Machine perfusion preservation versus static cold storage for deceased donor kidney transplantation.

Tingle SJ ，Figueiredo RS ，Moir JA ，Goodfellow M ，Talbot D ，Wilson CH ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》

Normothermic and hypothermic machine perfusion preservation versus static cold storage for deceased donor kidney transplantation.

Kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for kidney failure. Donation, transport and transplant of kidney grafts leads to significant ischaemia reperfusion injury. Static cold storage (SCS), whereby the kidney is stored on ice after removal from the donor until the time of implantation, represents the simplest preservation method. However, technology is now available to perfuse or "pump" the kidney during the transport phase ("continuous") or at the recipient centre ("end-ischaemic"). This can be done at a variety of temperatures and using different perfusates. The effectiveness of these treatments manifests as improved kidney function post-transplant. To compare machine perfusion (MP) technologies (hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) and (sub) normothermic machine perfusion (NMP)) with each other and with standard SCS. We contacted the information specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies until 15 June 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing machine perfusion techniques with each other or versus SCS for deceased donor kidney transplantation were eligible for inclusion. All donor types were included (donor after circulatory death (DCD) and brainstem death (DBD), standard and extended/expanded criteria donors). Both paired and unpaired studies were eligible for inclusion. The results of the literature search were screened, and a standard data extraction form was used to collect data. Both of these steps were performed by two independent authors. Dichotomous outcome results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Survival analyses (time-to-event) were performed with the generic inverse variance meta-analysis of hazard ratios (HR). Continuous scales of measurement were expressed as a mean difference (MD). Random effects models were used for data analysis. The primary outcome was the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF). Secondary outcomes included graft survival, incidence of primary non-function (PNF), DGF duration, economic implications, graft function, patient survival and incidence of acute rejection. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Twenty-two studies (4007 participants) were included. The risk of bias was generally low across all studies and bias domains. The majority of the evidence compared non-oxygenated HMP with standard SCS (19 studies). The use of non-oxygenated HMP reduces the rate of DGF compared to SCS (16 studies, 3078 participants: RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.88; P < 0.0001; I2 = 31%; high certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis revealed that continuous (from donor hospital to implanting centre) HMP reduces DGF (high certainty evidence). In contrast, this benefit over SCS was not seen when non-oxygenated HMP was not performed continuously (low certainty evidence). Non-oxygenated HMP reduces DGF in both DCD and DBD settings in studies performed in the 'modern era' and when cold ischaemia times (CIT) were short. The number of perfusions required to prevent one episode of DGF was 7.69 and 12.5 in DCD and DBD grafts, respectively. Continuous non-oxygenated HMP versus SCS also improves one-year graft survival (3 studies, 1056 participants: HR 0.46, 0.29 to 0.75; P = 0.002; I2 = 0%; high certainty evidence). Assessing graft survival at maximal follow-up confirmed a benefit of continuous non-oxygenated HMP over SCS (4 studies, 1124 participants (follow-up 1 to 10 years): HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.77; P = 0.0005; I2 = 0%; high certainty evidence). This effect was not seen in studies where HMP was not continuous. The effect of non-oxygenated HMP on our other outcomes (PNF, incidence of acute rejection, patient survival, hospital stay, long-term graft function, duration of DGF) remains uncertain. Studies performing economic analyses suggest that HMP is either cost-saving (USA and European settings) or cost-effective (Brazil). One study investigated continuous oxygenated HMP versus non-oxygenated HMP (low risk of bias in all domains); the simple addition of oxygen during continuous HMP leads to additional benefits over non-oxygenated HMP in DCD donors (> 50 years), including further improvements in graft survival, improved one-year kidney function, and reduced acute rejection. One large, high-quality study investigated end-ischaemic oxygenated HMP versus SCS and found end-ischaemic oxygenated HMP (median machine perfusion time 4.6 hours) demonstrated no benefit compared to SCS. The impact of longer periods of end-ischaemic HMP is unknown. One study investigated NMP versus SCS (low risk of bias in all domains). One hour of end ischaemic NMP did not improve DGF compared with SCS alone. An indirect comparison revealed that continuous non-oxygenated HMP (the most studied intervention) was associated with improved graft survival compared with end-ischaemic NMP (indirect HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.92; P = 0.03). No studies investigated normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) or included any donors undergoing NRP. Continuous non-oxygenated HMP is superior to SCS in deceased donor kidney transplantation, reducing DGF, improving graft survival and proving cost-effective. This is true for both DBD and DCD kidneys, both short and long CITs, and remains true in the modern era (studies performed after 2008). In DCD donors (> 50 years), the simple addition of oxygen to continuous HMP further improves graft survival, kidney function and acute rejection rate compared to non-oxygenated HMP. Timing of HMP is important, and benefits have not been demonstrated with short periods (median 4.6 hours) of end-ischaemic HMP. End-ischaemic NMP (one hour) does not confer meaningful benefits over SCS alone and is inferior to continuous HMP in an indirect comparison of graft survival. Further studies assessing NMP for viability assessment and therapeutic delivery are warranted and in progress.

