Paired Analysis of Outcomes After Kidney Transplantation in Peritoneal and Hemodialysis Patients.

BACKGROUND: The impact of dialysis modality before kidney transplantation (hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis) on outcomes is not clear. In this study we retrospectively analyzed the impact of dialysis modality on posttransplant follow-up. METHODS: To minimize donor bias, a paired kidney analysis was applied. One hundred thirty-three pairs of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) patients were transplanted at our center between 1994 and 2016. Those who received kidneys from the same donor were included in the study. HD patients were significantly older (44 vs 48 years), but the Charlson Comorbidity Index was similar (3.12 vs 3.46) in both groups. The groups did not differ significantly with respect to immunosuppressive protocols and number of mismatches (2.96 vs 2.95). RESULTS: One-year patient (98% vs 96%) and graft (90% vs 93%) survival was similar in the PD and HD patient groups. The Kaplan-Meier curves of the patients and graft survival did not differ significantly. Delayed graft function (DGF) and acute rejection (AR) occurred significantly more often in the HD recipients. Graft vessel thrombosis resulting in graft loss occurred in 9 PD (6.7%) and 4 HD (3%) patients (P > .05). Serum creatinine concentration and estimated glomerular filtration rate (using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease guidelines) showed no difference at 1 month, 1 year, and at final visit. On multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with graft loss were graft vessel thrombosis, DGF, and graft function 1 month after transplantation. On univariate analysis, age, coronary heart disease, and graft loss were associated with death. Among these factors, only coronary heart disease (model 1) and graft loss were significant predictors of death on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The long-term outcome for renal transplantation is similar in patients with PD and HD. These groups differ in some aspects, however, such as susceptibility to vascular thrombosis in PD patients, and to DGF and AR in HD patients.

New-onset Diabetes Mellitus After Kidney Transplantation-A Paired Kidney Analysis.

BACKGROUND: New-onset diabetes mellitus (NODAT) is a severe complication after kidney transplantation. It is associated with increased risk of graft failure, cardiovascular disease, mortality and infections. METHODS: We retrospectively (partially using the registry database) analyzed risk factors and clinical consequences of NODAT in patients after kidney transplantation performed at the University Transplant Centre between 2001 and 2016. To minimize the donor variability and bias, a paired kidney analysis was applied. Diabetes was defined as the need for insulin therapy for a minimum 30 days after transplantation. RESULTS: The incidence of NODAT was 7.6% (109 of 1424), but only 74 patients with NODAT had their pairs of patients without NODAT, who received kidneys from the same donor and were included to the analysis. The NODAT group was older, and with a significantly higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (2.97 vs 3.39; P = .02). The groups did not differ significantly with respect to immunosuppressive protocols and number of mismatches (2.65 vs 2.78). The incidence of acute rejection (AR; not biopsy proven) was significantly higher in the NODAT group (30% vs 13%), but the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) was similar (40%). Creatinine concentration and estimated glomerular filration rate (using the Modified Diet in End-stage Renal Disease equation) 1-month after kidney transplantation did not differ: 1.5 vs 1.54 mg/dL and 49.3 vs 50.2 mL/min, respectively. Body mass index (BMI) was higher in the NODAT group. On multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with NODAT were: age; AR; Charlson Comorbidity Index; and pretransplant dialysis time. BMI was higher in the NODAT group. NODAT was not a predictor of early graft loss and patient survival in the short-term analysis. CONCLUSION: AR, older age, higher comorbidity index, and BMI were risk factors for NODAT. We did not identify an influence of NODAT on early graft function and loss, but further analysis with a longer follow-up is necessary.

Clinical Consequences of Diabetes Mellitus in Patients After Kidney Transplantation: A Paired Kidney Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) has been acknowledged as the most common disorder leading to end-stage renal failure in adults. Diabetic patients show higher survival rates after kidney transplantation (KTx) compared with dialysis therapy. The aim of the study was to evaluate follow-up after KTx in patients with DM as a reason of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), or with long-lasting diabetes before transplantation, compared with patients without DM. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical consequences of DM in patients after KTx performed at the Gdansk Transplantation Centre between 2000 and 2016. To minimize donor bias, a paired kidney analysis was applied. RESULTS: The incidence of DM (types 1 and 2) was 13%; 145 patients with DM had pairs of nondiabetic patients, who received kidneys from the same donor and were included to the analysis. The DM group was older. The incidence of AR was similar among the 2 groups, DGF was observed more often in patients with diabetes. Kidney graft function 1 month after transplantation was equal in both groups (mean serum creatinine concentration 1.4 mg/dL). Five-year patient survival was better in the non-DM group (96.7% vs 81.5%). Kaplan-Meier survival curves did not differ significantly between the DM and non-DM groups. DM was not associated graft loss. In the univariate analysis age was the only factor associated with death. CONCLUSION: Diabetic patient survival after KTx seems to be worse than in patients without diabetes, but generally the follow-up among diabetics is good, with graft survival similar to that observed in patients without DM.

