Use of Machine Perfusion to Increase the Number of Expanded Criteria Deceased Donor Kidney Transplants: A Pharmacoeconomic Analysis
- PMID: 38988688
- PMCID: PMC11230806
- DOI: 10.1097/TXD.0000000000001668
Use of Machine Perfusion to Increase the Number of Expanded Criteria Deceased Donor Kidney Transplants: A Pharmacoeconomic Analysis
Abstract
Background: The discard of expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys is unacceptably high, considering the growing demand for transplantation. Using machine perfusion may reduce the discard rate, increase the number of transplants, and reduce mortality on the waiting list.
Methods: We developed a 5-y Markov model to simulate incorporating the pulsatile perfusion machine into the current government-funded healthcare system. The model compared the universal use of static cold storage for all kidneys with the selective use of machine perfusion for ECD kidneys. Real-life data were used to compose the cohort characteristics in this model. This pharmacoeconomic analysis aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness and budgetary impact of using machine perfusion to preserve ECD kidneys.
Results: Compared with the universal use of static cold storage, the use of machine perfusion for ECD kidneys was associated with an increase in the number of kidney transplants (n = 1123), a decrease in the number of patients on the waiting list (n = 815), and decrease in mortality (n = 120), with a cost difference of US dollar 4 486 009 in the period. The budget impact analysis revealed an additional cost of US dollar 4 453 749 >5 y. The budget impact analysis demonstrated a progressive reduction in costs, becoming cost-saving during the last year of the analysis.
Conclusions: This stochastic model showed that incorporating machine perfusion for ECD kidneys is most often a dominant or cost-effective technology associated with an increase in the number of transplants and a reduction in the number of patients on the waiting list, reducing mortality on the waiting list.
Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Conflict of interest statement
During the study, T.R.d.M.A., H.T.S.J., and M.C.M.F. report grants from Organ Recovery. M.C.M.F. is the scientific director of AxiaBio Life Sciences International, a consultancy company that provides various work to distinct healthcare stakeholders. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Figures
References
-
- Tonelli M, Wiebe N, Knoll G, et al. . Systematic review: kidney transplantation compared with dialysis in clinically relevant outcomes. Am J Transplant. 2011;11:2093–2109. - PubMed
-
- Gouveia D, Bignelli AT, Hokazono SR, et al. . Analysis of economic impact between the modality of renal replacement therapy. J Bras Nefrol. 2017;39:162–171. - PubMed
-
- Querard AH, Foucher Y, Combescure C, et al. . Comparison of survival outcomes between expanded criteria donor and standard criteria donor kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Transpl Int. 2016;29:403–415. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources