Improving the prediction of donor kidney quality: Decased donor score and resistive indices

Scott Nyberg, Edwina S. Baskin-Bey, Walter K Kremers, Mikel Prieto, Mitchell L. Henry, Mark D Stegall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

75 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. The deceased donor score (DDS), expanded criteria donor (ECD) definition, and resistive index (RI) were developed for pretransplant evaluation of donors. DDS and ECD are determined by a calculation of risk from donor variables, while RI is determined from flow characteristics of kidneys during machine preservation (MP). This study was designed to compare DDS, ECD status, and RI as predictors of outcome after deceased donor transplantation. We were also interested to see if DDS or ECD could identify kidneys most likely to benefit from MP. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 48,952 deceased donor renal transplants reported to UNOS from 1997-2002. DDS (0-39 pts.), ECD status (+ or -), and preservation technique (MP vs. cold storage [CS]) were determined in all cases. RI during MP was studied in a single-center cohort of 425 transplants. Results. DDS was superior to ECD status and RI in its correlation with early and late renal function after transplantation. DDS identified a subgroup of ECD- kidneys, those with DDS ≥20 pts, that functioned significantly below expectation and similar to ECD+ kidneys. Benefits of MP, which include improved early graft function and a trend towards longer graft survival, were greatest in the group of kidneys with DDS ≥20 pts. Conclusions. DDS was the best predictor of outcome after deceased donor renal transplantation and may be useful in identifying kidneys most likely to benefit from MP.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)925-929
Number of pages5
JournalTransplantation
Volume80
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 15 2005

Fingerprint

Kidney
Transplants
Transplantation
Graft Survival
Kidney Transplantation

Keywords

  • Allocation
  • Donation
  • Machine preservation
  • Procurement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Transplantation
  • Immunology

Cite this

Improving the prediction of donor kidney quality : Decased donor score and resistive indices. / Nyberg, Scott; Baskin-Bey, Edwina S.; Kremers, Walter K; Prieto, Mikel; Henry, Mitchell L.; Stegall, Mark D.

In: Transplantation, Vol. 80, No. 7, 15.10.2005, p. 925-929.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nyberg, Scott ; Baskin-Bey, Edwina S. ; Kremers, Walter K ; Prieto, Mikel ; Henry, Mitchell L. ; Stegall, Mark D. / Improving the prediction of donor kidney quality : Decased donor score and resistive indices. In: Transplantation. 2005 ; Vol. 80, No. 7. pp. 925-929.
@article{342c201e612440268c6f6552d1cfcc33,
title = "Improving the prediction of donor kidney quality: Decased donor score and resistive indices",
abstract = "Background. The deceased donor score (DDS), expanded criteria donor (ECD) definition, and resistive index (RI) were developed for pretransplant evaluation of donors. DDS and ECD are determined by a calculation of risk from donor variables, while RI is determined from flow characteristics of kidneys during machine preservation (MP). This study was designed to compare DDS, ECD status, and RI as predictors of outcome after deceased donor transplantation. We were also interested to see if DDS or ECD could identify kidneys most likely to benefit from MP. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 48,952 deceased donor renal transplants reported to UNOS from 1997-2002. DDS (0-39 pts.), ECD status (+ or -), and preservation technique (MP vs. cold storage [CS]) were determined in all cases. RI during MP was studied in a single-center cohort of 425 transplants. Results. DDS was superior to ECD status and RI in its correlation with early and late renal function after transplantation. DDS identified a subgroup of ECD- kidneys, those with DDS ≥20 pts, that functioned significantly below expectation and similar to ECD+ kidneys. Benefits of MP, which include improved early graft function and a trend towards longer graft survival, were greatest in the group of kidneys with DDS ≥20 pts. Conclusions. DDS was the best predictor of outcome after deceased donor renal transplantation and may be useful in identifying kidneys most likely to benefit from MP.",
keywords = "Allocation, Donation, Machine preservation, Procurement",
author = "Scott Nyberg and Baskin-Bey, {Edwina S.} and Kremers, {Walter K} and Mikel Prieto and Henry, {Mitchell L.} and Stegall, {Mark D}",
year = "2005",
month = "10",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1097/01.TP.0000173798.04043.AF",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "80",
pages = "925--929",
journal = "Transplantation",
issn = "0041-1337",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Improving the prediction of donor kidney quality

T2 - Decased donor score and resistive indices

AU - Nyberg, Scott

AU - Baskin-Bey, Edwina S.

AU - Kremers, Walter K

AU - Prieto, Mikel

AU - Henry, Mitchell L.

AU - Stegall, Mark D

PY - 2005/10/15

Y1 - 2005/10/15

N2 - Background. The deceased donor score (DDS), expanded criteria donor (ECD) definition, and resistive index (RI) were developed for pretransplant evaluation of donors. DDS and ECD are determined by a calculation of risk from donor variables, while RI is determined from flow characteristics of kidneys during machine preservation (MP). This study was designed to compare DDS, ECD status, and RI as predictors of outcome after deceased donor transplantation. We were also interested to see if DDS or ECD could identify kidneys most likely to benefit from MP. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 48,952 deceased donor renal transplants reported to UNOS from 1997-2002. DDS (0-39 pts.), ECD status (+ or -), and preservation technique (MP vs. cold storage [CS]) were determined in all cases. RI during MP was studied in a single-center cohort of 425 transplants. Results. DDS was superior to ECD status and RI in its correlation with early and late renal function after transplantation. DDS identified a subgroup of ECD- kidneys, those with DDS ≥20 pts, that functioned significantly below expectation and similar to ECD+ kidneys. Benefits of MP, which include improved early graft function and a trend towards longer graft survival, were greatest in the group of kidneys with DDS ≥20 pts. Conclusions. DDS was the best predictor of outcome after deceased donor renal transplantation and may be useful in identifying kidneys most likely to benefit from MP.

AB - Background. The deceased donor score (DDS), expanded criteria donor (ECD) definition, and resistive index (RI) were developed for pretransplant evaluation of donors. DDS and ECD are determined by a calculation of risk from donor variables, while RI is determined from flow characteristics of kidneys during machine preservation (MP). This study was designed to compare DDS, ECD status, and RI as predictors of outcome after deceased donor transplantation. We were also interested to see if DDS or ECD could identify kidneys most likely to benefit from MP. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 48,952 deceased donor renal transplants reported to UNOS from 1997-2002. DDS (0-39 pts.), ECD status (+ or -), and preservation technique (MP vs. cold storage [CS]) were determined in all cases. RI during MP was studied in a single-center cohort of 425 transplants. Results. DDS was superior to ECD status and RI in its correlation with early and late renal function after transplantation. DDS identified a subgroup of ECD- kidneys, those with DDS ≥20 pts, that functioned significantly below expectation and similar to ECD+ kidneys. Benefits of MP, which include improved early graft function and a trend towards longer graft survival, were greatest in the group of kidneys with DDS ≥20 pts. Conclusions. DDS was the best predictor of outcome after deceased donor renal transplantation and may be useful in identifying kidneys most likely to benefit from MP.

KW - Allocation

KW - Donation

KW - Machine preservation

KW - Procurement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=27644452629&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=27644452629&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.TP.0000173798.04043.AF

DO - 10.1097/01.TP.0000173798.04043.AF

M3 - Article

C2 - 16249740

AN - SCOPUS:27644452629

VL - 80

SP - 925

EP - 929

JO - Transplantation

JF - Transplantation

SN - 0041-1337

IS - 7

ER -