An economic assessment of contemporary kidney transplant practice

Kidney transplantation is the most desired and cost-effective modality of renal replacement therapy for patients with irreversible chronic kidney failure (end-stage renal disease, stage 5 chronic kidney disease). Despite emerging evidence that the best outcomes accrue to patients who receive a transplant early in the course of renal replacement therapy, only 2.5% of incident patients with end-stage renal disease undergo transplantation as their initial modality of treatment, a figure largely unchanged for at least a decade. The National Kidney Foundation convened a Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) conference in Washington, DC, March 19 through 20, 2007, to examine the issue. Fifty-two participants representing transplant centers, dialysis providers, and payers were divided into three work groups to address the impact of early transplantation on the chronic kidney disease paradigm, educational needs of patients and professionals, and finances of renal replacement therapy. Participants explored the benefits of early transplantation on costs and outcomes, identified current barriers (at multiple levels) that impede access to early transplantation, and recommended specific interventions to overcome those barriers. With implementation of early education, referral to a transplant center coincident with creation of vascular access, timely transplant evaluation, and identification of potential living donors, early transplantation can be an option for substantially more patients with chronic kidney disease.

Transplantation using kidneys from deceased donors who meet the expanded criteria donor (ECD) definition (age > or =60 years or 50 to 59 years with at least 2 of the following: history of hypertension, serum creatinine level >1.5 mg/dL [132.6 micromol/L], and cerebrovascular cause of death) is associated with 70% higher risk of graft failure compared with non-ECD transplants. However, if ECD transplants offer improved overall patient survival, inferior graft outcome may represent an acceptable trade-off. To compare mortality after ECD kidney transplantation vs that in a combined standard-therapy group of non-ECD recipients and those still receiving dialysis. Retrospective cohort study using data from a US national registry of mortality and graft outcomes among kidney transplant candidates and recipients. The cohort included 109,127 patients receiving dialysis and added to the kidney waiting list between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2002, and followed up through July 31, 2004. Long-term (3-year) relative risk of mortality for ECD kidney recipients vs those receiving standard therapy, estimated using time-dependent Cox regression models. By end of follow-up, 7790 ECD kidney transplants were performed. Because of excess ECD recipient mortality in the perioperative period, cumulative survival did not equal that of standard-therapy patients until 3.5 years posttransplantation. Long-term relative mortality risk was 17% lower for ECD recipients (relative risk, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.90; P 1350 days), ECD recipients had a 27% lower risk of death (relative risk, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.83; P<.001). In areas with shorter waiting times, only recipients with diabetes demonstrated an ECD survival benefit. ECD kidney transplants should be offered principally to candidates older than 40 years in OPOs with long waiting times. In OPOs with shorter waiting times, in which non-ECD kidney transplant availability is higher, candidates should be counseled that ECD survival benefit is observed only for patients with diabetes.

Incompatible live donor kidney transplantation (ILDKT) offers a survival advantage over dialysis to patients with anti-HLA donor-specific antibody (DSA). Program-specific reports (PSRs) fail to account for ILDKT, placing this practice at regulatory risk. We collected DSA data, categorized as positive Luminex, negative flow crossmatch (PLNF) (n = 185), positive flow, negative cytotoxic crossmatch (PFNC) (n = 536) or positive cytotoxic crossmatch (PCC) (n = 304), from 22 centers. We tested associations between DSA, graft loss and mortality after adjusting for PSR model factors, using 9669 compatible patients as a comparison. PLNF patients had similar graft loss; however, PFNC (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-2.23, p = 0.007) and PCC (aHR = 5.01, 95% CI: 3.71-6.77, p < 0.001) were associated with increased graft loss in the first year. PLNF patients had similar mortality; however, PFNC (aHR = 2.04; 95% CI: 1.28-3.26; p = 0.003) and PCC (aHR = 4.59; 95% CI: 2.98-7.07; p < 0.001) were associated with increased mortality. We simulated Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services flagging to examine ILDKT's effect on the risk of being flagged. Compared to equal-quality centers performing no ILDKT, centers performing 5%, 10% or 20% PFNC had a 1.19-, 1.33- and 1.73-fold higher odds of being flagged. Centers performing 5%, 10% or 20% PCC had a 2.22-, 4.09- and 10.72-fold higher odds. Failure to account for ILDKT's increased risk places centers providing this life-saving treatment in jeopardy of regulatory intervention.