncture assessment from January 2014 to July 2016 were group A1 and those receiving standard donor kidney (SCD) belonged to group A2. From August 2016 to March 2019, all DCD donors were routinely evaluated for kidney zero puncture and those receiving ECD recipients fell into Group B1 and those receiving SCD belonged to Group B2. Analysis was performed for ECD/SCD donor renal zero puncture pathological features and lesion degree and utilization of ECD donor kidney; donor-recipient body surface area (BSA) ratio and lesion degree of ECD donor kidney on recipient selecting and matching. Serum creatinine value, perioperative adverse events and 1-year follow-up of human/kidney survival rate in each group were compared at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year. Results A total of 108, 264, 306 and 416 recipients were recruited into A1, A2, B1 and B2 groups respectively. The ECD donor renal utilization rate was 88.5% vs 93.3% during two time periods. According to the 2016 Banff standard, glomerular sclerosis (GS), renal interstitial fibrosis (Ci) and intimal fibrosis thickening (Cv), small arterial intimal hyalinization (ah), tubular atrophy (ct) and acute tubular injury (ati) accounted for more than B1 group than B2 group (P<0.05). The severity of ECD donor kidney disease, BSA ratio <1.1 group and ≥1.1 group 1 week, 1 month, 3 months postoperative blood creatinine value was lower than the former while declining amplitude of blood creatinine was higher. A significant difference existed in the degree of moderate lesions in donor kidney (P<0.05). After 1 year, serum creatinine value of B1 group was lower than that of A1 group (P<0.05). Conclusions The quality of ECD donor kidney is obviously inferior to that of SCD donor kidney. The Banff donor kidney criterion is an effective mode of evaluating the quality of ECD donor kidney. Based upon the extent of Banff's nephropathy, the ratio of donor/recipient BSA is an important selecting method for ECD donors to receive kidneys and recipients, ultimately improving graft utilization and recipient transplantation. Key words: Kidney transplantation; Renal needle biopsy; Body surface area
扩展标准供肾的评价和利用
目的探讨公民死亡后扩展标准供体(ECD)肾捐赠的评价和受者选择方法,并分析移植结果。方法回顾性分析2019年1 - 9月供受者的临床资料。2014年1月至2016年7月未进行肾零穿刺评估的ECD供肾受者为A1组,接受标准供肾(SCD)者为A2组。2016年8月至2019年3月,所有DCD供者均常规进行肾零穿刺评估,接受ECD供者为B1组,接受SCD供者为B2组。分析ECD/SCD供肾零穿刺病理特征及ECD供肾病变程度及利用情况;供受体体表面积(BSA)比和ECD供肾病变程度对受体选择与匹配的影响。比较各组患者1天、1周、1个月、3个月、6个月、1年的血清肌酐值、围手术期不良事件及1年随访人肾生存率。结果A1组108例,A2组264例,B1组306例,B2组416例。ECD供者肾脏利用率分别为88.5%和93.3%。按照2016年Banff标准,肾小球硬化(GS)、肾间质纤维化(Ci)及内膜纤维化增厚(Cv)、小动脉内膜透明化(ah)、肾小管萎缩(ct)及急性肾小管损伤(ati)的发生率B1组高于B2组(P<0.05)。ECD供肾疾病严重程度、BSA比值<1.1组和≥1.1组术后1周、1个月、3个月血肌酐值低于前者,血肌酐下降幅度高于前者。供肾中度病变程度差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。1年后,B1组血清肌酐值低于A1组(P<0.05)。结论ECD供肾质量明显低于SCD供肾。Banff供肾标准是评价ECD供肾质量的有效模式。根据Banff肾病的严重程度,供体/受体BSA比值是ECD供体接受肾脏和受体的重要选择方法,最终提高移植物利用率和受体移植。关键词:肾移植;肾穿刺活检;体表面积
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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