Tingle SJ ，Thompson ER ，Figueiredo RS ，Moir JA ，Goodfellow M ，Talbot D ，Wilson CH ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》

Hypothermic Machine Perfusion Versus Static Cold Storage in Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Static cold storage (SCS) and hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) are two primary options for renal allograft preservation. Compared with SCS, HMP decreased the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) and protected graft function. However, more evidence is still needed to prove the advantages of the HMP. In this study, the outcomes of kidney grafts from the two preservation methods were compared by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of hypothermic machine perfusion and static cold storage in deceased donor kidney transplantation were identified through searches of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases between January 1, 1980 and December 30, 2017. The primary endpoints were delayed graft function and graft survival. Secondary endpoints included primary non-function (PNF), graft renal function, duration of DGF, acute rejection, postoperative hospital stay and patient survival. Summary effects were calculated as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 13 RCTs were included, including 2048 kidney transplant recipients. The results indicated that compared with SCS, HMP decreased the incidence of DGF (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.87, P < 0.0001), and improved the graft survival at 3 years (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.11, P = 0.009). There was no significant difference in other endpoints. HMP might be a more desirable method of preservation for kidney grafts. The long-term outcomes of kidney allografts stored by hypothermic machine perfusion still need to be further investigated.

Peng P ，Ding Z ，He Y ，Zhang J ，Wang X ，Yang Z ... -  《-》

Hypothermic machine perfusion is superior to static cold storage in deceased donor kidney transplantation: A meta-analysis.

There remains a lack of consensus on the optimal storage method for deceased donor kidneys. This meta-analysis compares storage with hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) vs traditional static cold storage (SCS). The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register was searched to identify (quasi-) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to include in our meta-analysis. PRISMA guidelines were used to perform and write this review. There is high-certainty evidence that HMP reduces the risk of delayed graft function (DGF) when compared to SCS (2138 participants from 14 studies, RR = 0.77; 0.67-0.90, P = .0006). This benefit is significant in both donation following circulatory death (DCD; 772 patients from seven studies, RR = 0.75; 0.64-0.87, P = .0002) and donation following brainstem death (DBD) grafts (971 patients from four studies, RR = 0.78; 0.65-0.93, P = .006). The number of perfusions required to prevent one episode of DGF was 7.26 and 13.60 in DCD and DBD grafts, respectively. There is strong evidence that HMP also improves graft survival in both DBD and DCD grafts, at both 1 and 3 years. Economic analyses suggest HMP is cost-saving at 1 year compared with SCS. Hypothermic machine perfusion is superior to SCS in deceased donor renal transplantation. Direct comparisons with normothermic machine perfusion in RCTs are essential to identify optimal preservation methods in kidney transplantation.

