A Propensity Score-weighted Comparison of Outcomes Between Living and Standard Criteria Deceased Donor Kidney Transplant Recipients.


Journal

Transplantation
ISSN: 1534-6080
Titre abrégé: Transplantation
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0132144

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2020
Historique:
pubmed: 5 6 2020
medline: 10 2 2021
entrez: 5 6 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Consider a theoretical situation in which 2 patients with similar baseline characteristics receive a kidney transplant on the same day: 1 from a standard criteria deceased donor, the other from a living donor. Which kidney transplant will last longer? We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked administrative healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada, from January 1, 2005, to March 31, 2014, to evaluate several posttransplant outcomes in individuals who received a kidney transplant from a standard criteria deceased donor (n = 1523) or from a living donor (n = 1373). We used PS weighting using overlap weights, a novel weighting method that emphasizes the population of recipients with the most overlap in baseline characteristics. Compared with recipients of a living donor, the rate of all-cause graft failure was not statistically higher for recipients of a standard criteria deceased donor (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-1.6). Recipients of a standard criteria deceased donor, compared with recipients of a living donor had a higher rate of delayed graft function (23.6% versus 18.7%; odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.6) and a longer length of stay for the kidney transplant surgery (mean difference, 1.7 d; 95% CI, 0.5-3.0). After accounting for many important donor and recipient factors, we failed to observe a large difference in the risk of all-cause graft failure for recipients of a standard criteria deceased versus living donor. Some estimates were imprecise, which meant we could not rule out the presence of smaller clinically important effects.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Consider a theoretical situation in which 2 patients with similar baseline characteristics receive a kidney transplant on the same day: 1 from a standard criteria deceased donor, the other from a living donor. Which kidney transplant will last longer?
METHODS
We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked administrative healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada, from January 1, 2005, to March 31, 2014, to evaluate several posttransplant outcomes in individuals who received a kidney transplant from a standard criteria deceased donor (n = 1523) or from a living donor (n = 1373). We used PS weighting using overlap weights, a novel weighting method that emphasizes the population of recipients with the most overlap in baseline characteristics.
RESULTS
Compared with recipients of a living donor, the rate of all-cause graft failure was not statistically higher for recipients of a standard criteria deceased donor (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-1.6). Recipients of a standard criteria deceased donor, compared with recipients of a living donor had a higher rate of delayed graft function (23.6% versus 18.7%; odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.6) and a longer length of stay for the kidney transplant surgery (mean difference, 1.7 d; 95% CI, 0.5-3.0).
CONCLUSIONS
After accounting for many important donor and recipient factors, we failed to observe a large difference in the risk of all-cause graft failure for recipients of a standard criteria deceased versus living donor. Some estimates were imprecise, which meant we could not rule out the presence of smaller clinically important effects.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32496358
doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000003337
pii: 00007890-202011000-00026
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e317-e327

Références

Rana A, Gruessner A, Gruessner RW. Estimation of life-years saved by solid-organ transplant–reply. JAMA Surg. 2015; 150:1015–1016
Ortiz F, Aronen P, Koskinen PK, et al. Health-related quality of life after kidney transplantation: who benefits the most? Transpl Int. 2014; 27:1143–1151
Tonelli M, Wiebe N, Knoll G, et al. Systematic review: kidney transplantation compared with dialysis in clinically relevant outcomes. Am J Transplant. 2011; 11:2093–2109
Canadian Institute for Health Information. Annual statistics on organ replacement in Canada: dialysis, transplantation and donation, 2006-2015. 2017. Available at https://secure.cihi.ca/estore/productFamily.htm?pf=PFC3381&lang=en&media=0. Accessed August 1, 2018
Lamb KE, Lodhi S, Meier-Kriesche HU. Long-term renal allograft survival in the United States: a critical reappraisal. Am J Transplant. 2011; 11:450–462
Savoye E, Tamarelle D, Chalem Y, et al. Survival benefits of kidney transplantation with expanded criteria deceased donors in patients aged 60 years and over. Transplantation. 2007; 84:1618–1624
Port FK, Bragg-Gresham JL, Metzger RA, et al. Donor characteristics associated with reduced graft survival: an approach to expanding the pool of kidney donors. Transplantation. 2002; 74:1281–1286
Li F, Thomas LE, Li F. Addressing extreme propensity scores via the overlap weights. Am J Epidemiol. 2019; 188:250–257
Benchimol EI, Smeeth L, Guttmann A, et al.; RECORD Working Committee. The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement. PLoS Med. 2015; 12:e1001885
Lam NN, McArthur E, Kim SJ, et al. Validation of kidney transplantation using administrative data. Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2015; 2:20
Robles SC, Marrett LD, Clarke EA, et al. An application of capture-recapture methods to the estimation of completeness of cancer registration. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988; 41:495–501
Weiner JP. The Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Health Services Research & Development Center. The Johns Hopkins ACG® Case-Mix System Version 10.0 Release Notes. 2011, Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University
Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med. 2009; 28:3083–3107
Austin PC. A tutorial and case study in propensity score analysis: an application to estimating the effect of in-hospital smoking cessation counseling on mortality. Multivariate Behav Res. 2011; 46:119–151
Li F, Morgan KL, Zaslavsky AM. Balancing covariates via propensity score weighting. J Am Stat Assoc. 2018; 113:390–400
Ontario Marginalization Index User Guide. Centre for Research on Inner City Health. 2012. Available at http://www.torontohealthprofiles.ca/onmarg/userguide_data/ON-Marg_user_guide_1.0_FINAL_MAY2012.pdf. Accessed December 1, 2017
Sternberg SA, Bentur N, Abrams C, et al. Identifying frail older people using predictive modeling. Am J Manag Care. 2012; 18:e392–e397
Weiner JP, Abrams C. The Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups Technical Reference Guide, version 9.0. 2009. Available at https://www.healthpartners.com/ucm/groups/public/@hp/@public/documents/documents/dev_057914.pdf. Accessed December 1, 2017
Matas AJ, Smith JM, Skeans MA, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2011 annual data report: kidney. Am J Transplant. 2013; 13Suppl 111–46
Hart A, Smith JM, Skeans MA, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2015 annual data report: kidney. Am J Transplant. 2017; 17Suppl 121–116
Opelz G, Döhler B; Collaborative Transplant Study Report. Influence of time of rejection on long-term graft survival in renal transplantation. Transplantation. 2008; 85:661–666
Tingle SJ, Figueiredo RS, Moir JA, et al. Machine perfusion preservation versus static cold storage for deceased donor kidney transplantation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019; 3:CD011671
Lim WH, Clayton P, Wong G, et al. Outcomes of kidney transplantation from older living donors. Transplantation. 2013; 95:106–113
Young A, Kim SJ, Speechley MR, et al.; Donor Nephrectomy Outcomes Research (DONOR) Network. Accepting kidneys from older living donors: impact on transplant recipient outcomes. Am J Transplant. 2011; 11:743–750
Iordanous Y, Seymour N, Young A, et al.; Donor Nephrectomy Outcomes Research (DONOR) Network. Recipient outcomes for expanded criteria living kidney donors: the disconnect between current evidence and practice. Am J Transplant. 2009; 9:1558–1573
Lentine KL, Kasiske BL, Levey AS, et al. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors. Transplantation. 2017; 1018S Suppl 1S1–S109. doi:10.1097/TP.0000000000001769
doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001769
Joo DJ, Kim JY, Lee JI, et al. Manufacturing of insulin-secreting spheroids with the RIN-5F cell line using a shaking culture method. Transplant Proc. 2010; 42:4225–4227
Matas AJ, Smith JM, Skeans MA, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2012 Annual Data Report: kidney. Am J Transplant. 2014; 14Suppl 111–44. doi:10.1111/ajt.12579
doi: 10.1111/ajt.12579
Ojo AO, Wolfe RA, Held PJ, et al. Delayed graft function: risk factors and implications for renal allograft survival. Transplantation. 1997; 63:968–974
Summers DM, Johnson RJ, Hudson A, et al. Effect of donor age and cold storage time on outcome in recipients of kidneys donated after circulatory death in the UK: a cohort study. Lancet. 2013; 381:727–734
Ma MK, Lim WH, Turner RM, et al. The risk of cancer in recipients of living-donor, standard and expanded criteria deceased donor kidney transplants: a registry analysis. Transplantation. 2014; 98:1286–1293
Trillium Gift of Life Network. Kidney donation and transplant. 2015. Available at https://www.giftoflife.on.ca/resources/pdf/TGLN_Kidney_Brochure_WEB.pdf. Accessed December 12, 2017
Kidney Foundation. The Kidney Foundation of Canada frequently asked questions (FAQ). Available at https://kidney.ca/Get-Involved/Be-an-Organ-Donor/Additional-FAQs. Accessed October 15, 2018.
Pestana JM. Clinical outcomes of 11,436 kidney transplants performed in a single center - Hospital do Rim. J Bras Nefrol. 2017; 39:287–295
Matas AJ, Smith JM, Skeans MA, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2013 Annual Data Report: kidney. Am J Transplant. 2015; 15Suppl 21–34
Englum BR, Schechter MA, Irish WD, et al. Outcomes in kidney transplant recipients from older living donors. Transplantation. 2015; 99:309–315
Tennankore KK, Kim SJ, Baer HJ, et al. Survival and hospitalization for intensive home hemodialysis compared with kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014; 25:2113–2120
Rigo DH, Ziraldo L, Di Monte L, et al. Preemptive kidney transplantation: experience in two centers. Transplant Proc. 2011; 43:3355–3358
Harada KM, Mandia-Sampaio EL, de Sandes-Freitas TV, et al. Risk factors associated with graft loss and patient survival after kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2009; 41:3667–3670
Gill J, Bunnapradist S, Danovitch GM, et al. Outcomes of kidney transplantation from older living donors to older recipients. Am J Kidney Dis. 2008; 52:541–552
Government of Ontario Minister of Finance, Ontario population projections update 2012-2036. 2013. Available at https://collections.ola.org/mon/27008/323666.pdf. Accessed December 2, 2017

Auteurs

Seychelle Yohanna (S)

Division of Nephrology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Kyla L Naylor (KL)

ICES, London, ON, Canada.

Eric McArthur (E)

ICES, London, ON, Canada.

Ngan N Lam (NN)

Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Peter C Austin (PC)

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
ICES, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Steven Habbous (S)

Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Western University, London, ON, Canada.

Megan K McCallum (MK)

ICES, London, ON, Canada.

Michael Ordon (M)

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Greg A Knoll (GA)

Division of Nephrology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Joseph S Kim (JS)

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Amit X Garg (AX)

ICES, London, ON, Canada.
Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Division of Nephrology, Western University, London, ON, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH