Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Supplemental oxygen during hypothermic kidney preservation: A systematic review

  • Consortium for Organ preservation in Europe (COPE)
  • , J.M. O'Callaghan*
  • , K.T. Pall
  • , L.H.M. Pengel
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • University of London
  • University of Oxford
  • The Royal College of Surgeons of England
  • London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We reviewed the evidence for ex-vivo Supplemental Oxygen during Hypothermic preservation (SOH) for deceased donor kidneys. Bibliographic databases were searched for human and animal studies of SOH in kidney transplantation reporting on patient or animal survival rate, discard rate, technical complications or renal function outcomes. We make special reference to a specific subgroup: supplemental oxygen applied during cold perfusion, referred to as Hypothermic Oxygenated Perfusion (HOP). Four human and 25 animal studies were identified. The data present conflicting results but suggest that the effects of oxygen on restoring kidney function during preservation may be of value for DCD kidneys and/or kidneys that have undergone a period of hypotension, warm ischemia or poor perfusion in the donor. There is very little information available from human or animal studies. This work highlights to the transplant community that far more high quality clinical studies are required to understand this technology and its role before widespread clinical introduction.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)172-179
Number of pages8
JournalTransplantation Reviews
Volume31
Issue number3
Early online date17 Feb 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2017
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Supplemental oxygen during hypothermic kidney preservation: A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this