Bernadette J. J. M. Haase-Kromwijk

Current situation of donation after circulatory death in European countries

The aim of the present study was to describe the current situation of donation after circulatory death (DCD) in the Council of Europe, through a dedicated survey. Of 27 participating countries, only 10 confirmed any DCD activity, the highest one being described in Belgium, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (mainly controlled) and France and Spain (mainly uncontrolled). During 2000–2009, as DCD increased, donation after brain death (DBD) decreased about 20% in the three countries with a predominant controlled DCD activity, while DBD had increased in the majority of European countries. The number of organs recovered and transplanted per DCD increased along time, although it remained substantially lower compared with DBD. During 2000–2008, 5004 organs were transplanted from DCD (4261 kidneys, 505 livers, 157 lungs and 81 pancreas). Short‐term outcomes of 2343 kidney recipients from controlled versus 649 from uncontrolled DCD were analyzed: primary non function occurred in 5% vs. 6.4% (P = NS) and delayed graft function in 50.2% vs. 75.7% (P < 0.001). In spite of this, 1 year graft survival was 85.9% vs. 88.9% (P = 0.04), respectively. DCD is increasingly accepted in Europe but still limited to a few countries. Controlled DCD might negatively impact DBD activity. The degree of utilization of DCD is lower compared with DBD. Short‐term results of DCD are promising with differences between kidney recipients transplanted from controlled versus uncontrolled DCD, an observation to be further analyzed.

The Dutch national living donor kidney exchange program

The wait time for deceased‐donor kidney transplantation has increased to 4–5 years in the Netherlands. Strategies to expand the donor pool include a living donor kidney exchange program. This makes it possible that patients who cannot directly receive a kidney from their intended living donor, due to ABO blood type incompatibility or a positive cross match, exchange donors in order to receive a compatible kidney. All Dutch kidney transplantation centers agreed on a common protocol. An independent organization is responsible for the allocation, cross matches are centrally performed and exchange takes place on an anonymous basis. Donors travel to the recipient centers. Surgical procedures are scheduled simultaneously. Sixty pairs participated within 1 year. For 9 of 29 ABO blood type incompatible and 17 of 31 cross match positive combinations, a compatible pair was found. Five times a cross match positive couple was matched to a blood type incompatible one, where the recipients were of blood type O. The living donor kidney exchange program is a successful approach that does not harm any of the candidates on the deceased donor kidney waitlist. For optimal results, both ABO blood type incompatible and cross match positive pairs should participate.

Non-heart-beating donor kidneys in the Netherlands: allocation and outcome of transplantation.

Background. Since February 1, 2001, kidneys from both heart-beating (HB) and non–heart-beating (NHB) donors in The Netherlands have been indiscriminately allocated through the standard renal-allocation system. Methods. Renal function and allograft-survival rate for kidneys from NHB and HB donors were compared at 3 and 12 months. Results. The outcomes of 276 renal transplants, 176 from HB donors and 100 from NHB III donors, allocated through the standard renal allocation system, Eurotransplant Kidney Allocation System, and performed between February 1, 2001 and March 1, 2002 were compared. Three months after transplantation, graft survival was 93.7% for HB kidneys and 85.0% for NHB kidneys (P<0.05). At 12 months, graft survival was 92.0% and 83.0%, respectively (P<0.03). Serum creatinine levels in the two groups were comparable at both 3 and 12 months. Multivariate analysis identified previous kidney transplantation (relative risk [RR] 3.33; P<0.005), donor creatinine (RR 1.01; P<0.005), and NHB (RR 2.38; P<0.05) as independent risk factors for transplant failure within 12 months. In multivariate analysis of NHB data, a warm ischemia time (WIT) of 30 minutes or longer (P<0.005; RR 6.16, 95% confidence interval 2.11–18.00) was associated with early graft failure. No difference in 12-month graft survival was seen between HB and NHB kidneys after excluding the kidneys that failed in the first 3 months. Conclusion. Early graft failure was significantly more likely in recipients of kidneys from NHB donors. A prolonged WIT was strongly associated with this failure. Standard allocation procedures do not have a negative effect on outcome, and there is no reason to allocate NHB kidneys differently from HB kidneys.

