Double renal transplants from marginal donors: 2-year results

• Published in: The Journal of urology Vol. 163; no. 2; p. 423
• Main Authors: Jerius, J T, Taylor, R J, Murillo, D, Leone, J P
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.02.2000
• Subjects: Female; Follow-Up Studies; Graft Survival; Humans; Kidney Transplantation - methods; Male; Middle Aged; Time Factors; Tissue and Organ Harvesting - methods
• ISSN: 0022-5347; 1527-3792
• DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67891-3

Marginal cadaveric renal transplant donors represent a potential source for expansion of the donor pool but these kidneys have generally demonstrated significantly poorer survival compared to those from conventional donors. A strategy to provide sufficient renal mass for adequate nephron dosing and subsequent improved survival is the use of both kidneys for a single recipient. We present our 2-year experience with double renal transplants from marginal donors. During an 8-year period 28 patients received double renal transplants (group 1) and 31 received a single transplant (group 2) from marginal donors. Donors were older than 55 years, or had diabetes mellitus, hypertension, greater than 15% glomerulosclerosis on biopsy, increasing creatinine or intrinsic renal parenchymal disease. Both groups were of similar age and the number of rejection episodes per year was similar but followup time differed (22.4+/-14.6 months for group 1 versus 43.7+/-20.5 for group 2). Male-to-female ratio, cold ischemia time, terminal creatinine and pre-transplant biopsy rates were similar for donors in both groups. Average donor age was younger in group 1 (48.9+/-15.8 versus 57.5+/-8.2 years, p = 0.01), and incidence of intrinsic renal disease and increasing donor creatinine was greater (12 versus 2, p = 0.002 and 4 versus 0, p = 0.04, respectively). Incidence of primary nonfunction (1 group 1 versus 5 group 2 patients) and delayed graft function (6 versus 7) was similar. The 1 and 2-year graft survival rates of 96% and 96%, respectively, for group 1 were significantly higher than those for group 2 (77% and 73%, p = 0.02). Our experience to date with double kidney transplants from marginal donors demonstrates acceptable 1 and 2-year survival rates significantly superior to the outcome using only 1 marginal kidney. This finding has important implications in the decision to use marginal donors in regard to cost-effectiveness and patient survival compared to the alternative of continued hemodialysis until an ideal donor organ becomes available.