Renal transplantation in the elderly: surgical complications and outcome with special emphasis on the Eurotransplant Senior Programme.

BACKGROUND The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the results of the Eurotransplant Senior Programme (ESP) within our centre compared to elderly recipients >or=60 years from the regular Eurotransplant Kidney Allocation System (ETKAS), specifically focusing on surgical aspects. METHODS Data from 73 ESP patients (average donor/recipient age: 71.1/67.1) were compared with those from 51 patients (49.7/63.6) treated within the framework of the ETKAS program between the years 1999 and 2006. The mean follow-up was 39.5 months. RESULTS Cold ischaemic time (ESP versus ETKAS: 10.3 versus 15.0 h), duration of renal replacement therapy (42.2 versus 76.8 months), donor glomerular filtration rate (81.7 versus 109.9 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) and HLA mismatches (4.1 versus 2.4) were significantly different between the two groups (all P < 0.001). Primary graft function was seen in 74% ESP versus 69% of ETKAS patients (P > 0.05). The rate of surgical complications in the ESP versus ETKAS group was 47% versus 28% (P = 0.031) and the revision rate, 33% versus 24% (P = 0.259). Three-year patient and censored graft survival was 84% versus 92% and 85% versus 88% in the ESP and ETKAS group, respectively (all P > 0.05). Ninety-five percent of all deceased patients died with a functioning graft. CONCLUSIONS The donor and recipient pool has been markedly expanded through ESP with similar patient and graft survival compared to elderly recipients grafted according to ETKAS criteria. However, patients and their physicians should be aware of the high surgical complication rate in elderly recipients, particularly when receiving elderly donor kidneys. This might seriously influence postoperative patient management but ultimately does not compromise the transplant outcome.

[1]  A. Torres,et al.  Retrospective analysis of surgical complications following cadaveric kidney transplantation in the modern transplant era. , 2006, Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association.

[2]  T. Wekerle,et al.  The advantage of allocating kidneys from old cadaveric donors to old recipients: a single‐center experience , 2006, Clinical transplantation.

[3]  W. Braun,et al.  Assessing Glomerular Filtration Rate by Estimation Equations in Kidney Transplant Recipients , 2006, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[4]  W. Winkelmayer,et al.  Long-Term Patient and Graft Survival in the Eurotransplant Senior Program: A Single-Center Experience , 2005, Transplantation.

[5]  G. Oniscu,et al.  Impact of cadaveric renal transplantation on survival in patients listed for transplantation. , 2005, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN.

[6]  S. Flechner,et al.  THE EFFECT OF 2-GRAM VS. 1-GRAM CONCENTRATION CONTROLLED MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL ON TRANSPLANT OUTCOMES USING SIROLIMUS BASED CALCINEURIN INHIBITOR DRUG-FREE IMMUNOSUPPRESSION , 2004, Transplantation.

[7]  Ulrich Frei,et al.  Expanding the donor pool to increase renal transplantation. , 2005, Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association.

[8]  M. Wolfram,et al.  Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) requiring transurethral resection in freshly transplanted renal allograft recipients. , 2004, Clinical nephrology.

[9]  T. Larson,et al.  WOUND-HEALING COMPLICATIONS AFTER KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION: A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED COMPARISON OF SIROLIMUS AND TACROLIMUS1 , 2004, Transplantation.

[10]  I. Derweesh,et al.  The influence of various maintenance immunosuppressive drugs on lymphocele formation and treatment after kidney transplantation. , 2004, The Journal of urology.

[11]  P. Ditonno,et al.  Medical and surgical complications after kidney transplantation from "suboptimal donors": one centre's experience. , 2004, Transplantation Proceedings.

[12]  I. Derweesh,et al.  The impact of sirolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclosporine, azathioprine, and steroids on wound healing in 513 kidney-transplant recipients , 2003, Transplantation.

[13]  S. Loening,et al.  "Old-for-old" cadaveric renal transplantation: surgical findings, perioperative complications and outcome. , 2003, European urology.

[14]  Lutz Fritsche,et al.  Old‐for‐Old Kidney Allocation Allows Successful Expansion of the Donor and Recipient Pool , 2003, American Journal of Transplantation.

[15]  D. Hricik,et al.  Comparison of Sirolimus vs. Mycophenolate Mofetil on Surgical Complications and Wound Healing in Adult Kidney Transplantation , 2003, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[16]  H. Meier‐Kriesche,et al.  Waiting time on dialysis as the strongest modifiable risk factor for renal transplant outcomes: A Paired Donor Kidney Analysis1 , 2002, Transplantation.

[17]  B. Krämer,et al.  Early experience with the ET Senior Program "Old For Old"; better to be number one? , 2002, Transplant International.

[18]  P. Morris,et al.  The urological complications of renal transplantation: a series of 1535 patients , 2002, BJU international.

[19]  R. Langer,et al.  Incidence, therapy, and consequences of lymphocele after sirolimus-cyclosporine-prednisone immunosuppression in renal transplant recipients1. , 2002, Transplantation.

[20]  K. Ivens,et al.  Kidney transplantation in the elderly: age-matching as compared to HLA-matching: a single center experience , 2002, Transplantation.

[21]  R. Willers,et al.  Risk factors for delayed graft function after renal transplantation and their significance for long-term clinical outcome , 2002, Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation.

[22]  K. Ivens,et al.  Eurotransplant Senior Program ‘old for old’: results from 10 patients , 2001, Clinical transplantation.

[23]  R. Wolfe,et al.  Survival in recipients of marginal cadaveric donor kidneys compared with other recipients and wait-listed transplant candidates. , 2001, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN.

[24]  R. Zietse,et al.  The vanishing importance of age in renal transplantation. , 1999, Transplantation.

[25]  R. J. Unwin,et al.  Kidney , 1969, The Journal of physiology.

[26]  H C van Houwelingen,et al.  Analysis of the renal transplant waiting list: application of a parametric competing risk method. , 1998, Transplantation.

[27]  G Opelz,et al.  The new Eurotransplant Kidney Allocation System: report one year after implementation. Eurotransplant International Foundation. , 1998, Transplantation.

[28]  G. Persijn,et al.  ANALYSIS OF THE RENAL TRANSPLANT WAITING LIST , 1998 .

[29]  R. Lindeman,et al.  Overview: renal physiology and pathophysiology of aging. , 1990, American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation.

[30]  G. Tufveson,et al.  Influence of the age of cadaveric kidney donors on transplantation outcome and rate of surgical complications. , 1990, Scandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology, Supplementum.

[31]  C. Cardella,et al.  Ten years of experience with vascular complications in renal transplantation. , 1982, The Journal of urology.