Liver Transplantation from Elderly Donors (≥85 Years Old).

BACKGROUND: Despite the ongoing trend of increasing donor ages in liver transplantation (LT) setting, a notable gap persists in the availability of comprehensive guidelines for the utilization of organs from elderly donors. This study aimed to evaluate the viability of livers grafts from donors aged ≥85 years and report the post-LT outcomes compared with those from "ideal" donors under 40 years old. METHODS: Conducted retrospectively at a single center from 2005 to 2023, this study compared outcomes of LTs from donors aged ≥85 y/o and ≤40 y/o, with the propensity score matching to the recipient's gender, age, BMI, MELD score, redo-LT, LT indication, and cause of donor death. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients received grafts from donors ≥85 y/o and were compared to 349 liver grafts from donors ≤40 y/o. Prior to PSM, the 5-year overall survival was 63% for the elderly group and 77% for the young group (p = 0.002). After PSM, the 5-year overall survival was 63% and 73% (p = 0.1). A nomogram, developed at the time of graft acceptance and including HCC features, predicted 10-year survival after LT using a graft from a donor aged ≥85. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of organ scarcity, elderly donors emerge as a partial solution. Nonetheless, without proper selection, LT using very elderly donors yields inferior long-term outcomes compared to transplantation from very young donors ≤40 y/o. The resulting nomogram based on pre-transplant criteria allows for the optimization of elderly donor/recipient matching to achieve satisfactory long-term results, in addition to traditional matching methods.

Influence of donor age on liver transplantation outcomes: A multivariate analysis and comparative study.

BACKGROUND: The growing disparity between the rising demand for liver transplantation (LT) and the limited availability of donor organs has prompted a greater reliance on older liver grafts. Traditionally, utilizing livers from elderly donors has been associated with outcomes inferior to those achieved with grafts from younger donors. By accounting for additional risk factors, we hypothesize that the utilization of older liver grafts has a relatively minor impact on both patient survival and graft viability. AIM: To evaluate the impact of donor age on LT outcomes using multivariate analysis and comparing young and elderly donor groups. METHODS: In the period from April 2013 to December 2018, 656 adult liver transplants were performed at the University Hospital Merkur. Several multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were developed to independently assess the significance of donor age. Donor age was treated as a continuous variable. The approach involved univariate and multivariate analysis, including variable selection and assessment of interactions and transformations. Additionally, to exemplify the similarity of using young and old donor liver grafts, the group of 87 recipients of elderly donor liver grafts (≥ 75 years) was compared to a group of 124 recipients of young liver grafts (≤ 45 years) from the dataset. Survival rates of the two groups were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test was used to test the differences between groups. RESULTS: Using multivariate Cox analysis, we found no statistical significance in the role of donor age within the constructed models. Even when retained during the entire model development, the donor age's impact on survival remained insignificant and transformations and interactions yielded no substantial effects on survival. Consistent insignificance and low coefficient values suggest that donor age does not impact patient survival in our dataset. Notably, there was no statistical evidence that the five developed models did not adhere to the proportional hazards assumption. When comparing donor age groups, transplantation using elderly grafts showed similar early graft function, similar graft (P = 0.92), and patient survival rates (P = 0.86), and no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Our center's experience indicates that donor age does not play a significant role in patient survival, with elderly livers performing comparably to younger grafts when accounting for other risk factors.

First-in-human liver transplantation from a centenarian deceased donor after brain death.

Liver transplantation from elderly donors is expanding due to demand for liver grafts, aging of recipients and donors, and introduction of machine perfusion. We report on a liver transplant from a 100-year-old deceased donor after brain death. The liver was transplanted after the use of hypothermic machine perfusion to a 60-year-old recipient with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing neoadjuvant immunotherapy. Nine months after the transplant, the patient is alive with a functioning graft and no evidence of acute rejection or tumor recurrence.

Age and liver graft: a systematic review with meta-regression.

