One-year results of a prospective, randomized trial comparing two machine perfusion devices used for kidney preservation.
Wszola M, Kwiatkowski A, et al.Transplant International 2013;26(11):1088-96
Aims
To investigate whether the type of machine perfusion device affects the outcome of deceased donor kidney transplantation.
Interventions
Donors were randomised to a machine perfusion flow driven device or a pressure driven device.
Participants
25 deceased kidney transplant donors.
Outcomes
The primary outcome included delayed graft function, the number of hemodialysis sessions required, graft function at 12 months and biopsy analysis.
Follow-up
1 year.
CET Conclusions
Following fairly long cold ischemia time (mean 28 hours) there was no difference in the early graft function rates, acute rejection, serum creatinine, or one year graft survival between the two machines compared in this small study. Perfusate levels of LDH were higher following preservation with RM3 than with lifeport, but there were no other differences in the biomarkers tested. In patients with DGF the number of dialysis sessions required was significantly less following preservation with lifeport. The authors attributed the beneficial effects to the lower mean pressures maintained by the lifeport than the RM3 during the preservation period, manufacturers guidelines were followed when setting up the machines.
Data analysis
Per protocol analysis
Trial registration
Not reported.