Transplantation Direct (Jun 2024)

Preoperative Risk Assessment of Early Kidney Graft Loss

  • Verner Eerola, MD,
  • Ville Sallinen, MD, PhD,
  • Grace Lyden, PhD,
  • Jon Snyder, PhD, MS,
  • Marko Lempinen, MD, PhD,
  • Ilkka Helanterä, MD, PhD

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001636
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 10, no. 6
p. e1636

Abstract

Read online

Background. A large proportion of potential organ donors are not utilized for kidney transplantation out of risk of early allograft loss because of donor-related characteristics. These can be summarized using kidney donor profile index (KDPI). Because KDPI affects the choice of the recipient, the predictive ability of KDPI is tied to recipient attributes. These have been questioned to explain most of the predictive ability of KDPI. This study aims to quantify the effect of the donor on early graft loss (EGL) by accounting for nonrandom allocation. Methods. This study included patients undergoing kidney transplantation from deceased donors between 2014 and 2020 from the Scientific Registry of Transplantation Recipients. EGL, defined as a return to dialysis or retransplantation during the first posttransplant year, was the primary endpoint. Nonrandom allocation and donor–recipient matching by KDPI necessitated the use of inverse probability treatment weighting, which served to assess the effect of KDPI and mitigate selection bias in a weighted Cox regression model. Results. The study comprised 89 290 transplantations in 88 720 individual patients. Inverse probability treatment weighting resulted in a good balance of recipient covariates across values of continuous KDPI. Weighted analysis showed KDPI to be a significant predictor for short-term outcomes. A comparable (in terms of age, time on dialysis, previous transplants, gender, diabetes status, computed panel-reactive antibodies, and HLA mismatches) average recipient, receiving a kidney from a donor with KDPI 40–60 had a 3.5% risk of EGL increased to a risk of 7.5% if received a kidney from a KDPI >95 donor (hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-2.7). However, for all-cause survival KDPI was less influential. Conclusions. The predictive ability of KDPI does not stem from recipient confounding alone. In this large sample-sized study, modeling methods accounting for nonindependence of recipient selection verify graft quality to effectively predict short-term transplantation outcomes.