Early Post-transplant Lymphoproliferative Disease in the Donor Ureter Without Systemic Involvement: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease is a serious complication of renal transplantation. Major risk factors include Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) seronegativity and induction immunosuppression with lymphocyte-depleting agents. RESULTS: We present a case of a 50-year year-old woman with very early onset PTLD confined to the donor ureter. Phenotypic studies on the tumor material reveal that the lymphoma was most likely of donor origin. A complete staging workup including the kidney allograft was negative for any other sites of involvement. CONCLUSIONS: This case, which had a fatal outcome, emphasizes the risk of renal transplantation in BV-negative individuals when given induction with lymphocyte-depleting drugs.

Cost-utility analysis of living-donor kidney transplantation followed by pancreas transplantation versus simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation.

For a type I diabetic with end-stage renal disease, the choice between a kidney-alone transplant from a living-donor (KA-LD) and a simultaneous pancreas kidney (SPK) transplant remains a difficult one. The prevailing practice seems to favor KA-LD over SPK, presumably due to the superior long-term renal graft survival in KA-LD and the elimination of the lengthy waiting time on the cadaver transplant list. In this study, two treatment options, KA-LD followed by pancreas-after-kidney (PAK) and SPK transplant, are compared using a cost-utility decision analysis model. The decision tree consisted of a choice between KA-LD + PAK and SPK. The analysis was based on a 5-yr model and the measures of outcome used in the model were cost, utility and cost-utility. The expected 5-yr cost was $277,638 for KA-LD + PAK and $288,466 for SPK. When adjusted for utilities, KA-LD + PAK at a cost of $153,911 was less cost-effective than SPK at a cost of $110,828 per quality-adjusted year. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed by varying patient and graft survival probabilities, utilities and cost. SPK remained the optimal strategy over KA-LD + PAK across all variations. Two-way sensitivity analysis showed that in order for KA-LD + PAK to be at least as cost-effective as SPK, 5-yr pancreas and patient survival rates following PAK would need to surpass 86 and 80%. In conclusion, according to the 5-yr cost-utility model presented in this study, KA-LD followed by PAK is less cost-effective than SPK as a treatment strategy for a type I diabetic with end-stage renal disease. For patients interested in the benefits of a pancreas transplant, it would be reasonable to offer SPK as the optimal treatment, even if a living kidney donor is available.

Donor liver selection. The South-Eastern Organ Procurement Foundation Liver Committee.

Changes in donor liver allotment will not generate more organs. At this time, diverse training and experience are all that guide donor organ selection. Donor variables are now recognized to influence patient and graft survival at 1 year and beyond. Little is known about the molecular biology of hepatic ischemia/reperfusion that might enable informed donor preparation and selection. This study of South-Eastern Organ Procurement Foundation liver transplant centers identifies differences among liver transplant surgeons in donor assessment as issues for further consideration. Sixteen of 25 centers responded. A 170 mEq/L donor serum sodium was the upper limit for acceptance. Selection based on donor vasopressor use lacked uniformity. Preimplantation donor liver biopsy was used selectively, and the maximum acceptable fat content was 30 per cent for most centers. Donor hospitalization for more than 7 days was considered a negative factor by all groups. Surprisingly, five centers were not using donor livers testing positive for hepatitis C. This study points to the great variability in the assessment of organ donors. Greater consensus in this area could lead to increased organ use and/or less retransplantation, a net gain in organ economy.

Treatment strategies for insulin-dependent diabetics with ESRD: a cost-effectiveness decision analysis model.