Hurdles, barriers, and successes of a national living donor kidney exchange program.

Background. Living donor kidney exchange is now performed in several countries. However, no information is available on the practical problems inherent to these programs. Here, we describe our experiences with 276 couples enrolled in the Dutch program. Methods. Our protocol consists of five steps: registration, computerized matching, crossmatching, donor acceptation, and transplantation. We prospectively collected data of each step of the procedure. Results. Of the 276 registered pairs we created 183 computer-matched combinations. However, 62 of 183 recipients proved to have a positive crossmatch with their new donor, which was not predicted by the screening results of the recipient centers. Alternative solutions were found for 39 couples, resulting in a total of 160 new combinations with negative crossmatches. Thereafter, because of 22 individual clinical problems, the exchange procedure had to be discontinued for 51 couples while only for 19 of them alternative solutions were found. At the end of day, 128 patients had received exchange kidneys, 55 were transplanted outside the program, 59 are still on the crossover waitlist, and 34 had left the program for medical or psychological reasons. Conclusion. A living donor kidney exchange program is a dynamic process. Many clinical hurdles and barriers are encountered that for a large part were not foreseen but should be taken into account when programs are initiated based on computer simulations. Success is dependent on a flexible organization able to create alternative solutions when problems arise. Centralized allocation and crossmatch procedures are instrumental in this respect.

A highly efficient living donor kidney exchange program for both blood type and crossmatch incompatible donor-recipient combinations

Background. Lack of deceased donors for kidney transplant patients in the Netherlands encouraged alternative options to expand the living donor pool for recipients who have a willing donor but cannot donate directly because of a positive crossmatch or ABO blood type incompatibility. A national donor kidney exchange was considered as a possible solution. Methods. From January 2004 until June 2006, 146 couples from seven kidney transplantation centers were enrolled and participated in 10 match procedures. The Dutch Transplant Foundation was responsible for the allocation and the National Reference Laboratory for Histocompatibility in Leiden performed all the serological crossmatches. Results. For 72 out of the 146 (49%) donor-recipient combinations, a match was found. The success rate in the positive crossmatch group was significantly (P=0.0015) higher than in the ABO-incompatible group (44/69 vs. 28/77); median panel reactive antibodies of the matched recipients in the positive crossmatch group was 38% (0–100) and in the ABO-incompatible group 0% (0–27; P<0.001). We were least successful for ABO blood type incompatible pairs with blood type O recipients, but for 9/53 (17%) there were possibilities. These nine blood type incompatible pairs were coupled to nine positive crossmatch pairs, which reflects the efficiency of combining the two categories of donor-recipient combinations into one program. Conclusion. The donor kidney exchange program in the Netherlands, in which all seven kidney transplantation centers participated, proved to be a successful program to expand the number of living donor kidney transplantations.

The optimal chain length for kidney paired exchanges: an analysis of the Dutch program

Living donor kidney exchange programs offer incompatible donor–recipient pairs the opportunity to be transplanted. To increase the number of these transplants, we examined in our actual donor–recipient couples how to reach the maximum number of matches by using different chain lengths. We performed 20 match procedures in which we constructed four different chain lengths: two, up to three, up to four and unlimited. The actual inflow and outflow of donor–recipient couples for each run were taken into consideration in this analysis. The total number of matched pairs increased from 148 pairs for only two‐way exchanges to 168 for three‐way exchanges. When a chain length of 4 was allowed five extra couples could be matched over a period of 5 years. Unlimited chain length did not significantly affect the results. The optimal chain length for living donor kidney exchange programs is 3. Longer chains with their inherent logistic burden do not lead to significantly more transplants.