Ureteric Stenting in Kidney Transplant Recipients, Gdansk Centre Experience, Poland.

BACKGROUND: The role of ureteric stenting in kidney transplant recipients is still debatable. Stenting can reduce the incidence of urine leaks and ureter stenosis, but can be also associated with specific complications, particularly urinary tract infections (UTIs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: To estimate the influence of ureteric stenting on urological complications in kidney transplantation (KTx), we retrospectively analyzed all KTx performed between January 2011 and December 2016 in Gdansk Transplantation Centre, a total of 628 patients. Ureteric stenting was used in 502 patients (80%)-double-J (DJ) group. Catheters were implanted during the surgical procedure and left in situ for a mean time of 30 days. RESULT: The frequency of urinary leaks was 10 times higher in patients without stenting (10%). Ureter stenosis was also more frequent in the non-DJ group (8.7% vs 1.6%, P < .05). Multiple-regression modeling showed that the urinary not stenting was a risk factor for urinary leak (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0,1; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03-0.26; P < .01), ureter stenosis (AOR = 0,16; 95% CI: 0.06-0.41; P < .01), and generally reoperation after KTx (AOR = 0,46; 95% CI: 0.28-0.77; P < .01). Acute rejection and delayed graft function were equal in both groups. Mean serum creatinine concentration 1 month after transplantation was similar in both groups (1.5 mg/dL in the DJ group and 1.44 mg/dL in the non-DJ group, P > .05). UTIs were more frequent in the DJ group (22.1% vs 16.7%), but the difference was not significant. Time of hospitalization was longer in patients with UTI (34 vs 22 days, P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Ureteric stenting can protect patients from most frequent urological complications like urine leaks and ureter stenosis. The influence of ureteric stenting on UTI development is not strong in our material.

Psychological Well-Being in Patients After Preemptive Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Preemptive kidney transplantation (PKT) is associated with improved patient and graft survival as compared with transplantation in previously dialyzed patients. Complications related to dialysis are avoided in preemptively transplanted patients. Psychological functioning of those patients is still under investigation. The aim of the study was to evaluate the acceptance of illness, satisfaction of life, and anxiety in patients preemptively transplanted (PET) and transplanted after dialysis (PTD). METHODS: The present study compares 23 pairs of PET and PTD patients after kidney transplantation from the same donor. Each patient completed a set of psychological questionnaires: Acceptance of Illness Scale, Satisfaction With Life Scale, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Pairs were examined in the same moment, from 7 days to 5 years after transplantation. The PET and PTD groups did not differ significantly in respect to sex, underlying renal diseases, incidence of acute rejection, surgical complications, and graft function. More PTD patients had delayed graft function (P < .05). RESULTS: The statistical analysis revealed a significant lower acceptance of illness as well as satisfaction with life in PET recipients (P < .05). The groups differed significantly in the trait of anxiety but not in the state of anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Although the medical benefits of PKT are widely known, numerous psychological problems may occur in patients who do not have difficulties of dialysis and who after transplantation are faced with unexpected discomfort, which influences psychological well-being. Further effort should focus on providing psychological support during qualification to the transplantation and in follow-up after surgery.

Treatment of the Lymphocele After Kidney Transplantation: A Single-center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Lymphocele is one of the most common complications after kidney transplantation. It is usually asymptomatic, but can cause pressure on the kidney transplant, ureter, bladder, and adjacent vessels with deterioration of graft function, ipsilateral leg edema, and external iliac vein thrombosis. Peritoneal fenestration is a well-established method for treatment. In this report, we present the incidence of symptomatic lymphocele requiring treatment (LRT), demographic and surgical factors that influenced lymphocele formation, its clinical presentation, and 2 types of treatment: open and laparoscopic intraperitoneal drainage in the experience of our center. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all kidney transplantations performed between January 2007 and December 2014 in Gdansk Transplantation Center (n = 740) and selected patients with LRT. LRT occurred in 59 cases (8%). All other patients transplanted during the same time (n = 681) were treated as a control group in the univariate and multivariate analysis of risk factors of the lymphocele formation. RESULTS: Surgical intraperitoneal drainage was performed in an open method in 53 cases and laparoscopically in 6 patients. We observed recurrence of lymphocele in 11 cases (18.6%). Acute rejection episodes (ARE) and delayed graft function (DGF) were more frequent in patients with LRT. ARE and age were independent risk factors for LRT in multivariate analysis. The mean estimated glomerular filtration rate by the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease method at 1 month after the fenestration was higher than before the operation (51.7 and 43.6 mL/min, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Fenestration is a safe and effective method of treatment of symptomatic lymphocele. ARE, DGF, and older age were associated with a greater risk of LRT.