Clinical decision analysis has become an important tool for evaluating specific clinical scenarios and exploring public health policy issues. A decision analysis model that incorporates patient preferences regarding various outcomes, as well as cost, may be particularly informative in patients with type I diabetes and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Such a model that includes pancreas transplantation as a treatment choice has not been performed and is presented in this study. The decision tree consisted of a choice between four possible treatment strategies: dialysis, kidney-alone transplant from a cadaver (KA-CAD) or living donor (KA-LD), and simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplant. The analysis was based on a 5-year model, and the measures of outcome used in the model were cost and cost adjusted for quality of life. The measure of preference for quality of life was obtained using the "Standard Reference Gamble" method in 17 SPK transplant recipients who underwent transplantation between January, 1992 and June, 1996 at our center. The measures for various outcome states (mean +/- 1 SD) were dialysis-free/insulin-free = 1, dialysis-free/insulin-dependent = 0.6 (0.4 to 0.8), dialysis-dependent/insulin-free = 0.5 (0.36 to 0.64), dialysis-dependent/insulin-dependent = 0.4 (0.21 to 0.59), and death = 0. The expected 5-year costs for each of the treatment strategies in the model were dialysis, $216,068; KA-CAD transplant, $214,678; KA-LD transplant, $210,872; and SPK transplant, $241,207. The expected cost per quality-adjusted year for each of the treatment strategies in the model were dialysis, $317,746; KA-CAD transplant, $156,042; KA-LD transplant, $123,923; and SPK transplant, $102,422. SPK transplantation remained the optimal strategy after varying survival probabilities, costs, and utilities over plausible ranges by means of one-way sensitivity analysis. In conclusion, according to the 5-year cost-utility model presented in this study, SPK transplantation is the most cost-effective treatment strategy for a patient with type I diabetes and ESRD. From a policy standpoint, looking at the cost alone of pancreas transplantation is deceiving. In these patients, who may view various outcome states differently, it would be important to take into account cost adjusted for quality of life when evaluating this procedure.

Assessment of function and survival as measures of renal graft outcome following kidney and kidney-pancreas transplantation in type I diabetics.

Reports on renal graft outcome after kidney-alone (KA) and simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplants have focused on graft survival instead of function. The aim of this study is to compare renal graft outcome after KA and SPK using graft function and survival as the measures of outcome. The records of 102 transplants performed in type I diabetics from 10/90 to 9/96 were reviewed (SPK 42, KA 60). Serum creatinine (Cr) and calculated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were used as estimates of graft function. Cr were similar in SPK and KA on day 3 (4.8 +/- 2.9 vs. 4.8 +/- 2.8 mg/dl, P = 0.9) and day 7 (2.5 +/- 1.8 vs. 3.0 +/- 2.5 mg/dl, P = 0.3). GFR was higher KA at 6 months (57 +/- 18 vs. 51 +/- 12 ml/min, P = 0.08), 1 yr (55 +/- 23 vs. 51 +/- 11 ml/min, P = 0.4) and 3 yr (60 +/- 22 vs. 42 +/- 16 ml/min, P = 0.03). Kidney graft survival was similar in KA and SPK at 1 and 5 yr (87% vs. 89% and 44% vs. 47%, P = 0.8). Immunologic failure of the renal graft occurred more frequently in SPK (58% vs. 48%, P = 0.04) whereas death with function was more common in KA (33% vs. 17%, P = 0.04). In KA, risk factors for failure of the renal graft included acute rejection (P = 0.008, relative risk or rr = 3.4) and African American recipient (P = 0.06, rr = 2.8). In SPK, risk factors included donor age > 40 yr (P = 0.05, rr = 5.3) and African American donor (P = 0.03, rr = 4.5). Logistic regression analysis revealed the following risk factors for GFR < 50 ml/min at 1 yr: acute rejection (P = 0.03, rr = 2.2) and Cr > 3 mg/dl on day 7 (P = 0.06, rr = 2.3). In conclusion, although renal graft survival was similar after KA and SPK, better graft function was observed in KA at 3 yr. Assessment of renal graft function allows us to evaluate outcome from a different perspective than graft survival, and these two measures of outcome complement each other.

Primary enteric drainage of the pancreas allograft revisited.

