Donation after cardiac death: A 29-year experience

Division of Organ Transplantation, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53792-7375, USA.
Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.11). 10/2011; 150(4):692-702. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2011.07.057
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To report the long-term outcomes of 1218 organs transplanted from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors from January 1980 through December 2008.
One-thousand two-hundred-eighteen organs were transplanted into 1137 recipients from 577 DCD donors. This includes 1038 kidneys (RTX), 87 livers (LTX), 72 pancreas (PTX), and 21 DCD lungs. The outcomes were compared with 3470 RTX, 1157 LTX, 903 PTX, and 409 lung transplants from donors after brain death (DBD).
Both patient and graft survival is comparable between DBD and DCD transplant recipients for kidney, pancreas, and lung after 1, 3, and 10 years. Our findings reveal a significant difference for patient and graft survival of DCD livers at each of these time points. In contrast to the overall kidney transplant experience, the most recent 16-year period (n = 396 DCD and 1,937 DBD) revealed no difference in patient and graft survival, rejection rates, or surgical complications but delayed graft function was higher (44.7% vs 22.0%; P < .001). In DCD LTX, biliary complications (51% vs 33.4%; P < .01) and retransplantation for ischemic cholangiopathy (13.9% vs 0.2%; P < .01) were increased. PTX recipients had no difference in surgical complications, rejection, and hemoglobin A1c levels. Surgical complications were equivalent between DCD and DBD lung recipients.
This series represents the largest single center experience with more than 1000 DCD transplants and given the critical demand for organs, demonstrates successful kidney, pancreas, liver, and lung allografts from DCD donors.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) makes a significant contribution to the transplant activity but is associated with significantly lower organ recovery rates and poorer function for the abdominal extra-renal organs compared with donation after brain death. Traditionally, DCD organ recovery involves cold thoracic and abdominal perfusion with a rapid removal of organs in order to minimize the ischemic damage. Novel approaches to organ recovery and preservation include the use of normothermic regional perfusion in the donor and ex vivo organ preservation. We report a new technique for multi-organ recovery from Maastricht category III donors with abdominal normothermic perfusion and concomitant cold lung flushing which allows a rapid removal of the lungs with preservation of the abdominal normothermic circulation throughout the thoracic procurement. This approach could lead to an increased organ recovery and better function for the abdominal organs.
    American Journal of Transplantation 07/2014; 14(9). DOI:10.1111/ajt.12808 · 6.19 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The criteria that define acceptable physiologic and social parameters for lung donation have remained constant since their empiric determination in the 1980s. These criteria include a donor age between 25-40, a arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2)/FiO2 ratio greater than 350, no smoking history, a clear chest X-ray, clean bronchoscopy, and a minimal ischemic time. Due to the paucity of organ donors, and the increasing number of patients requiring lung transplant, finding a donor that meets all of these criteria is quite rare. As such, many transplants have been performed where the donor does not meet these stringent criteria. Over the last decade, numerous reports have been published examining the effects of individual acceptance criteria on lung transplant survival and graft function. These studies suggest that there is little impact of the historical criteria on either short or long term outcomes. For age, donors should be within 18 to 64 years old. Gender may relay benefit to all female recipients especially in male to female transplants, although results are mixed in these studies. Race matched donor/recipients have improved outcomes and African American donors convey worse prognosis. Smoking donors may decrease recipient survival post transplant, but provide a life saving opportunity for recipients that may otherwise remain on the transplant waiting list. No specific gram stain or bronchoscopic findings are reflected in recipient outcomes. Chest radiographs are a poor indicator of lung donor function and should not adversely affect organ usage aside for concerns over malignancy. Ischemic time greater than six hours has no documented adverse effects on recipient mortality and should not limit donor retrieval distances. Brain dead donors and deceased donors have equivalent prognosis. Initial PaO2/FiO2 ratios less than 300 should not dissuade donor organ usage, although recruitment techniques should be implemented with intent to transplant.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. With the relative paucity of acceptable donors for lung transplantation, criteria for extended donor consideration are being explored. We sought to evaluate the suitability of donors whose cause of death was asphyxiation or drowning (A/D) as a potential option to enlarge the donor pool. Methods. We queried the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Standard Transplant Analysis and Research registry for lung transplantation from 1987 to 2010 to assess associations between cause of death and recipient survival using the Kaplan-Meier method. To adjust for potential confounders, we used a Cox proportional hazards model and a logistic regression model to evaluate incidence of rejection within the first year. Results. There were 18,250 adult primary lung transplantations performed, with 309 A/D donors. There was no difference in survival between groups (log-rank, p [ 0.52). There were no differences in demographics, length of stay, airway dehiscence, lung allocation score (LAS), or ischemic time in univariate analysis (all p > 0.05). The A/D lung recipients had fewer deaths from pulmonary causes (5.8% versus 9.5%; p = 0.02). Proportional hazards analysis was significant for double lung transplantation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-0.9), height difference (HR, 1.002; 95% CI, 1.00-1.003), donor age greater than 50 years (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.96), and recipient age greater than 55 years (HR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.76-0.84). A/D cause of death did not impact survival in multivariate analysis. Conclusions. A/D as a donor cause of death was not associated with poor long-term survival or incidence of rejection in the first year after transplantation. Donor cause of death by A/D, when carefully evaluated and selected, should not automatically exclude the organ from transplant consideration. These results provide important justification for potentially broadening the donor pool safely. (C) 2014 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
    The Annals of Thoracic Surgery 08/2014; 98(4). DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.05.065 · 3.63 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 21, 2014