ASN's Mission

To create a world without kidney diseases, the ASN Alliance for Kidney Health elevates care by educating and informing, driving breakthroughs and innovation, and advocating for policies that create transformative changes in kidney medicine throughout the world.

learn more

Contact ASN

1401 H St, NW, Ste 900, Washington, DC 20005


The Latest on Twitter

Kidney Week

Abstract: SA-OR009

Characteristics and Outcomes of Deceased Donor Kidney Transplants Performed in the US Based on Donor HCV NAT and Recipient HCV Ab Status

Session Information

Category: Transplantation

  • 1802 Transplantation: Clinical


  • Ariyamuthu, Venkatesh Kumar, UT Southwestern, Richardson, Texas, United States
  • Keceli, Cagla, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Tanriover, Bekir, UT Southwestern, Richardson, Texas, United States
  • Sandikci, Burhaneddin, University of Chicago, CHICAGO, Illinois, United States
  • Zhong, Yuan, University of Chicago, Booth School of Business, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • AbdulRahim, Nashila, UT Southwestern, Richardson, Texas, United States
  • La Hoz, Ricardo M., UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, United States

HCV nucleic acid testing (NAT) testing for deceased donors has become routine since April 2014. Comparative outcomes of deceased donor renal transplants (DDRT) based on HCV NAT and antibody (Ab) testing in different donor-recipient pairs are not well known.


We queried the UNOS dataset for DDRT performed between April 2015 and September 2017. Pediatric age, multiorgan transplants, and cases with unknown HCV NAT / Ab status were excluded. The final study cohort (N=27,930) were stratified into 4 groups: 1) Donor (D) Ab-/NAT- Recipient (R) Ab- (reference group, n=27,070); 2) D Ab+/NAT- R Ab- (n=133); 3) D Ab+ / NAT+ R Ab- (n=65); 4) D Ab+/NAT+ R Ab+ (n=662). A propensity score was calculated based on donor KDPI, recipient age, race, and underlying kidney diagnosis. An exact propensity score matching was performed 1:4 ratio between the reference group and other 3 stratified groups. Primary outcomes were overall allograft survival (failure defined as death or graft failure), acute rejection at 1 year and DGF.


The results are shown in Table 1.


HCV NAT + kidneys do have similar outcomes compared to NAT negative donors. Utilization of HCV NAT + kidneys should be encouraged.

Characteristics and outcomes of DDRT based on HCV NAT and Ab testing
 DAb-/NAT- RAb-
DAb+/NAT- RAb-
D Ab+/NAT+ RAb-
D Ab+/NAT+ RAb+
P-value 4-way
Donor age, mean(SD)38.8 ±15.836.7±11.732.4±8.632.6±8.2<0.001
Donor gender, male %61.448.961.567.8<0.001
Donor race, White %67.690.292.384.3<0.001
DCD donor %<0.001
ECD donor, %13.5601.5<0.001
KDPI, %47±2657±1949±1549±16<0.001
Recipient age, mean (SD)518±13.557.8±10.860.1±7.559.8±7.7<0.001
Recipient gender, male %61.448.961.567.8<0.001
Recipient race, White %36.837.647.726.1<0.001
ESRD diagnosis, DM %2633.836.939.4<0.001
Dialysis duration>3 yr, %70.368.414.341<0.001
Transplant factors and outcomes     
CIT, hr17.9±8.719.8±7.320.7±8.618.4±8<0.001
National allocation, %16.360.255.448.8<0.001
Length of stay, days6.4±7.26.1±5.16.4±5.76.1±4.9<0.001
HLA mismatch >3, %71817383<0.001
Acute rejection at one-year, %4.401.53.6<0.001
Propensity matched overall graft survival at one year, %93.789.798.194<0.001
DGF, %28.717.323.118.9<0.001