Outcome of expanded criteria donor kidneys that were transplanted at other Eurotransplant centers after being rejected by our institution.

PURPOSE: There is a growing discrepancy between the demand for renal transplants and the number of transplants conducted. For the many patients on the renal transplant waiting list, this means increased dialysis-associated morbidity, mortality and a reduced quality of life. The aim of this study was to ascertain whether it is justifiable for transplant centers to reject cadaveric donor organs on hand of marginal organ quality. METHODS: We identified 110 kidneys that were primarily rejected for transplantation at Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte, and later transplanted at another center within the Eurotransplant zone. Using data from the Collaborative Transplant Study, we analyzed various demographic donor data including cold ischemia times, as well as graft and recipient outcomes. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 54 months. The cold ischemia time averaged 16 h. The organs that were primarily rejected by our center and then transplanted at other Eurotransplant centers showed 31 % of recipients had creatinine levels under 1.47 mg/dl and 94 % had levels under 2.97 mg/dl at 3-year follow-up. The mean death-censored graft survival was 71.4 months. The mean renal transplant recipient survival was 87.5 months. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we propose that acceptance criteria for marginal donor kidneys need to be widened.

[Introduction of interdisciplinary prostate cancer centers based on the recommendations of the German Cancer Society. A cost-benefit analysis 3 years after accreditation]. / Etablierung von interdisziplinären Prostatakrebszentren nach den Empfehlungen der DKG. Eine Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse 3 Jahre nach Zertifizierung.

The introduction of prostate cancer treatment centers according to the criteria of the German Cancer Society ("Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft", DKG) aims at improving the quality of care for patients with prostate cancer. Systematic analyses of the effects and costs are lacking as yet. Three years after certification of the Interdisciplinary Prostate Cancer Center at the Charité Hospital Berlin we observed a decrease in the rate of positive surgical margins (tumor stage pT2), but other parameters of treatment quality including patient satisfaction remained unchanged. A survey among urologists of the region showed a high acceptance of prostate cancer centers in general. The majority of participating urologists appreciated the work of the Charité center, in particular the treatment recommendations given by the center were mostly followed and the majority of urologists regularly use educational activities of the center. However, only 30% of the participating urologists confirmed short-term improvements in the quality of patient care. Yearly additional costs for the Charité prostate cancer center are estimated at 205,000 euro (precertification phase and certification) and 138,000 euro (monitoring phase), despite the initial drop in mean treatment costs per case (radical prostatectomy). The introduction of prostate cancer treatment centers certified by the DKG is cost intensive, increases in treatment efficiency notwithstanding. Short-term improvements in quality of care cannot be unequivocally demonstrated. Prostate cancer centers serve an important role in counseling and medical education and may thus help disseminate evidence-based treatment strategies.