Candida arteritis in kidney transplant recipients: case report and review of the literature.

Multi-organ procurement is a risk factor for contamination of preservation fluid with intestinal flora including fungi (e.g., Candida). Transmission of fungal species to the graft vessel can cause mycotic arteritis. This is a very rare but life-threatening complication of renal transplantation. We present 2 cases of renal transplant recipients from the same multi-organ donor. Both recipients suffered from severe hemorrhages from renal graft anastomosis and renal artery pseudoaneurysm due to Candida albicans arteritis (CAA). The culture of the preservation fluid revealed growth of Escherichia coli, but neither preservation fluid nor multiple routine blood cultures performed before hemorrhagic complications revealed fungal growth (media non-selective for fungal growth were applied). The first recipient suffered from sudden severe hemorrhage in the area of graft anastomosis on day 10 post surgery (without any preceding clinical or radiological symptoms). This led to urgent surgery and graftectomy, which was complicated by cardio-respiratory arrest with resuscitation in the operating room; despite resuscitation, irreversible brain damage, and subsequent death occurred in the intensive care unit (ICU) 2 weeks later (on day 24 after transplantation). The second patient underwent urgent vascular surgery on day 22 (after transplantation), because of hemorrhage from a pseudoaneurysm of the graft artery. She required repeated vascular operations, extended antimicrobial and antifungal therapy, and ICU monitoring and, despite these interventions, she died on day 80 after transplantation as a result of Pseudomonas aeruginosa sepsis. Arteritis of the renal artery in both patients was caused by C. albicans. This was confirmed by histopathology: infiltration of renal artery with budding yeast forming pseudohyphae (Case 1), and the presence of C. albicans in the culture of the renal artery and surrounding tissue (Case 2). We conclude that organ preservation solution should be cultured with use of media selective for fungal growth. As soon as the positive culture is detected, appropriate measures protecting patients against CAA should be undertaken.

Preemptive kidney transplantation: analysis of kidney grafts from the same donor.

BACKGROUND: From November 2003 to December 2012, in the Gdansk Center, 64 patients received preemptive transplantation (PET). PET comprised 8% of 794 kidney transplantations performed during this time. The benefits for individual patients and for the health care system are discussed. METHODS: This study compares the outcomes of these PET patients who had their kidney pairs transplanted after a variable duration of dialysis (PTD), a total of 51 pairs. RESULTS: The mean Charlson comorbidity index was 2.57 vs 3.04 (P > .05) for the PET and PTD groups, respectively. Both groups did not differ significantly with respect to 1-year patient and graft survivals, and incidences of acute rejection. Five (9.8%) PET patients and 20 (39%) PTD patients experienced delayed graft function (P < .05). The graft function (serum creatinine/4p MDRD) 1 year after transplantation was similar in both groups (1.42/53.7 vs 1.43/57.4; mg/dL/mL/min/1.73 m(2)). More PET patients continued normal professional activities or education before and after transplantation (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Our single-center results confirmed that for both medical and socioeconomic reasons, PET is an optimal mode of renal replacement therapy.

Generic formulation of mycophenolate mofetil (Myfenax) in de novo renal transplant recipients: results of 12-month observation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to show the preliminary outcomes of transplantation in patients treated with the generic formulation of mycophenolate mofetil (Myfenax, Teva). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over the past 4 years, 60 patients received generic mycophenolate mofetil (Myfenax) after renal transplantation at the Gdansk Transplantology Center. During the same time period, another 273 kidney transplantations were performed in our department, and these patients were treated with other formulations of mycophenolate (CellCept [Roche], Myfortic, or mycophenolate mofetil-Apotex) as a part of the immunosuppressive plan. Thirty of the Myfenax patients received a pair of kidneys from the same donor and received original mycophenolate mofetil CellCept with observation for at least 12 months. RESULTS: The outcomes of the renal transplantations in both groups (Myfenax vs pair) were good, with satisfactory function of grafts. One case of graft loss was reported in the Myfenax group (renal vein thrombosis, graftectomy 5 days after transplantation). There was no difference in the incidence of acute renal graft rejection in either group. Moderate adverse reactions to immunosuppression were observed in both groups. On the other hand, a comparison between the 60 patients with Myfenax and the 273 other patients with other formulations of mycophenolate revealed no differences in the incidence of acute renal graft rejection, delayed graft function, graft loss, and death. CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in the incidence of acute renal graft rejection, delayed graft function, graft loss, and death in patients with Myfenax vs original CellCept and other formulations of mycophenolate. To confirm its complete biological and pharmacokinetic equivalence with the reference medicine, long-term, randomized observations carried out on larger renal transplant patients groups are needed.