Visual Abstract
Keywords: COVID-19, renal transplantation, transplant outcomes
Abstract
Background
Acceptable post-transplant outcomes were reported in kidney transplant recipients from donors with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, there are no comparative studies with well-matched controls.
Methods
This multicenter, prospective observational study, which included three transplant centers in the United States, enrolled 61 kidney recipients from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–infected deceased donors. Using optimal matching methods, we matched every recipient to three comparators receiving kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–negative deceased donors with otherwise highly similar characteristics in the same transplant centers to compare 6-month eGFR.
Results
Among recipients of SARS-CoV-2–infected donor kidneys, one recipient died with a functional graft within 6 months. Mean 6-month eGFR was not significantly different between SARS-CoV-2–infected and noninfected donor groups (55±21 and 57±25 ml/min per 1.73 m2, respectively; P = 0.61). Six-month eGFR in recipients from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors who died of reasons other than COVID-19 was not significantly different from those from SARS-CoV-2–negative donors (58±22 and 56±25 ml/min per 1.73 m2, respectively; P = 0.51). However, recipients from donors who died of COVID-19 had significantly lower 6-month eGFR than those from SARS-CoV-2–negative donors (46±17 and 58±27 ml/min per 1.73 m2, respectively; P = 0.03). No donor-to-recipient SARS-CoV-2 transmission was observed.
Conclusions
Six-month eGFR was not significantly different between recipients of kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–infected and noninfected donors. However, those receiving kidneys from donors who died of COVID-19 had significantly lower 6-month eGFR. Donor-to-recipient SARS-CoV-2 transmission was not observed.
Introduction
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which began in the United States in early 2020, brought unprecedented challenges to the solid-organ transplantation community worldwide.1 Kidney transplant activity in the United States decreased initially, but quickly recovered with gradual increases in utilization of organs from donors with COVID-19.2–7 Early experience revealed the safety of transplanting organs from donors who had recovered from COVID-19.8–10 Clinical practice in many centers soon evolved toward transplanting kidneys from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA-positive donors and from those who died of COVID-19.11–17 To date, despite evidence suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 infects not only the lung but also extrapulmonary organs,18–21 no COVID-19 transmission has been reported from infected donors to negative recipients of non-lung solid-organ transplants.
In addition to the reported safety of transplanting kidneys from donors with COVID-19, case reports and series have provided some evidence for good short-term recipient outcomes.11–16 Moreover, large-scale studies using the US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database have revealed graft and patient survival of recipients of kidneys from SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive donors that were comparable with those from SARS-CoV-2 RNA-negative donors.4–6,22 However, a more recent single-center retrospective study revealed acceptable but worse short-term graft function for recipients of kidneys from SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive donors with COVID-19–related cause of death compared with those from SARS-CoV-2 RNA-negative donors.23 Post-transplant follow-up in this single-center study was limited to <6 months, and potential confounders were not sufficiently addressed in these analyses, indicating the need for comparative studies with well-matched controls to better elucidate outcomes. We, therefore, established the multicenter COnsortium to study SARS-CoV-2 VIrus–infecteD DONOR kidney transplants to prospectively evaluate transplant outcomes for recipients of kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors compared with highly similar kidney recipients from SARS-CoV-2–negative donors. We hypothesized that short-term outcomes, including 6-month post-transplant eGFR, are similar between the groups.
Methods
Cohort
This multicenter, prospective observational cohort study was designed to assess the safety, potential complications, and short- and long-term outcomes of kidney transplantation from SARS-CoV-2–infected deceased donors. The three participating transplant centers are University of Utah; University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Methodist University Hospital; and Virginia Commonwealth University. This study included recipients aged 18 years or older. We prospectively collected SARS-CoV-2–infected deceased-donor data, including SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test results, chest X-ray and computed tomography findings, vaccination status, COVID-19 symptoms and treatments, history of venous thromboembolism, hepatitis C virus nucleic acid tests, and length of hospital stay. We collected clinical information for the recipients of those kidneys, including SARS-CoV-2–related data (SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test, anti-spike IgG, vaccination status, prophylaxis, history of COVID-19, post-transplant COVID-19, and venous thromboembolism) and transplant-related data (e.g., induction and maintenance immunosuppression; preexisting donor-specific antibody; graft type; multiorgan transplantation; and history of diabetes, hypertension, cancer, peripheral vascular disease, coronary artery disease, and cerebrovascular disease). Data were extracted from electronic medical records and local transplant datasets and were managed/stored in the Research Electronic Data Capture tool hosted by the University of Utah.
The Institutional Review Board for each participating center approved the study (IRB_00147596). Informed consent was obtained from all participants before enrollment. The research was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
Data Source and Study Population
This study also used each participating center's Standard Transplant Analysis and Research files, which are patient-identified datasets containing information about transplant recipients, deceased and living donors, and waiting-list candidates at individual transplant centers. To compare post-transplant outcomes between recipients of kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–infected and noninfected donors, we extracted deceased-donor kidney transplant data for recipients at each center from January 1, 2016, to May 15, 2022 (Figure 1). Donor/kidney data included age, sex, history of diabetes and hypertension, cause of death, donation after cardiac death, Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) referenced to the 2021 Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network donor population,24 use of kidney hypothermic machine perfusion, terminal serum creatinine, and glomerulosclerosis at organ recovery by biopsy reports. The following recipient data were also collected: age, sex, race, body mass index, previous solid-organ transplantation, dialysis duration, cause of kidney failure, calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA), human leukocyte antigen mismatch, and cold ischemia time.