Increasing organ shortage results in extended criteria donors (ECD) being used to face the growing demand for liver grafts. The demographic change leads to greater use of elderly donors for liver transplantation, historically considered marginal donors. Age is still considered amongst ECD in liver transplantation as it could affect transplant outcomes. However, what is the cutoff for donor age is still unclear and debated. A search of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Library was performed. The primary outcome was 1-year graft survival (GS). The secondary outcome was overall biliary complications and 3-5 years of graft and overall survival. A meta-regression model was used to analyse the temporal trend relation in the survival outcome. The meta-analysis included 11 studies. Hazard ratios for 1-year (age cutoff of 70 and 80,) and 5-year GS (I2:0%) were similar irrespectively of the age group. The meta-regression analysis showed a significant correlation between the 1-year graft survival and the year of publication. (coef. 0.00027, 95% CI - 0.0001 to - 0.0003 p = 0.0009). Advanced-age donors showed an increased risk of overall biliary complications with an odd ratio (OR) of 1.89 (95% CI 1-3.65). Liver grafts potentially discharged because of high-risk failure show encouraging results, and GS in ECD has progressively improved with a temporal trend. Currently, the criteria of marginality vary amongst centres. Age alone cannot be considered amongst the extended criteria. First of all, because of the positive results in terms of septuagenarian graft survival. Moreover, the potential elderly donor-related adjunctive risk can be balanced by reducing other risk factors. A prospective multicentre study should investigate a multi-factorial model based on donor criteria, recipient features and new functional biomarkers to predict graft outcome, as proper donor-recipient matching seems to be the critical point for good outcomes.

Beyond the Concepts of Elder and Marginal in DCD Liver Transplantation: A Prospective Observational Matched-Cohort Study in the Italian Clinical Setting.

Donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) is a valuable strategy to increase the availability of grafts for liver transplantation (LT). As the average age of populations rises, the donor pool is likely to be affected by a potential increase in DCD donor age in the near future. We conducted a prospective cohort study to evaluate post-transplantation outcomes in recipients of grafts from elderly DCD donors compared with younger DCD donors, and elderly donors after brainstem determination of death (DBD). From August 2020 to May 2022, consecutive recipients of deceased donor liver-only transplants were enrolled in the study. DCD recipients were propensity score matched 1:3 to DBD recipients. One-hundred fifty-seven patients were included, 26 of whom (16.6%) were transplanted with a DCD liver graft. After propensity score matching and stratification, three groups were obtained: 15 recipients of DCD donors ≥75 years, 11 recipients of DCD donors <75 years, and 28 recipients of DBD donors ≥75 years. Short-term outcomes, as well as 12 months graft survival rates (93.3%, 100%, and 89.3% respectively), were comparable among the groups. LT involving grafts retrieved from very elderly DCD donors was feasible and safe in an experienced high-volume center, with outcomes comparable to LTs from younger DCD donors and age-matched DBD donors.

Results of Lung Transplantation for Cystic Fibrosis With Selected Donors Over 65 Years Old.

Lung transplantation is limited by the shortage of suitable donors. Many programs have begun to use extended criteria donors. Donors over 65 years old are rarely reported, especially for young cystic fibrosis recipients. This monocentric study was conducted for cystic fibrosis recipients from January 2005 to December 2019, comparing two cohorts according to lung donor age (<65 years or ≥65 years). The primary objective was to assess the survival rate at 3 years using a Cox multivariable model. Of the 356 lung recipients, 326 had donors under 65 years, and 30 had donors over 65 years. Donors' characteristics did not differ significantly in terms of sex, time on mechanical ventilation before retrieval, and partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio. There were no significant differences in post-operative mechanical ventilation duration and incidence of grade 3 primary graft dysfunction between the two groups. At 1, 3, and 5 years, the percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (p = 0.767) and survival rate did not differ between groups (p = 0.924). The use of lungs from donors over 65 years for cystic fibrosis recipients allows extension of the donor pool without compromising results. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the long-term effects of this practice.

Liver Transplant Recipient Characteristics Associated With Worse Post-Transplant Outcomes in Using Elderly Donors.

Advanced age of liver donor is a risk factor for graft loss after transplant. We sought to identify recipient characteristics associated with negative post-liver transplant (LT) outcomes in the context of elderly donors. Using 2014-2019 OPTN/UNOS data, LT recipients were classified by donor age: ≥70, 40-69, and <40 years. Recipient risk factors for one-year graft loss were identified and created a risk stratification system and validated it using 2020 OPTN/UNOS data set. At transplant, significant recipient risk factors for one-year graft loss were: previous liver transplant (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 4.37, 95%CI 1.98-9.65); mechanical ventilation (aHR 4.28, 95%CI 1.95-9.43); portal thrombus (aHR 1.87, 95%CI 1.26-2.77); serum sodium <125 mEq/L (aHR 2.88, 95%CI 1.34-6.20); and Karnofsky score 10-30% (aHR 2.03, 95%CI 1.13-3.65), 40-60% (aHR 1.65, 95%CI 1.08-2.51). Using those risk factors and multiplying HRs, recipients were divided into low-risk (n = 931) and high-risk (n = 294). Adjusted risk of one-year graft loss in the low-risk recipient group was similar to that of patients with younger donors; results were consistent using validation dataset. Our results show that a system of careful recipient selection can reduce the risks of graft loss associated with older donor age.

