Introduction: The incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) in Brazilians deceased kidney donor receptors is high; this is attributed to poor hemodynamic conditions on potential donors. Improvements in allograft preservation techniques are a viable alternative to reduce the incidence and duration of DGF. Objectives: To determine whether kidney preservation using dynamic perfusion kidney graft preservation presents a lower DGF incidence than the standard static method. Methods: This is a prospective randomized trial designed to show a reduction in 30% in DGF incidence. A matched pairs design was performed in such a way that from each single donor one kidney was placed in static preservation and the other on machine dynamic perfusion, the sample size was calculation was 76 donors. Here we present our preliminary data on 69 donors and 138 recipients. Results: The mean donor age was 50 ±12 years and the most frequent cause of death was cerebrovascular (67%), mean donor final creatinine was 1.82 ± 1.47Mg/dl. Recipient demographic data was similar between groups except by age.Recipients of dynamic perfused grafts had a lower age. (48,9±12,4 vs. 46,7±15,9 years, p=0.007), moreover the cold ischemic time was similar between groups (25,6 ± 6.4 vs. 25.1±6.2,hours). Recipients of grafts preserved on dynamic perfusion presented a reduction of 23% in DGF incidence (62% vs. 48%, p=0,087).Conclusion: This preliminary analysis demonstrates a reduction in 23% in DGF incidence in kidneys preserved in machine dynamic perfusion.

CITATION INFORMATION: Marinho Neto H, Aires V, Offerni J, Luconi W, Luconi P, Braga S, Noronha I, Barsante R, Moreira J, Savina A, Kuschnaroff L, Lemos F, Cuvello A, Chocair P, Moura L, Silva Filho A, Charpiot I, Abbud Filho M, Cunha M, Malafonte P, Demetrio D, Miorin L, Duboc Filho A, Claudini A, Aguiar W, Tedesco H, Medina Pestana J. The Influence of Static versus Machine Dynamic Perfusion Kidney Graft Preservation on Delayed Graft Function Incidence: A Prospective, Randomized Study. Am J Transplant. 2016;16 (suppl 3).

« Back to 2016 American Transplant Congress