title: A prospective controlled trial of cold-storage versus machine-perfusion preservation in cadaveric renal transplantation.
abstract: A prospective controlled study was carried out in 60 consecutive cadaver renal donors comparing cold storage to pulsatile machine-perfusion preservation. Each donor served as its own control, by allocating one of the kidneys to each of the two preservation methods. There were 51 evaluable pairs of kidneys. Recipient age, panel-reactive antibody level, history of prior renal transplant, and immunosuppressive regimen were similar in the two preservation groups. Almost all recipients were treated with cyclosporine, and over 50% received antilymphoblast globulin. Total cold ischemic time was 1262 +/- 387 min in the machine-perfused group and 1309 +/- 426 min in the cold-storage group (P = NS). Prolonged ischemia (greater than 24 hr) occurred in 31% of machine-perfused and 22% of cold-stored kidneys (P = NS). Post-operative serum creatinine levels at 1, 7, and 30 days posttransplant were similar in both groups. Dialysis requirements were also similar, with 21 recipients of machine-perfused kidneys (41%) requiring at least one dialysis treatment compared to 16 patients (31%) in the cold-stored group (P = NS); the mean number of dialysis treatments required was 3.14 +/- 1.46 and 3.06 +/- 1.29, respectively (P = NS). Long ischemic time (greater than 24 hr) was associated with a higher rate of dialysis requirement in both groups, but in neither case did this achieve statistical significance. The distribution of graft losses within the first 30 days was similar in both groups, and the incidence of preservation-related graft failure was not significantly different. These results demonstrate that, in the cyclosporine era, machine perfusion offers no significant advantages over cold storage for cadaver renal preservation. Because machine perfusion is considerably more expensive and cold storage is simpler and facilitates the logistics of organ sharing, we recommend simple hypothermic storage of renal allografts as the preservation method of choice.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor 48109-0331.
authors.forename: R M
authors.initials: RM
authors.lastname: Merion
authors.forename: H K
authors.initials: HK
authors.lastname: Oh
authors.forename: F K
authors.initials: FK
authors.lastname: Port
authors.forename: L H
authors.initials: LH
authors.lastname: Toledo-Pereyra
authors.forename: J G
authors.initials: JG
authors.lastname: Turcotte
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D002102:Cadaver; D003404:Creatinine / Q000097:blood; D006085:Graft Survival; D006801:Humans; D006863:Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; D016030:Kidney Transplantation / Q000379:methods*; D009926:Organ Preservation / Q000379:methods*; D010477:Perfusion / Q000379:methods; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012044:Regression Analysis; D006435:Renal Dialysis
chemical_list: D003404:Creatinine