Figure 1.
Flow chart for matching. COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; COVID-death donor, a donor who died of COVID-19; non-COVID–death donor, a donor who died of causes other than COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.
Donor/Recipient Selection Criteria and Protocols for Transplanting Kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–Infected Deceased Donors
This observational study did not stipulate selection criteria or protocols for participating center practice; each center followed its own clinical procedures and policies for accepting and transplanting kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–infected deceased donors (Supplemental Methods). Briefly, University of Utah initially only considered deceased donors with SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test cycle threshold values >30 and death from causes other than COVID-19. After the first few successful transplants, University of Utah stopped excluding donors because of specific COVID-19 histories. Virginia Commonwealth University only considered asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test–positive donors for the first few cases, but thereafter also accepted symptomatic donors. University of Tennessee only considered donors who had not died of active COVID-19. In all centers, kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–positive donors were transplanted only for recipients who at least verbally consented to receive such kidneys and had completed a primary COVID-19 vaccine series. All kidney recipients from donors with positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid tests were eligible for this study. All centers used their standard transplant procedures and immunosuppression protocols. University of Utah and University of Tennessee used rabbit antithymocyte globulin for induction immunosuppression. Virginia Commonwealth University initially only used basiliximab for induction in the first several transplants and followed their standard induction protocols thereafter (rabbit antithymocyte globulin or basiliximab). Standard triple maintenance immunosuppression was used by all centers and consisted of calcineurin inhibitors, mycophenolic acid/mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone. University of Utah used belatacept instead of calcineurin inhibitors according to its protocol, regardless of donor COVID-19 status (i.e., belatacept was administered to recipients of kidneys from donors who were considered at high risk of severe acute tubular necrosis on the basis of certain conditions [terminal serum creatinine >2 mg/dl, donation after cardiac death, off-pump kidney graft, and/or cold ischemia time >24 h]). University of Utah administered apixaban postoperatively for 1 month because of concern about the higher risk of thromboembolism reported in recipients of kidneys from donors with COVID-19.16
Exposure Variables
The primary exposure was deceased-donor SARS-CoV-2 infection status. SARS-CoV-2–infected status was determined by nucleic acid amplification testing obtained during the usual care of the donor by the organ procurement organization. A donor was considered SARS-CoV-2–infected if at least one SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test result was positive during the donation hospital stay. For matched analyses, donors were defined as SARS-CoV-2–noninfected if they never had SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test positivity. All potential donors received testing for SARS-CoV-2.
Outcome Variables
The primary outcome was 6-month recipient eGFR by the serum creatinine–based Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration 2021 equation.25 Secondary outcomes were delayed graft function, defined as any dialysis within the first week after transplant, length of hospital stay, 6-month graft and patient survival, rejection within 6 months, donor-to-recipient SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and thromboembolic events in recipients of kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors. Donor-to-recipient SARS-CoV-2 transmission was defined as a positive nucleic acid test/development of COVID-19 within 10 days after transplant.
Matching Process
Using optimal matching methods, we matched every patient (“donor SARS-CoV-2–infected”) to three comparators (“donor SARS-CoV-2–negative”) within each center (Figure 1). Matching was performed in an iterative process to ensure that patients and matched comparators were highly similar. A propensity score model was first built using all variables in the matching algorithm. We then built a Mahalanobis distance matrix for important continuous variables (age, KDPI, cold ischemia time, and cPRA), and finally, bipartite cardinality matching was performed to identify optimal pairs. The matching process included recipient factors (age, sex, race, dialysis vintage, cause of kidney failure, history of prior transplant, and cPRA), donor factors (donation after cardiac death, KDPI, and kidney pumped), and transplant factors (human leukocyte antigen mismatch and cold ischemia time). We used mean constraint to balance continuous variables and fine-balance to match categorical variables. Balance was assessed using absolute standardized differences (cutoff <0.1) and visual inspection of distribution plots. Study outcomes were examined only after balance was assessed by study investigators (V.P., M.Z.M., I.E.H., and J.Y.) and the match was finalized. Optimal matching and balance assessment was performed using R statistical software (R Foundation for Statistical Computing version 4.2.2, and packages “designmatch” and “cobalt”).
Statistical Analysis
Baseline characteristics are presented as mean and SD or median and interquartile range for continuous variables and number and percentage for categorical variables, as appropriate. We used the generalized Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney rank-sum test to compare recipient 6-month eGFR between the matched SARS-CoV-2–infected and negative donor groups. As a subgroup analysis, we also compared recipient 6-month eGFR by primary exposure stratified by donor death either directly caused by COVID-19 (COVID-death) or other causes (non-COVID–death). Differences in donor and recipient characteristics between the COVID-death and non-COVID–death donor groups were analyzed using t-tests or Mann–Whitney U tests for continuous variables and Fisher exact tests for categorical variables. P values were two-sided and considered statistically significant when <0.05 for all analyses. All analyses, except matching, were conducted using STATA version 17 (STATA Corporation, College Station, TX).
Results
Description of Kidney Transplantation from SARS-CoV-2–Infected Donors
We enrolled 61 recipients of kidneys from 52 SARS-CoV-2–infected donors (Table 1). The median (interquartile range) donor age was 38 (29–51) years, 15 recipients (29%) were female, and 13 (25%) had died of COVID-19. Median KDPI and terminal serum creatinine were 42 (25–65) and 0.9 (0.5–1.3) mg/dl, respectively. COVID-19 symptoms that were reported in donors included cough (25%), fever (14%), and dyspnea (20%); 45% of donors had no symptoms. Two donors (4%) developed pulmonary embolism after COVID-19 onset. Median time from COVID-19 symptom onset to organ procurement was 26 (17–32) days. SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold was available in 28 donors, with the median lowest value of 33.4 (28.5–37.3) and range of 12.5–44.8. Typical chest X-ray and computed tomography changes consistent with COVID-19 were observed in 71% and 51% of these donors, respectively. Compared with SARS-CoV-2–infected but non-COVID–death donors, COVID-death donors were older (33 [21–46] versus 53 [48–54] years) and more likely donated after cardiac death (21% versus 69%; Supplemental Table 1). Median KDPI was higher in COVID-death donors (37 [19–66] versus 46 [39–57]). The degree of glomerulosclerosis was 0%–5% in 34 of 38 biopsy reports (89%; 85% [11/13] and 92% [23/25] in COVID-death and non-COVID–death donors, respectively).
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2–positive donor kidney transplant
| Donor Characteristic | Total (n=52) |
|---|---|
| Age, yr | 39 (29–51) |
| Sex, n (%) | |
| Male | 37 (71) |
| Female | 15 (29) |
| Race, n (%) | |
| Black | 7 (13) |
| White | 37 (71) |
| Others | 8 (15) |
| Diabetes, n (%) | 5 (10) |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 9 (18) |
| Positive HCV nucleic acid test status, n (%) | 7 (13) |
| Kidney Donor Profile Index, % | 42 (25–65) |
| COVID-19 as the cause of death, n (%) | 13 (25) |
| Cause of death, n (%) | |
| Anoxia | 27 (52) |
| Cerebrovascular/stroke | 7 (13) |
| Head trauma | 14 (27) |
| Others | 4 (8) |
| Recovery type, n (%) | |
| Donation after cardiac death | 17 (33) |
| Donation after brain death | 35 (67) |
| Donor kidney on pump | 34 (65) |
| Terminal serum creatinine, mg/dl | 0.9 (0.5–1.3) |
| Length of hospital stay, d | 4 (2–10) |
| Glomerulosclerosis in kidney biopsy at organ recovery, n (%) a | |
| 0%–5% | 34 (89) |
| 6%–10% | 3 (8) |
| 11%–15% | 1 (3) |
| COVID-19 symptoms, n (%) | |
| Cough | 13 (25) |
| Fever | 7 (14) |
| Dyspnea | 10 (20) |
| No symptoms | 23 (45) |
| Unknown | 9 (18) |
| Time since symptom onset to donation, db | 26 (17–32) |
| Treatment for COVID-19, n (%) | |
| Remdesivir | 3 (6) |
| Steroids | 2 (4) |
| None | 30 (59) |
| Unknown | 15 (29) |
| History of venous thromboembolism | 2 (4) |
| Type of venous thromboembolism | |
| Pulmonary embolism | 2 (100) |
| Time since venous thromboembolism to donation, d | 10, 22 |
| SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test c | |
| Lowest cycle threshold | 33.4 (28.5–37.3) |
| Source of sample, n (%) | |
| Nasopharyngeal | 24 (86) |
| Bronchoalveolar lavage | 4 (14) |
| Typical chest X ray changes for COVID-19 (opacities/infiltrates), n (%) | 36 (71) |
| Typical chest CT changes for COVID-19 (opacities/infiltrates), n (%)d | 24 (50) |
| Prior COVID-19 vaccination, n (%) | |
| No | 9 (17) |
| Yes | 7 (13) |
| Unknown | 36 (69) |
| Recipient Characteristic | Total (n=61) |
|---|---|
| Age, yr | 53 (44–63) |
| Sex, n (%) | |
| Male | 40 (66) |
| Female | 21 (34) |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 | 29.9 (24.9–34.0) |
| Race, n (%) | |
| Black | 32 (52) |
| White | 19 (31) |
| Others | 10 (16) |
| Cause of kidney failure, n (%) | |
| Diabetes | 24 (39) |
| Hypertension | 15 (25) |
| Glomerulonephritis | 8 (13) |
| Cystic disease | 2 (3) |
| Others | 12 (20) |
| Pretransplant Dialysis, n (%) | |
| Preemptive | 9 (15) |
| ≤ 1 yr | 4 (7) |
| 1–3 yr | 19 (31) |
| 3–5 yr | 19 (31) |
| >5 yr | 10 (16) |
| Length of dialysis, m | 42 (22–56) |
| Prior transplant, n (%) | 3 (5) |
| Multiorgan transplant, n (%) | 2 (3) |
| Diabetes, n (%) | 34 (56) |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 60 (98) |
| Cancer, n (%) | 7 (11) |
| Peripheral vascular disease, n (%) | 9 (15) |
| Coronary artery disease, n (%) | 16 (26) |
| Cerebrovascular disease, n (%) | 3 (5) |
| Calculated PRA | 0 (0–0) |
| Human leukocyte antigen mismatch, n (%) | |
| 0 | 1 (2) |
| 1 | 0 (0) |
| 2 | 2 (3) |
| 3 | 9 (15) |
| 4 | 22 (36) |
| 5 | 19 (31) |
| 6 | 8 (13) |
| Preexisting donor-specific antibody, human leukocyte antigen class I, n (%) | 0 (0) |
| Preexisting donor-specific antibody, human leukocyte antigen class II, n (%) | 3 (5) |
| Cold ischemia time, h | 23 (18–30) |
| Graft type, n (%) | |
| Single | 55 (90) |
| Dual | 1 (2) |
| En bloc pediatric | 3 (5) |
| Other | 2 (3) |
| Induction immunosuppression, n (%) | |
| Antithymocyte globulin | 54 (89) |
| Basiliximab | 7 (11) |
| Maintenance immunosuppression at discharge, n (%) | |
| Tacrolimus | 51 (84) |
| Cyclosporine | 1 (2) |
| Mycophenolate | 59 (97) |
| Steroids | 59 (97) |
| Belatacept | 9 (15) |
| COVID-19–related, n (%) | |
| History of COVID-19 infection | 6 (10) |
| Pretransplant COVID-19 vaccination | 61 (100) |
| Vaccine dose, n (%) | |
| 1 | 2 (3) |
| 2 | 29 (48) |
| 3 | 28 (46) |
| 4 | 2 (3) |
| Anti-spike IgG, positive, n (%)e | 34 (94) |
| COVID-19 prophylaxis after transplant, n (%) | |
| Remdesivir | 30 (49) |
| Tixagevimab/cilgavimab | 40 (66) |
Values are expressed as median (interquartile range) or number (%). HCV, Hepatitis C virus; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; CT, computed tomography; PRA, panel reactive antibody.
Data for glomerulosclerosis were available in 38 SARS-CoV-2–positive donor kidneys. As a reference, 100 kidney biopsy reports of 183 SARS-CoV-2–negative donors (matched control in this study) were available. The degree of glomerulosclerosis was 0%–5% in 76 (76%), 6%–10% in 17 (17%), 11%–15% in five (5%), and 16%–20% in two (2%) kidneys.
Data for time since symptom onset to donation were available in 19 donors.
Data for lowest cycle threshold and source of sample were available in 28 donors.
Data for typical chest CT changes for COVID-19 were available in 48 donors.
Data for anti-spike IgG were available in 36 recipients.
The median recipient age was 53 (44–63) years, 34% recipients were female, 52% were Black, and 31% were White (Table 1). Two of the 61 recipients (3%) underwent simultaneous kidney–pancreas transplant; all others received kidney-only transplants. The median cold ischemia time was 23 (18–30) hours. Antithymocyte globulin induction was used in 89%; 11% received basiliximab. At discharge, 84% received tacrolimus for maintenance immunosuppression, 2% (one recipient) received cyclosporine, and 15% initiated belatacept. Compared with recipients from non-COVID–death donors, those from COVID-death donors were less frequently administered tacrolimus (91% versus 60%) and more frequently administered belatacept (7% versus 40%), reflecting more frequent donations after cardiac death, higher KDPI, and longer cold ischemia time (Supplemental Table 1). Ninety-seven percent of recipients were also discharged on mycophenolate and steroids. All 61 recipients had been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 before transplant, with 97% having received at least two doses of mRNA vaccines. Thirty-four of the 36 recipients (94%) tested positive for anti-spike IgG during their transplant hospitalization. Remdesivir was used prophylactically in 49%. Tixagevimab/cilgavimab was administered after transplant in 66% of recipients.
Mean 6-month eGFR was 55±21 ml/min per 1.73 m2 and was lower in recipients of kidneys from COVID-death donors than from non-COVID–death donors (46±17 versus 58±22 ml/min per 1.73 m2; Table 2 and Supplemental Table 2). Delayed graft function occurred in 22 recipients (36%), and median length of hospital stay was 5 (4–6) days. There were no death-censored graft losses by 6 months after transplant, although one recipient (2%) died with a functioning graft 42 days after transplant because of respiratory failure secondary to volume overload, pneumonia, and procedure-associated tachyarrhythmia. One recipient (2%), who received tacrolimus, experienced acute antibody-mediated rejection. Nine recipients (15%) subsequently developed COVID-19; however, all cases occurred beyond 10 days after transplant and were determined not to be donor-derived. One recipient (2%), who did not have COVID-19, developed pulmonary embolism 52 days after transplant. Of 45 recipients who underwent SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing within 30 days after transplant, only one, who notably had a positive test before transplant, tested positive 6 days after transplant. This recipient was confirmed negative 12 days after transplant and never experienced COVID-19 symptoms. Except for 6-month eGFR (see below), post-transplant outcomes were similar between recipients from COVID-death donors and those from non-COVID–death donors.
Table 2.
Recipient outcomes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2–positive donor kidney transplantation
| Recipient Outcome | Total (n=61) |
|---|---|
| eGFR at 6 mo, ml/min per 1.73 m2 | 55 (21) |
| Delayed graft function, n (%) | 22 (36) |
| Length of hospital stay, d | 5 (4–6) |
| Graft loss within 6 mo, n (%) | 0 (0) |
| Death within 6 mo, n (%) | 1 (2) |
| Rejection within 6 mo, n (%) | 1 (2) |
| Post-transplant COVID-19 infection, n (%) | 9 (15) |
| Donor-derived COVID-19 infection, n (%) | 0 (0) |
| Post-transplant venous thromboembolism, n (%) | 1 (2) |
| Type of venous thromboembolism, n (%) | |
| Pulmonary embolism | 1 (100) |
| Time since transplant to venous thromboembolism, d | 52 |
| SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test within 30 d after transplant, n (%) a | |
| Positive | 1 (2) |
| Negative | 44 (98) |
| Time since transplant to testing, d | 7 (3–10) |
| Source of sample, n (%) | |
| Nasopharyngeal | 38 (84) |
| Blood | 3 (7) |
| Saliva | 4 (9) |
Values are expressed as mean (SD), median (interquartile range), or number (%). COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.
