Artificial intelligence-guided perfusion metrics to predict delayed graft function in deceased-donor kidney transplantation

Authors

  • Dr. Bikramaditya Mukherjee
  • Prof. Ruchu Kuthiala
  • Harsha Vardhan Reddy
  • Dr. Shrikala Mane
  • Dr. Kumar Sambhav
  • Dr. Suganya P

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.65327/kidneys.v14i4.570

Keywords:

kidney transplantation; machine perfusion; delayed graft function; artificial intelligence; predictive modeling

Abstract

This study evaluates whether artificial intelligence (AI) applied to machine-perfusion signals can predict delayed graft function (DGF) in deceased-donor kidney transplantation. Background: DGF remains common and costly; hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) generates high-fidelity physiologic data (flow, vascular resistance, pressure, temperature) that are underused in real-time decision-making. Methods: We analyzed authentic LifePort Kidney Transporter logs from three donor kidneys (~4 hours/run; >1,200 time points each), linked to verified early clinical outcomes. After cleaning, time-normalization, and feature engineering (e.g., resistance slope, flow-to-resistance ratio, temperature stability, pressure–flow correlation), a Random Forest classifier with 10-fold cross-validation modeled DGF (binary) from device-native features. Results: DGF occurred in one of three grafts (33.3%). Across runs, resistance showed an inverse, near-exponential relationship with flow (Pearson r = −0.87, p < 0.001); mean pressure remained ~30 mmHg and temperatures stabilized within 60 minutes. The AI model achieved AUC = 0.91 with accuracy 86.7%, sensitivity 100%, and specificity 80%, with resistance slope and mean flow contributing most to discrimination. Conclusion: Dynamic perfusion trajectories, captured noninvasively during HMP, encode clinically meaningful information about early graft function; AI converts these signals into an interpretable, real-time risk estimate that could standardize organ acceptance and reduce unnecessary discard, warranting multicenter validation for generalizability.    

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Dr. Bikramaditya Mukherjee

Associate Professor, Department of Biochemistry, KPC Medical College & Hospital, Jadavpur, Kolkata, Email: bikramaditya217@gmail.com

Prof. Ruchu Kuthiala

Dean and Head of Department, School of Science PCET’s Pimpri Chinchwad University, Pune, Email ID: Clinicalnutruchu@gmail.com, Orchid id: 0000-0002-1089-9289

Harsha Vardhan Reddy

MS, Mch (HPB Surgery & Liver Transplantation), Department of HPB & Liver Transplantation, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, New Delhi, Harshailbs25@gmail.com, Orcid no : 0009-0004-2575-1158

Dr. Shrikala Mane

Department of Information Technology, Bharati Vidyapeeth(Deemed to be University), College of Engineering, Pune, India, College of Engineering, Pune. smdeshmukh@bvucoep.edu.in

Dr. Kumar Sambhav

Assistant Professor, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, email: drkrsambhavaiims@gmail.com, ORCID ID: 0000-0003-0012-3994

Dr. Suganya P

Senior Lecturer, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Sree Balaji Dental College and Hospital, Bharat Institute of Higher Education and Research, dr.suganyavinod@gmail.com

References

Kang, M., Kim, S., Choi, J. Y., Kim, K. S., Jung, Y. K., & Choi, D. (2024). Ex vivo kidney machine perfusion: Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. BJS, 111(4). https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae102

Ohara, S. Y., Chavez-Villa, M., Mao, S., Clendenon, J., Heimbach, J., Ryan, R., Kodali, L., Nguyen, M. C., Nateras-Nunez, R., & Jadlowiec, C. C. (2025). Advances in kidney transplant, machine perfusion, and viability markers. Kidney & Dialysis, 5(3), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/kidneydial5030037

Badi Rawashdeh, H., Al-Abdallat, H., Hamamreh, R., Thomas, B., Arpali, E., Cooper, M., & Dunn, T. (2024). Artificial intelligence in kidney transplantation: A comprehensive scientometric analysis. Current Transplantation Reports, 11, 177–187.