Kidney transplantation from elderly donors: single-center experience / Trasplante renal de donantes añosos: experiencia de un centro

ABSTRACT Introduction: The shortage of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation has forced the re-evaluation of the limits on donor age acceptability. Thus, marginal donors such as elderly donors have been progressively increasing in recent years for organ transplantation around the world. Aim: In this study, it was aimed to contribute to the elimination of question marks about the using elderly donors for kidney transplantation. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, prospectively recorded data of patients who underwent kidney transplantation between January 1996 and January 2020 were evaluated. The inclusion criteria for the study were deceased or living donor, donor aged 55 years and older. Results: Of the total 392 kidney transplantation, 64 donors met the study criteria. The mean age of the donors was 59 ± 3.86 years (range, 55-69). Twenty-one (87.5%) out of 24 deceased donors and 1 (2.5%) living related recipients presented DGF. There was no mortality in the living donors. Overall, 1, 5, 10 years of recipient and graft survivals for this study 91%, 88%, 81% and 84%, 82%, 75%, respectively. Same rates for living donor 96%, 96%, 96% and 90%, 88%, 80%, respectively, and for deceased donor 81%, 74%, 70% and 78%, 74%, 67%, respectively. Conclusion: Transplantation from the donors with age 55 and up, might be related to decreased kidney function and graft survival, compared to the transplantations from the standard donors. However, when the long-term graft survival and patient survival is observed, the group of elderly donors cannot be subject to exclusion.

RESUMEN Introducción: La escasez de riñones de donantes fallecidos para trasplante ha obligado a reevaluar los límites de aceptabilidad de la edad de los donantes. Así, los donantes marginales como los donantes de edad avanzada han ido aumentando progresivamente en los últimos años para el trasplante de órganos en todo el mundo. Objetivo: En este estudio se buscó contribuir a la eliminación de interrogantes sobre el uso de donantes ancianos para trasplante renal. Material y métodos: En este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo, se evaluaron datos registrados prospectivamente de pacientes que se sometieron a trasplante renal entre enero de 1996 y enero de 2020. Como criterio de inclusión para el estudio se tomó la edad de los donantes y se incluyeron aquellos donantes mayores de 55 años tanto fallecidos como vivos relacionados. Resultados: Del total de 392 trasplantes renales, 64 donantes cumplieron con los criterios del estudio. La edad media de los donantes fue de 59 ± 3,86 años (rango, 55-69). Veinte y un receptorde 24 donantes fallecidos (87,5%) y solo un receptor de donante vivo relacionado (2,5%)presentaron DGF. No hubo mortalidad en los donantes vivos. En términos generales, la supervivencia del receptor y del injerto a 1, 5 y 10 años en este estudio fue de 91 % - 88 %, 81 % - 84 % y 82 % - 75 %, respectivamente. Se observaron las tasas similares para donante vivo 96%- 96%, 96% - 90% y 88% - 80%, respectivamente, y para donante fallecido 81% - 74%, 70% - 78%y 74% - 67%, respectivamente. Conclusión: El trasplante de riñones provenientes de donantes de 55 años en adelante, podría estar relacionado con la disminución de la función renal y la supervivencia del injerto, en comparación con los trasplantes de los donantes estándar. Sin embargo, cuando se observa la supervivencia del injerto a largo plazo y la supervivencia del paciente, el grupo de donantes de edad avanzada no puede ser objeto de exclusión.

Extended criteria grafts and emerging therapeutics strategy in liver transplantation. The unstable balance between damage and repair.

Due to increasing demand for donor organs, "extended criteria" donors are increasingly considered for liver transplantation, including elderly donors and donors after cardiac death. The grafts of this subgroup of donors share a major risk to develop significant features of ischemia reperfusion injury, that may eventually lead to graft failure. Ex-situ machine perfusion technology has gained much interest in liver transplantation, because represents both a useful tool for improving graft quality before transplantation and a platform for the delivery of therapeutics directly to the organ. In this review, we survey ongoing clinical evidences supporting the use of elderly and DCD donors in liver transplantation, and the underlying mechanistic aspects of liver aging and ischemia reperfusion injury that influence graft quality and transplant outcome. Finally, we highlight evidences in the field of new therapeutics to test in MP in the context of recent findings of basic and translational research.