Organ donation performance in the Netherlands 2005–08; medical record review in 64 hospitals

BACKGROUND The Netherlands has a low number of deceased organ donors per million population. As long as there is a shortage of suitable organs, the need to evaluate the donor potential is crucial. Only in this way can bottlenecks in the organ donation process be detected and measures subsequently taken to further improve donation procedures. METHODS Within a time frame of 4 years, 2005-08, medical charts of all intensive care deaths in 64 hospitals were reviewed by transplant coordinators and donation officers. Data were entered in a web-based application of the Dutch Transplant Foundation, both to identify the number of potential organ donors (including donation after cardiac death), as well as to analyse the reasons for potential donor loss. RESULTS In total, 23 508 patients died in intensive care units, of which 64% were younger than 76 years. The percentage of all potential organ donors out of the total number of deaths decreased from 8.2% in 2005 to 7.1% in 2008. Donor detection increased from 96% in 2005 to 99% in 2008. Of the potential donors, 17-21% recorded consent and 17-18% recorded objection in the national Donor Register. If the Donor Register was not decisive, the consent rate of families approached for organ donation was 35% in 2005, 29% in 2006, 41% in 2007 and 31% in 2008. The overall conversion rate (the number of actual donors divided by the number of potential donors) was 30%, 26%, 35% and 29% in these years. In the group of potential donor losses, objection by families accounted for about 60% during this study. CONCLUSIONS This study showed that the maximal number of potential organ donors is about three times higher than the number of effective organ donors. The main reason accounting for approximately 60% of the potential donor losses was the high family refusal rate. The year 2007 showed that a higher percentage of deceased organ donors can be procured from the pool of potential donors. All improvements should focus on decreasing the unacceptably high family refusal rates.

Appointing 'trained donation practitioners' results in a higher family consent rate in the Netherlands: a multicenter study

The consent process for organ and tissue donation is complex, both for families and professionals. To help professionals in broaching this subject we performed a multicenter study. We compared family consent to donation in three hospitals between December 2007 and December 2009. In the intervention hospital, trained donation practitioners (TDP) guided 66 families throughout the time in the ICU until a decision regarding donation had been reached. In the first control hospital, without any family guidance or training, 107 families were approached. In the second control hospital ‘hostesses’, who were not trained in donation questions, supported 99 families during admittance. A total of 272 families were requested to donate. We primarily compared consent rates, but also asked families about their experiences through a questionnaire. Family consent rate was significantly higher in the intervention hospital: 57.6% (38/66), than in the control hospitals: 34.6% (37/107) and 39.4% (39/99). The 69% response rate to the questionnaire –∼5 months after death – showed no confounding variables that could have influenced the consent rate. Appointing TDPs in the intervention hospital to guide families during admittance and the donation decision‐making process, results in higher family consent rates.

Allocation and matching in kidney exchange programs

Living donor kidney transplantation is the preferred treatment for patients suffering from end‐stage renal disease. To alleviate the shortage of kidney donors, many advances have been made to improve the utilization of living donors deemed incompatible with their intended recipient. The most prominent of these advances is kidney paired donation (KPD), which matches incompatible patient–donor pairs to facilitate a kidney exchange. This review discusses the various approaches to matching and allocation in KPD. In particular, it focuses on the underlying principles of matching and allocation approaches, the combination of KPD with other strategies such as ABO incompatible transplantation, the organization of KPD, and important future challenges. As the transplant community strives to balance quantity and equity of transplants to achieve the best possible outcomes, determining the right long‐term allocation strategy becomes increasingly important. In this light, challenges include making full use of the various modalities that are now available through integrated and optimized matching software, encouragement of transplant centers to fully participate, improving transplant rates by focusing on the expected long‐run number of transplants, and selecting uniform allocation criteria to facilitate international pools.

A plea for uniform European definitions for organ donor potential and family refusal rates.

Conversion of potential organ donors to actual donors is negatively influenced by family refusals. Refusal rates differ strongly among countries. Is it possible to compare refusal rates in order to be able to learn from countries with the best practices? We searched in the literature for reviews of donor potential and refusal rates for organ donation in intensive care units. We found 14 articles pertinent to this study. There is an enormous diversity among the performed studies. The definitions of potential organ donors and family refusal differed substantially. We tried to re‐calculate the refusal rates. This method failed because of the influence caused by the registered will on donation in the Donor Register. We therefore calculated the total refusal rate. This strategy was also less satisfactory considering possible influence of the legal consent system on the approach of family. Because of lack of uniform definitions, we can conclude that the refusal rates for organ donation can not be used for a sound comparison among countries. To be able to learn from well‐performing countries, it is necessary to establish uniform definitions regarding organ donation and registration of all intensive care deaths.