Data for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test within 30 days after transplant were available in 45 recipients.
Baseline Characteristics
Figure 1 shows the cohort generation. In the prematched cohort, 61 recipients of kidneys from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors were similar in age, race, and preemptive transplantation compared with 2517 recipients from SARS-CoV-2–negative donors (Table 3). Recipients in the SARS-CoV-2–infected donor group had lower cPRA and prior transplant frequency. KDPI was similar between groups; however, the SARS-CoV-2–infected donor group had a higher proportion of cardiac death and longer cold ischemia time. After matching, all adjusted characteristics were very well balanced with small standardized mean differences and similar distribution plots (Supplemental Figure 1).
Table 3.
Distribution of covariates used in the matching algorithm
| Characteristics | Pre-Match | Post-Match | Standardized Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Donor SARS-CoV-2–Positive (n=61) | Donor SARS-CoV-2–Negative (n=2517) | Donor SARS-CoV-2–Positive (n=61) | Donor SARS-CoV-2–Negative (n=183) | Pre-Match | Post-Match | |
| Recipient variables | ||||||
| Age, yr | 54 (13) | 52 (13) | 54 (13) | 54 (13) | −0.09799 | 0.00041 |
| Female, n (%) | 21 (34) | 1022 (41) | 21 (34) | 63 (34) | 0.12733 | 0 |
| Race—Black, n (%) | 32 (53) | 1363 (54) | 32 (53) | 96 (53) | 0.03379 | 0 |
| Transplant center, n (%) | ||||||
| Center 1 | 20 (33) | 631 (25) | 20 (33) | 60 (33) | −0.17004 | 0 |
| Center 2 | 9 (15) | 823 (33) | 9 (15) | 27 (15) | 0.43015 | 0 |
| Center 3 | 32 (53) | 1063 (42) | 32 (53) | 96 (53) | −0.20501 | 0 |
| Duration on dialysis, n (%) | ||||||
| Preemptive | 9 (15) | 370 (15) | 9 (15) | 27 (15) | −0.00152 | 0 |
| <1 yr | 4 (7) | 160 (6) | 4 (7) | 12 (7) | −0.00813 | 0 |
| 1–3 yr | 19 (31) | 576 (23) | 19 (31) | 57 (31) | −0.18604 | 0 |
| 3–5 yr | 19 (31) | 594 (24) | 19 (31) | 57 (31) | −0.16912 | 0 |
| >5 yr | 10 (16) | 817 (33) | 10 (16) | 30 (16) | 0.37938 | 0 |
| Cause of kidney failure, n (%) | ||||||
| Diabetes | 24 (39) | 879 (35) | 24 (39) | 72 (39) | −0.09122 | 0 |
| Hypertension | 15 (25) | 734 (29) | 15 (25) | 45 (25) | 0.10284 | 0 |
| Glomerulonephritis | 8 (13) | 236 (9) | 8 (13) | 24 (13) | −0.11797 | 0 |
| Cystic disease | 2 (3) | 138 (6) | 2 (3) | 6 (3) | 0.10749 | 0 |
| Other/missing | 12 (20) | 530 (21) | 12 (20) | 36 (20) | 0.03425 | 0 |
| Prior transplant | 3 (5) | 252 (10) | 3 (5) | 9 (5) | 0.19415 | 0 |
| Calculated PRA | 10.1 (27) | 19.8 (35) | 10.1 (27) | 10.2 (27) | 0.31156 | 0.00487 |
| Zero human leukocyte antigen mismatch | 1 (2) | 87 (4) | 1 (2) | 3 (2) | 0.11518 | 0 |
| Donor variables | ||||||
| Donation after cardiac death, n (%) | 19 (31) | 606 (24) | 19 (31) | 57 (31) | −0.15794 | 0 |
| Kidney Donor Profile Index, % | 42.1 (25) | 42.6 (26) | 42.1 (25) | 42.2 (25) | 0.01981 | 0.00699 |
| Kidney pumped, n (%) | 41 (67) | 1521 (60) | 41 (67) | 123 (67) | −0.14096 | 0 |
| Cold ischemia time, h | 23.0 (8.5) | 17.5 (8.1) | 23.0 (8.5) | 22.9 (7.9) | −0.65633 | −0.00973 |
Values are expressed as mean (SD) or number (%). SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; PRA, panel reactive antibody.
Six-Month Outcomes
Mean 6-month recipient eGFR was not significantly different between the well-matched SARS-CoV-2–infected and noninfected donor groups (55±21 and 57±25 ml/min per 1.73 m2, respectively; P = 0.61; Table 4). Six-month patient and graft survival were also not statistically different between groups. In the subgroup analysis, 6-month eGFR was not significantly different for recipients of kidneys from non-COVID–death donors (58±22 and 56±25 ml/min per 1.73 m2, respectively; P = 0.51; see Supplemental Tables 3 and 4 for covariate distributions). However, recipients from COVID-death donors had significantly lower 6-month eGFR compared with those from SARS-CoV-2–negative donors (46±17 and 58±27 ml/min per 1.73 m2, respectively; P = 0.03).
Table 4.