Kidney transplantation outcomes from elderly donors after circulatory death: a comparison with elderly brain-dead donors.

BACKGROUND: The use of kidneys from elderly controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) donors has increased significantly in recent years. Concerns about outcomes achieved with these elderly cDCD kidneys have arisen. We aimed to compare outcomes from elderly cDCD kidney transplant recipients (KTrs) and elderly donation after brain death donors (DBDs) in KTrs. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre retrospective study including 87 cDCD-KTrs (46 from donors ≥65 years of age and 41 from <65 years) and 126 DBD-KTrs from donors ≥65 years of age from 2013 through 2017). Young cDCD-KTrs were used as controls. The median follow-up was 27.1 months for all cDCD-KTrs and 29.7 months for DBD-KTrs ≥65 years of age. RESULTS: Donors >65 years of age represented more than half of our global cDCD cohort (52.9%). KTs from elderly cDCDs had similar rates of delayed graft function, primary non-function and vascular complications compared with young cDCD-KTrs and elderly DBD-KTrs. Short and medium-term graft survival from elderly cDCD kidneys are excellent and are comparable to those from young cDCD and elderly DBD kidneys (90% young cDCD versus 88% elderly cDCD versus 80% elderly DBD at 36 months, P = 0.962 and 0.180, respectively). Although recipients from cDCDs ≥65 years of age showed lower 3-year patient survival (78% versus 87% in elderly DBD-KTrs; P = 0.01), recipient age was the only determinant of patient survival [hazard ratio 1.10 (95% confidence interval 1.02-1.17); P < 0.01], without any influence of donor characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The use of kidneys from elderly cDCDs is increasing in Spain. Short- and medium-term graft outcomes are similar when comparing kidneys from elderly cDCDs and DBDs. Recipient age is the only determinant of patient survival. Additional studies are needed to assess long-term outcomes.

Clinical effect of liver transplantation from elderly donors / 国际外科学杂志

Objective:To investigate the clinical effect of liver transplantation from organ donors in elderly patients.Methods:The clinical data of 346 patients who underwent liver transplantation in the general surgery center of Beijing You′an Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University from January 2018 to November 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. After screening, they were divided into the elderly donor group (30 cases) aged 60-70 years and the non elderly donor group (60 cases) aged < 60 years. The observation indexes were operation time, anhepatic phase time and operation bleeding. The prognosis indexes were: postoperative ICU stay, length of hospital stay, primary graft nonfunction (PNF), delayed graft function recovery (DGF) and in-hospital mortality. The measurement data in accordance with normal distribution are expressed as ( Mean± SD). The comparison between the two groups was analyzed by t-test. The measurement data that did not conform to the normal distribution were expressed as median (range). Mann Whitney U test was used for comparison between the two groups. The counting data were collected by the computer χ2 test or Fisher′s exact test analysis. Results:The operation time, anhepatic period and blood loss in the elderly group were (444.33±72.44) min, 56.0 (30-170) min, 1 992.1(400-9 000) mL, respectively and the non elderly group were (460.88±91.32) min, 58.45 (35-140) min, 1 885.8(400-12 000) mL, respectively, there were no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05); Among the prognostic indicators, the length of stay in ICU, the length of stay in hospital and the in-hospital mortality of the elderly group were 4.9 (2-21) d, 20.4 (3-40) d and 10% respectively, while the length of stay in ICU, the length of stay in hospital and the in-hospital mortality of the non elderly group were 5.3(1-32) d, 22.1(3-61) d and 10% respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05); No PNF occurred in the two groups, but the incidence rate of DGF in the elderly group was 13.33%(4/30), and the non elderly group was 1.67%(1/60). There was a significant difference between the two groups ( P<0.05). Conclusion:Under strict preoperative donor evaluation and accurate recipient selection, 60-70 years old donors can achieve similar short-term effect as non elderly donors, but the long-term effect needs further observation.

Relationship between early proteinuria and long term outcome of kidney transplanted patients from different decades of donor age.