Tingle SJ ，Figueiredo RS ，Moir JA ，Goodfellow M ，Thompson ER ，Ibrahim IK ，Bates L ，Talbot D ，Wilson CH ... -  《-》

Machine perfusion in liver transplantation.

Liver transplantation is the only chance of cure for people with end-stage liver disease and some people with advanced liver cancers or acute liver failure. The increasing prevalence of these conditions drives demand and necessitates the increasing use of donated livers which have traditionally been considered suboptimal. Several novel machine perfusion preservation technologies have been developed, which attempt to ameliorate some of the deleterious effects of ischaemia reperfusion injury. Machine perfusion technology aims to improve organ quality, thereby improving outcomes in recipients of suboptimal livers when compared to traditional static cold storage (SCS; ice box). To evaluate the effects of different methods of machine perfusion (including hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (HOPE), normothermic machine perfusion (NMP), controlled oxygenated rewarming, and normothermic regional perfusion) versus each other or versus static cold storage (SCS) in people undergoing liver transplantation. We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 10 January 2023. We included randomised clinical trials which compared different methods of machine perfusion, either with each other or with SCS. Studies comparing HOPE via both hepatic artery and portal vein, or via portal vein only, were grouped. The protocol detailed that we also planned to include quasi-randomised studies to assess treatment harms. We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. overall participant survival, 2. quality of life, and 3. serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were 4. graft survival, 5. ischaemic biliary complications, 6. primary non-function of the graft, 7. early allograft function, 8. non-serious adverse events, 9. transplant utilisation, and 10. transaminase release during the first week post-transplant. We assessed bias using Cochrane's RoB 2 tool and used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence. We included seven randomised trials (1024 transplant recipients from 1301 randomised/included livers). All trials were parallel two-group trials; four compared HOPE versus SCS, and three compared NMP versus SCS. No trials used normothermic regional perfusion. When compared with SCS, it was uncertain whether overall participant survival was improved with either HOPE (hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 1.98; P = 0.81, I2 = 0%; 4 trials, 482 recipients; low-certainty evidence due to imprecision because of low number of events) or NMP (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.80; P = 0.90; 1 trial, 222 recipients; very low-certainty evidence due to imprecision and risk of bias). No trials reported quality of life. When compared with SCS alone, HOPE was associated with improvement in the following clinically relevant outcomes: graft survival (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.87; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%; 4 trials, 482 recipients; high-certainty evidence), serious adverse events in extended criteria DBD liver transplants (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.91; P = 0.03, I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 156 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and clinically significant ischaemic cholangiopathy in recipients of DCD livers (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.92; P = 0.03; 1 trial, 156 recipients; high-certainty evidence). In contrast, NMP was not associated with improvement in any of these clinically relevant outcomes. NMP was associated with improved utilisation compared with SCS (one trial found a 50% lower rate of organ discard; P = 0.008), but the reasons underlying this effect are unknown. We identified 11 ongoing studies investigating machine perfusion technologies. In situations where the decision has been made to transplant a liver donated after circulatory death or donated following brain death, end-ischaemic HOPE will provide superior clinically relevant outcomes compared with SCS alone. Specifically, graft survival is improved (high-certainty evidence), serious adverse events are reduced (moderate-certainty evidence), and in donors after circulatory death, clinically relevant ischaemic biliary complications are reduced (high-certainty evidence). There is no good evidence that NMP has the same benefits over SCS in terms of these clinically relevant outcomes. NMP does appear to improve utilisation of grafts that would otherwise be discarded with SCS; however, the reasons for this, and whether this effect is specific to NMP, is not clear. Further studies into NMP viability criteria and utilisation, as well as head-to-head trials with other perfusion technologies are needed. In the setting of donation following circulatory death transplantation, further trials are needed to assess the effect of these ex situ machine perfusion methods against, or in combination with, normothermic regional perfusion.

Tingle SJ ，Dobbins JJ ，Thompson ER ，Figueiredo RS ，Mahendran B ，Pandanaboyana S ，Wilson C ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》