Recipient outcome comparison at 6 months after transplant
| Outcome | Donor SARS-CoV-2–Positive | Donor SARS-CoV-2–Negative | P Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary analysis (all recipients) | |||
| 6-mo eGFR, ml/min per 1.73 m2 | 55 (21) | 57 (25) | 0.61 |
| Graft loss within 6 mo, n (%) | 0 (0) | 1 (1) | 1.00 |
| Death within 6 mo, n (%) | 1 (2) | 2 (1) | 1.00 |
| Subgroup analysis | |||
| Recipients from non-COVID–death donors | |||
| 6-mo eGFR, ml/min per 1.73 m2 | 58 (22) | 56 (25) | 0.51 |
| Recipients from COVID-death donors | |||
| 6-mo eGFR, ml/min per 1.73 m2 | 46 (17) | 58 (27) | 0.03 |
P values were calculated using the generalized Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney rank-sum test (van Elteren test) for 6-month eGFR and the Fisher exact test for graft loss and death within 6 months. Values are expressed as mean (SD) or number (%). SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; COVID, coronavirus disease.
Discussion
In this multicenter study, we described the clinical experience of kidney transplantation from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors and compared 6-month eGFR between recipients of kidneys from otherwise very well-matched SARS-CoV-2–infected and noninfected donors. Short-term outcomes were acceptable. Six-month eGFR was comparable between groups, although recipients of COVID-death donor kidneys had significantly lower eGFR in subgroup analyses. Donor-derived SARS-CoV-2 infection was not observed in these recipients.
Graft and patient survival for recipients of SARS-CoV-2–infected donor kidneys were excellent, although one recipient died. In addition, 6-month eGFR was no different in recipients of these kidneys than recipients of well-matched SARS-CoV-2–negative donor kidneys. These results provide additional reassurance for using SARS-CoV-2–infected donor kidneys. Because of perceived risk, some transplant centers have only offered these kidneys to specific types of recipients (e.g., those who would have otherwise waited a long time to receive an organ offer).23 Our results suggest that SARS-CoV-2–infected donor kidneys can be used safely for recipients who have been vaccinated against COVID-19.
Risks of transplanting COVID-death donor kidneys, however, may be different from non-COVID–death donor kidneys. Six-month eGFR was significantly lower in recipients of COVID-death donor kidneys than matched SARS-CoV-2–negative counterparts, which is consistent with the report by Koval et al.23 While COVID-death donors were older, more likely donated after cardiac death, and had higher average KDPI than the non-COVID–death donors, median KDPI difference was only 9. These modest differences in graft quality may partly explain the worse graft function; however, severe COVID-19 that led to the death of these donors might have also caused some degree of kidney damage before procurement given that severe COVID-19 is associated with acute tubular injury26–29 and advanced interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy.30 Notably, the relatively normal terminal serum creatinine concentrations and low levels of reported glomerulosclerosis for these COVID-death donors were not necessarily associated with good graft function for all recipients in this cohort. Additional studies are needed to confirm and elucidate the likely causes of worse graft function in recipients of COVID-death donor kidneys.
Consistent with prior reports, we found no evidence of donor-to-recipient SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Most of the SARS-CoV-2–infected donors in this study had some evidence of active infection based on typical chest X-ray changes consistent with COVID-19, and the cycle threshold was as low as 12.5. As such, our results suggest that SARS-CoV-2–infected donor kidneys can be safely used even among donors with low cycle threshold values. While 49% of recipients received remdesivir prophylaxis, recent data suggest that peritransplant medical prophylaxis is unnecessary.23 Nonetheless, post-transplant general infection precautions are important given that eventually (more than 10 days after transplantation), 15% of recipients in this cohort developed COVID-19 despite all receiving pretransplant COVID-19 vaccination and arguably high anti-spike IgG positivity.
COVID-19 is associated with higher risk of thromboembolism.31 In fact, two SARS-CoV-2–infected donors in this study had developed pulmonary embolism before donation. Some transplant providers may be concerned that recipients of organs from SARS-CoV-2–infected donors are similarly at risk of thrombotic events, especially given that two of 26 kidney recipients developed venous thromboembolism in a previous report.16 With only one (pulmonary) thromboembolism in this study, which occurred 52 days after transplant in a recipient without COVID-19, we found no evidence for higher thromboembolic risk when using SARS-CoV-2–infected donor kidneys.
This prospective study has several strengths. First, we could confirm that most SARS-CoV-2–infected donors were not false positive but had COVID-19 on the basis of symptoms and imaging results. Second, we compared 6-month graft function between recipients of SARS-CoV-2–infected and negative donor kidneys with otherwise highly similar backgrounds using advanced matching methods to address confounding. We avoided the potential effect of between-center differences in transplant practice by selecting matched controls from the same centers. Finally, in addition to graft and patient survival, we evaluated other important outcomes (e.g., post-transplant COVID-19 development and thromboembolism) that are not available in large database-only studies.
Limitations for this study should also be considered. The sample size, especially the number of COVID-death donors, was relatively small. For this reason, we did not perform separate matching for the subgroup analysis. We included only three US centers. Thus, generalizability for all transplant centers and patient populations may be limited. Study data collection was limited to information that was recorded for usual patient care at each site. Thus, not all information of potential interest (e.g., post-transplant kidney biopsy, proteinuria, and all donor SARS-CoV-2 cycle thresholds) could be analyzed. In addition, because this observational study did not stipulate treatment or follow-up protocols, we cannot exclude the possibility of missed subclinical post-transplant COVID-19 and thromboembolic events.