BACKGROUND: Proteinuria after kidney transplantation portends a worse graft survival. However the magnitude of proteinuria related to patient and graft survival and its correlation with donor and recipient characteristics are poorly explored. METHODS: This study investigated the impact of post transplant proteinuria in the first year in 1127 kidney transplants analyzing the impact of different donor ages. Proteinuria cut off was set at 0.5 g/day. RESULTS: Transplants with proteinuria > 0.5 g/day correlated with poor graft and patient outcome in all donor age groups. In addition, 6-month-1-year proteinuria increase was significantly associated with graft outcome, especially with donors > 60 years old (p < 0.05; Odd Ratio 1.8). 1-year graft function (eGFR < or ≥ 44 ml/min) had similar impact to proteinuria (≥ 0.5 g/day) on graft failure (Hazard Ratio 2.77 vs Hazard Ratio 2.46). Low-grade proteinuria (0.2-0.5 g/day) demonstrated a trend for worse graft survival with increasing donor age. Also in kidney-paired analysis proteinuria ≥0.5 effect was more significant with donors > 50 years old (Odd Ratio 2.3). CONCLUSIONS: Post-transplant proteinuria was increasingly harmful with older donor age. Proteinuria ≥0.5 g/day correlates with worse outcomes in all transplanted patients. Prognostic value of proteinuria and eGFR for graft and patient survival was comparable and these two variables remain significant risk factors even in a multivariate model that take into consideration the most important clinical variables (donor age, rejection, delayed graft function and cytomegalovirus viremia among others).

Early outcomes of kidney transplantation from elderly donors after circulatory death (GEODAS study).

BACKGROUND: Spain has dramatically increased the number of controlled circulatory death donors (cDCD). The initial selection criteria for considering cDCD for kidney transplantation (KT) have been expanded progressively, with practically no limits in donor age during the last years. We aimed to analyze the early clinical outcomes using expanded (> 65 years) cDCD in comparison with standard ones. METHODS: Observational multicenter study including 19 transplant centers in Spain. We performed a systematic inclusion in a central database of every KT from expanded cDCD at each participant unit from January-2012 to January-2017. Surgical procedures and immunosuppressive protocols were based on local practices. Data was analyzed in the central office using logistic and Cox regression or competitive-risk models for multivariate analysis. Median time of follow-up was 18.1 months. RESULTS: 561 KT were performed with kidneys from cDCD, 135 from donors older than 65 years. As expected, recipients from older cDCD were also older (65.8 (SD 8.8) vs 53.7 (SD 11.4) years; p < 0.001) and with higher comorbidity. At 1 year, no differences were found amongst older and younger cDCD KT recipients in terms of serum creatinine (1.6 (SD 0.7) vs 1.5 (SD 0.8) mg/dl; p = 0.29). Non-death censored graft survival was inferior, but death-censored graft survival was not different (95.5 vs 98.2% respectively; p = 0.481). They also presented a trend towards higher delayed graft function (55.4 vs 46.7%; p = 0.09) but a similar rate of primary non-function (3.7 vs 3.1%; p = 0.71), and acute rejection (3.0 vs 6.3%; p = 0.135). In the multivariate analysis, in short follow-up, donor age was not related with worse survival or poor kidney function (eGFR < 30 ml/min). CONCLUSIONS: The use of kidneys from expanded cDCD is increasing for older and comorbid patients. Short-term graft outcomes are similar for expanded and standard cDCD, so they constitute a good-enough source of kidneys to improve the options of KT wait-listed patients.

The use of old donors in liver transplantation.

The process of ageing has an impact on the entire human body including the organ systems. In transplantation, professionals are daily faced with risk assessment of suitable donor offers , whether to accept a liver graft for a specific recipient. In this context, livers from elderly donors are more frequently accepted for transplantation, to increase the donor pool and compensate the high waiting list mortality. In the current practice it is not unusual to accept 60-year old donor livers for transplantation, as the donor demographics have significantly changed over the years. However, controversy exists regarding the use of livers from donors above 70 or 80 years, particular in combination with other risk factors, e.g. liver steatosis, warm ischaemia or long cold storage. This review focuses first on the impact of ageing on liver morphology and function. Second, we will highlight outcome after transplantation from elderly donors. Finally, we describe further risk factors and donor-recipient selection under the scope of old donor organs and include our institutional experience and policy.

Identification of miR-31-5p, miR-141-3p, miR-200c-3p, and GLT1 as human liver aging markers sensitive to donor-recipient age-mismatch in transplants.

