• Michael L Nicholson, Sarah A Hosgood, Matthew S Metcalfe, Julian R Waller, and Nicholas R Brook.
• Division of Transplant Surgery, University of Leicester, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, United Kingdom. lkh5@leicester.ac.uk
• Transplantation. 2004 Aug 15; 78 (3): 333-7.

BackgroundPulsatile machine perfusion offers theoretical advantages as a method of preserving kidneys before transplantation. This may be particularly the case for organs taken from non-heart-beating donors (NHBD), but there is still a lack of data to support this view. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of static cold storage in ice (CS) and hypothermic pulsatile machine perfusion (MP) as methods of renal transplant preservation.MethodsGroups of large white pigs (n=5) underwent left nephrectomy after warm ischemic times (WIT) of 0 or 30 min. Kidneys were preserved by CS or by cold (3degrees-8degreesC) MP for 24 hr. The left kidney was then autotransplanted into the right iliac fossa and an immediate right nephrectomy was performed. Renal function was assessed daily for 14 days.ResultsFourteen-day animal survival rates for 0 and 30 min WIT were four of five and one of five after both CS and MP. In the zero WIT groups, there was improved recovery of renal function after MP (area under the creatinine curve, 4,722+/-2,496 [MP] vs. 8,849+/-2,379 [CS]; P<0.05). MP did not improve renal function after 30 min of WIT (mean daily area under the creatinine curve, 1,077+/-145 [MP] vs. 1,049+/-265 [CS]).ConclusionsIn this model, MP improved 24-hr preservation of kidneys not subjected to warm ischemia (heart-beating donor model), but there was no evidence that MP was a better method of preservation than CS for kidneys exposed to 30 min of WIT (NHBD model).

23 keywords...

hide…