In conclusion, our findings demonstrate excellent short-term outcomes in recipients of SARS-CoV-2–infected donor kidneys, with 6-month graft function comparable with that of SARS-CoV-2–negative donor kidneys. This study provides additional evidence that transplanting SARS-CoV-2–infected donor kidneys is safe and effective; however, additional studies are needed to further elucidate the risk of using kidneys from donors who specifically died of COVID-19.
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgments
The results of this paper have not been published previously in whole or part.
Footnotes
See related Patient Voice, “Should I Take a Transplant Kidney from a Person with COVID Infection?,” and editorial, “Kidney Transplantation from SARS-CoV-2–Infected Deceased Donors: Comfort or Caution in Contemporary Practice?,” on pages 1383–1384 and 1393–1395, respectively.
Disclosures
A. Azhar reports research funding from Eurofins Viracor. V. Balaraman reports research funding from Caredx and Natera and speakers bureau for Veloxis. A. Bhalla reports consultancy for CareDx, Natera, and Visterra. G. Gupta reports consultancy for CareDx; research funding from Merck Pharmaceuticals; honoraria from Alexion, CareDx, Mallinckrodt, Natera, and Veloxis; advisory or leadership role for Frontiers of Medicine; speakers bureau for Alexion, CareDx, Mallinckrodt, and Veloxis; and other interests or relationships with AST KPOP Executive Committee, AST Transplant Nephrology Fellowship Accreditation Committee, and National Kidney Foundation Virginia. I.E. Hall reports advisory or leadership roles as a UNOS Donor Management Goals Advisory Board member (unpaid), Donor Connect Organ Procurement Research Oversight Committee member (unpaid), and National Kidney Foundation member of the Transplant Advisory Committee and the Scientific Advisory Board (both unpaid). M.Z. Molnar reports consultancy for CareDx; honoraria from CareDx; and role on the Editorial Boards of the Clinical Kidney Journal, Frontiers in Medicine, the Journal of Renal Nutrition, International Urology and Nephrology, ISRN Nephrology, and Renal Failure. All remaining authors have to disclose.
Funding
This work was supported by NIH from K08DK127250 (V.S. Potluri).
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: Ambreen Azhar, Anshul Bhalla, Gaurav Gupta, Isaac E. Hall, Hannah Imlay, Miklos Z. Molnar, Junji Yamauchi.
Data curation: Ambreen Azhar, Vasanthi Balaraman, Anshul Bhalla, Isaac E. Hall, Miklos Z. Molnar, Divya Raghavan, Bekir Tanriover, Crystal Truax, Junji Yamauchi.
Formal analysis: Isaac E. Hall, Miklos Z. Molnar, Vishnu S. Potluri, Junji Yamauchi.
Funding acquisition: Miklos Z. Molnar.
Methodology: Isaac E. Hall, Miklos Z. Molnar, Vishnu S. Potluri, Divya Raghavan.
Project administration: Miklos Z. Molnar.
Supervision: Miklos Z. Molnar.
Writing – original draft: Isaac E. Hall, Miklos Z. Molnar, Junji Yamauchi.
Writing – review & editing: Ambreen Azhar, Talia Baker, Vasanthi Balaraman, Anshul Bhalla, Jeffrey Campsen, Gaurav Gupta, Hannah Imlay, Vishnu S. Potluri, Divya Raghavan, George Rofaiel, Bekir Tanriover, Crystal Truax, Michael Zimmerman.
Supplemental Material
This article contains the following supplemental material online at http://links.lww.com/CJN/B800.
Supplemental Table 1. Baseline characteristics of SARS-CoV-2–positive donor kidney transplant according to the donor cause of death.
Supplemental Table 2. Recipient outcomes of SARS-CoV-2–positive donor kidney transplantation according to the donor cause of death.
Supplemental Table 3. Distribution of matching covariates for the non-COVID–death donor group.
Supplemental Table 4. Distribution of matching covariates for the COVID-death donor group.
Supplemental Figure 1. Distribution of continuous variables used in the matching algorithm.
References
- 1.Nimmo A, Gardiner D, Ushiro-Lumb I, Ravanan R, Forsythe JLR. The global impact of COVID-19 on solid organ transplantation: two years into a pandemic. Transplantation. 2022;106(7):1312–1329. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004151 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Loupy A, Aubert O, Reese PP, Bastien O, Bayer F, Jacquelinet C. Organ procurement and transplantation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet. 2020;395(10237):e95–e96. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31040-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Cholankeril G Podboy A Alshuwaykh OS, et al. Early impact of COVID-19 on solid organ transplantation in the United States. Transplantation. 2020;104(11):2221–2224. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000003391 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Bock MJ, Vaughn GR, Chau P, Berumen JA, Nigro JJ, Ingulli EG. Organ transplantation using COVID-19-positive deceased donors. Am J Transplant. 2022;22(9):2203–2216. doi: 10.1111/ajt.17145 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Schold JD, Koval CE, Wee A, Eltemamy M, Poggio ED. Utilization and outcomes of deceased donor SARS-CoV-2–positive organs for solid organ transplantation in the United States. Am J Transplant. 2022;22(9):2217–2227. doi: 10.1111/ajt.17126 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Dhand A, Okumura K, Nabors C, Nishida S. Solid organ transplantation from COVID positive donors in the United States: analysis of united network for organ sharing database. Transpl Infect Dis. 2023;25(1):e13925. doi: 10.1111/tid.13925 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Gupta G, Azhar A, Gungor A, Molnar MZ, Morales MK, Tanriover B. Early data on utilization and discard of organs from COVID-19-infected donors: a US national registry analysis. Transplantation. 2022;106(5):e266–e268. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004091 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Kute VB Godara S Guleria S, et al. Is it safe to be transplanted from living donors who recovered from COVID-19? Experience of 31 kidney transplants in a multicenter cohort study from India. Transplantation. 2021;105(4):842–850. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000003609 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kute VB Ray DS Yadav DK, et al. A multicenter cohort study from India of 75 kidney transplants in recipients recovered after COVID-19. Transplantation. 2021;105(7):1423–1432. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000003740 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Neidlinger NA Smith JA D'Alessandro AM, et al. Organ recovery from deceased donors with prior COVID-19: a case series. Transpl Infect Dis. 2021;23(2):e13503. doi: 10.1111/tid.13503 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Koval CE, Poggio ED, Lin Y-C, Kerr H, Eltemamy M, Wee A. Early success transplanting kidneys from donors with new SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity: a report of 10 cases. Am J Transplant. 2021;21(11):3743–3749. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16765 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Puodziukaite L Serpytis M Kundrotaite A, et al. Kidney transplantation from a SARS-CoV-2-positive donor for the recipients with immunity after COVID-19. Transplant Infect Dis. 2021;23(4):e13666. doi: 10.1111/tid.13666 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Molnar MZ Hall IE Raghavan D, et al. Kidney transplantation from SARS-CoV-2–positive deceased donor. Am J Transplant. 2022;22(4):1280–1282. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16905 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Sanchez-Vivaldi JA Patel MS Shah JA, et al. Short-term kidney transplant outcomes from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 lower respiratory tract positive donors. Transplant Infect Dis. 2022;24(4):13890. doi: 10.1111/tid.13890 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Viana LA Cristelli MP Mendes Leite V, et al. Transplanting kidneys from donors with SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity in Brazil: early success under a detailed surveillance approach. Transplantation. 2022;106(12):e517–e519. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004353 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Azhar A Kleiboeker S Khorsandi S, et al. Detection of transmissible severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 from deceased kidney donors: implications for kidney transplant recipients. Transplantation. 2023;107(2):e65–e67. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004422 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Covarrubias K Brubaker AL Mekeel K, et al. Single-center experience on nonlung solid organ transplantation from SARS-CoV-2–positive donors. Transplantation. 2023;107(1):e41–e42. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004400 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Kaul DR Valesano AL Petrie JG, et al. Donor to recipient transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by lung transplantation despite negative donor upper respiratory tract testing. Am J Transplant. 2021;21(8):2885–2889. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16532 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Gaussen A Hornby L Rockl G, et al. Evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cells, tissues, and organs and the risk of transmission through transplantation. Transplantation. 2021;105(7):1405–1422. doi: 10.1097/tp.0000000000003744 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Kumar D, Humar A, Keshavjee S, Cypel M. A call to routinely test lower respiratory tract samples for SARS-CoV-2 in lung donors. Am J Transplant. 2021;21(7):2623–2624. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16576 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Stein SR Ramelli SC Grazioli A, et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection and persistence in the human body and brain at autopsy. Nature. 2022;612(7941):758–763. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05542-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Goldman JD Pouch SM Woolley AE, et al. Transplant of organs from donors with positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing: a report from the organ procurement and transplantation network ad hoc disease transmission advisory committee. Transpl Infect Dis. 2023;25(1):e14013. doi: 10.1111/tid.14013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Koval CE, Eltemamy M, Poggio ED, Schold JD, Wee AC. Comparative outcomes for over 100 deceased donor kidney transplants from SARS-CoV-2 positive donors: a single-center experience. Am J Transplant. 2022;22(12):2903–2911. doi: 10.1111/ajt.17203 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. Guide to Calculating & Interpreting KDPI. Accessed May 2, 2023 https://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/data/allocation-calculators/kdpi-calculator/learn-about-kdpi/ [Google Scholar]
- 25.Inker LA Eneanya ND Coresh J, et al. New creatinine- and cystatin C-based equations to estimate GFR without race. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(19):1737–1749. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2102953 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Robbins-Juarez SY Qian L King KL, et al. Outcomes for patients with COVID-19 and acute kidney injury: a systematic Review and meta-analysis. Kidney Int Rep. 2020;5(8):1149–1160. doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2020.06.013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Sharma P, Ng JH, Bijol V, Jhaveri KD, Wanchoo R. Pathology of COVID-19-associated acute kidney injury. Clin Kidney J. 2021;14(suppl 1):i30–i39. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfab003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Bowe B, Cai M, Xie Y, Gibson AK, Maddukuri G, Al-Aly Z. Acute kidney injury in a national cohort of hospitalized US veterans with COVID-19. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2021;16(1):14–25. doi: 10.2215/CJN.09610620 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Santoriello D Khairallah P Bomback AS, et al. Postmortem kidney pathology findings in patients with COVID-19. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2020;31(9):2158–2167. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2020050744 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Jansen J Reimer KC Nagai JS, et al. SARS-CoV-2 infects the human kidney and drives fibrosis in kidney organoids. Cell Stem Cell. 2022;29(2):217–231.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2021.12.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Wu C, Liu Y, Cai X, Zhang W, Li Y, Fu C. Prevalence of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019: a meta-analysis. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021;8:603558. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.603558 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]