To understand why livers from aged donors are successfully used for transplants, we looked for markers of liver aging in 71 biopsies from donors aged 12-92 years before transplants and in 11 biopsies after transplants with high donor-recipient age-mismatch. We also assessed liver function in 36 age-mismatched recipients. The major findings were the following: (i) miR-31-5p, miR-141-3p, and miR-200c-3p increased with age, as assessed by microRNAs (miRs) and mRNA transcript profiling in 12 biopsies and results were validated by RT-qPCR in a total of 58 biopsies; (ii) telomere length measured by qPCR in 45 samples showed a significant age-dependent shortage; (iii) a bioinformatic approach combining transcriptome and miRs data identified putative miRs targets, the most informative being GLT1, a glutamate transporter expressed in hepatocytes. GLT1 was demonstrated by luciferase assay to be a target of miR-31-5p and miR-200c-3p, and both its mRNA (RT-qPCR) and protein (immunohistochemistry) significantly decreased with age in liver biopsies and in hepatic centrilobular zone, respectively; (iv) miR-31-5p, miR-141-3p and miR-200c-3p expression was significantly affected by recipient age (older environment) as assessed in eleven cases of donor-recipient extreme age-mismatch; (v) the analysis of recipients plasma by N-glycans profiling, capable of assessing liver functions and biological age, showed that liver function recovered after transplants, independently of age-mismatch, and recipients apparently 'rejuvenated' according to their glycomic age. In conclusion, we identified new markers of aging in human liver, their relevance in donor-recipient age-mismatches in transplantation, and offered positive evidence for the use of organs from old donors.

Stretching the Limits of Renal Transplantation in Elderly Recipients of Grafts from Elderly Deceased Donors.

An increasing number of elderly patients (≥65 years) receive a donor kidney from elderly donors after brain death (DBD) or after circulatory death (DCD). These organs are allocated within the Eurotransplant Senior Program, but outcomes must be evaluated. From the Dutch Organ Transplantation Registry, we selected 3597 recipients (≥18 years) who received a first DBD or DCD kidney during 2002-2012, and categorized them as young or elderly recipients receiving a graft from either a young or elderly donor, stratified by donor type. In multiple logistic regression analysis, elderly recipients of elderly DCD kidneys experienced more delayed graft function and acute rejection than did elderly recipients of young DBD kidneys (odds ratios 10.43 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 5.75 to 18.91] and 2.78 [95% CI, 1.35 to 5.73], respectively). In Cox regression analysis, elderly recipients of elderly DCD kidneys had a 5-year mortality risk higher than that of elderly recipients of young DBD kidneys (hazard ratio, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.15 to 3.02). Elderly recipients of elderly kidneys had a 5-year mortality rate comparable to that of waitlisted elderly patients remaining on dialysis. Among elderly recipients, 63.8% of those who received elderly DCD kidneys, 45.5% of those who received elderly DBD kidneys, and approximately 26% of those who received young DBD or DCD kidneys had an eGFR<30 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (including primary nonfunction) after 1 year. In conclusion, improving donor selection and preservation is warranted if the allocation of elderly DCD grafts to elderly recipients is to be expanded.

Elderly donor liver grafts are not associated with a higher incidence of biliary complications after liver transplantation: results of a national multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation with livers grafts from elderly donors has been associated with a higher risk of biliary complications. The aim of this study was to examine whether our national protocol could contribute to a lower incidence of biliary complications. METHODS: All adult recipients in the Netherlands transplanted with a liver from an elderly donor (≥ 65 yrs; n = 68) in the period January 2000-July 2011 were matched with recipients of a liver from a donor <65 yr (n = 136). Outcome parameters were 90-d, one-yr, and three-yr patient/graft survival rates, biliary complications (non-anastomotic stricture, anastomotic stricture, biliary leakage, and post-transplant cholangitis), and postoperative hepatic ischemic injury serum markers (AST/ALT). RESULTS: The median cold ischemia time (CIT) was 7:25 (h:min) in the group recipients of an elderly donor liver graft. Ninety-day, one-yr, and three-yr patient/graft survival rates were similar between the group with an elderly donor liver and their younger controls. Moreover, no differences were found in the incidence of biliary complications and postoperative levels of AST/ALT between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Transplantation of livers from elderly donors (≥ 65 yr) is not associated with a higher incidence of biliary complications, in a national policy wherein the CIT is kept short.