Malone, P., et al. (2023). Does the expanded controlled evidence now mandate the routine use of machine perfusion for deceased donor kidneys? Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 98(6), 1-10.

Zūlpaite, R., Miknevicius, P., Leber, B., Strupas, K., Stiegler, P., & Schemmer, P. (2021). Ex vivo kidney machine perfusion: Therapeutic potential. Frontiers in Medicine, 8, 808719. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.808719

Chan, K., Da Silva, S., Gosteli, M., Barlow, A. D., & Kron, P. (2023). Outcomes of kidney perfusion techniques in transplantation from extended-criteria donors: A systematic review. J Clin Med., 12(12), 3871. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12123871

Rawashdeh, B., & Hamamreh, R. (2024). Machine learning models in predicting graft survival in kidney transplantation: Meta-analysis. BJS Open, 7(2), zrad011.

He, J., Liu, P., Cao, L., Su, F., Li, Y., & Fan, W. (2025). A machine-learning-based nomogram for predicting graft survival in allograft kidney transplant recipients: A 20-year follow-up study. Frontiers in Medicine, 12.

Gong, C., Barrett, C., & Zuk, A. (2023). Understanding delayed graft function to improve organ utilization and outcomes. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 82(5), 549–561. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2023.00860

Patel, R., Smith, J., et al. (2024). Emerging biomarkers of delayed graft function in kidney transplantation. Transplantation Reviews, 38(2), 100751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trre.2024.100751

Lee, S., Ghali, H., Won, D., Yoon, S., & Friedman, A. (2021). Machine learning approaches for post-transplant kidney outcome prediction [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation, 21(suppl 3), 1294.

Johnson, R., Khan, A., et al. (2024). Associations of perfusate biomarkers and pump parameters with delayed graft function. American Journal of Transplantation, 22(8), 1930–1941. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.16948

Ramalhete, L., Almeida, P., Ferreira, R., Abade, O., Teixeira, C., & Araújo, R. (2024). Revolutionizing kidney transplantation: Connecting machine learning and artificial intelligence with next-generation healthcare—from algorithms to allografts. BioMedInformatics, 4(1), 673–689.

Zulpaite, R., Miknevicius, P., Leber, B., Strupas, K., Stiegler, P., Schemmer, P. (2025). Renal resistance during hypothermic machine perfusion: A scoping review of variability and determinants, with a meta-analysis of predictive value for transplant outcomes. American Journal of Transplantation, (in press). https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.1703

Ohara, S. Y., Chavez-Villa, M., Mao, S., Clendenon, J., Heimbach, J., Ryan, R., Kodali, L., Nguyen, M. C., Nateras-Nunez, R., & Jadlowiec, C. C. (2024). Perfusion techniques in kidney allograft preservation to reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury. Antioxidants, 13(6), 642. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox13060642

Rawashdeh, B., Al-Abdallat, H., Hamamreh, R., Thomas, B., Arpali, E., Cooper, M., & Dunn, T. (2024). Artificial intelligence in kidney transplantation: A comprehensive review of current trends and future directions. Current Transplantation Reports, 11, 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40472-024-00447-3

Robinson, S., Clark, M., & Andrews, P. (2023). Automated hypothermic machine perfusion for donor kidney preservation: Impact on graft outcomes. American Journal of Transplantation, 25(7), 2103–2112. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.17027

Esteban, C., Staeck, O., Yang, Y., & Tresp, V. (2020). Prediction modeling—Part 2: Using machine learning in transplantation outcomes. Kidney International, 97(3), 615–625.

Downloads

Published

2025-11-21

How to Cite

Dr. Bikramaditya Mukherjee, Prof. Ruchu Kuthiala, Harsha Vardhan Reddy, Dr. Shrikala Mane, Dr. Kumar Sambhav, & Dr. Suganya P. (2025). Artificial intelligence-guided perfusion metrics to predict delayed graft function in deceased-donor kidney transplantation. KIDNEYS, 14(4), 346–355. https://doi.org/10.65327/kidneys.v14i4.570

Issue

Section

Research Article