BACKGROUND: Historically, primary enteric drainage (ED) of exocrine secretions in pancreas allografts was associated with a poor outcome, mostly as a result of infectious complications. On the other hand, bladder drainage (BD), which is presently used in the majority of institutions, is associated with substantial urologic morbidity. The aim of this study is to reassess the role of primary ED by reviewing our experience with ED versus BD in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantations. STUDY DESIGN: The records of all pancreas-kidney transplantations performed between October 1990 and September 1996 were reviewed (n = 42). Enteric drainage was used in the last 16 (38%) and BD in the first 26 (62%). The BD and ED groups were comparable with respect to donor and recipient characteristics. RESULTS: Length of stay for the transplantation (mean +/- standard deviation) was significantly shorter with ED than with BD (12.9 +/- 5.6 versus 20.4 +/- 9.6 days, p = 0.007). The total number of readmissions (1.7 +/- 1.5 versus 1.2 +/- 1.2 days, p = 0.2) and the length of hospital stay in the first 6 months after discharge (13.7 +/- 16.2 versus 10 +/- 11.3 days, p = 0.4) were similar between BD and ED. Complications requiring admission were distributed as follows in BD and ED recipients: recurrent/persistent urinary complications (46% versus 6%, p = 0.01), dehydration (27% versus 6%, p = 0.05), symptomatic graft pancreatitis (8% versus 6%, p = 0.9), gastrointestinal disturbance (27% versus 12%, p = 0.1), and wound infection (12% versus 19%, p = 0.5). The duration of the operative procedure was shorter in ED than in BD (4.3 +/- 0.9 versus 5.4 +/- 0.8 hours, p = 0.01). Reoperation during the initial transplantation stay was necessary in 23% of the patients having BD, compared with none having ED (p = 0.04). Similarly, fewer ED patients underwent reoperations compared with BD patients in the first 6 months after discharge (38% versus 69%, p = 0.04). Hospital charges for ED were lower than for BD for the initial admission ($73,458 +/- 17,103 versus $107,193 +/- 32,965, p = 0.001). Actuarial patient (96% versus 94%, p = 0.6), kidney (85% versus 87%, p = 0.9), and technically successful pancreas (90% versus 85%, p = 0.6) survival rates at 1 year were similar for BD and ED. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that, compared with BD, ED is associated with less morbidity and shorter hospitalization without compromising outcome. Primary ED is a viable alternative to BD in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation. More clinical experience with careful cost-effectiveness analysis is needed to better assess the implications of primary ED.

Effect of race on outcome following kidney and kidney-pancreas transplantation in type I diabetics: the South-Eastern Organ Procurement Foundation experience.

In this study we analyze the South-Eastern Organ Procurement Foundation (SEOPF) experience with kidney and kidney-pancreas transplantation in IDDM recipients and evaluate the impact of racial disparity on patient and graft outcome. Data obtained from 4413 kidney-alone and 884 pancreas transplants performed in White and Black type I diabetics at member institutions of SEOPF between 10/1/87 and 7/25/96 were analyzed. Survival data from 15,827 transplants performed during the same period of time in non-diabetics were available for comparison. A lesser proportion of pancreas recipients were Black compared to kidney-alone (12% vs 23%, p < 0.0005). Recipient race had no effect on patient survival in any of the groups studied. Kidney graft survival, on the other hand, was adversely affected by Black race in both non-diabetic and diabetic recipients of a kidney transplant but not in diabetics who received a combined pancreas-kidney transplant. As was the case for patient survival in diabetics, recipient race had no effect on pancreas graft survival. Cox Regression analysis showed that kidney-pancreas transplant (p = 0.034, RR = 0.49) and female recipient gender (p = 0.046, RR = 0.68) were associated with a lower risk of failure of the pancreas graft. The following factors were independent predictors of kidney graft outcome: Donor age (p = 0.0001, RR = 0.95), kidney-pancreas transplant (p = 0.0004, RR = 0.58), AB match (p = 0.001, RR = 0.86), DR match (p = 0.006, RR = 0.82), preservation time (p = 0.012, RR = 1.01), Black recipient race (p = 0.047, RR = 1.23) and living donor (p = 0.06, RR = 0.73). Our findings suggest that the effect of race on graft outcome observed in non-diabetic and, to a lesser extent, diabetic kidney-alone transplant recipients, is not present after kidney-pancreas transplantation.

Effect of race on outcome after kidney and kidney-pancreas transplantation in type 1 diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVE: The racial impact on graft outcome is not well defined in diabetic recipients. The purpose of this study is to analyze our experience with kidney-alone (A) and kidney-pancreas (KP) transplantation in type 1 diabetic recipients and evaluate the impact of racial disparity on outcome. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The records of 217 kidney transplants (118 KA, 99 KP) performed on type 1 diabetic patients between 1985 and 1995 at the Medical University of South Carolina and the University of Texas Medical Branch were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 53 (31%) white patients and 15 (33%) black patients experienced at least one episode of biopsy-proven acute rejection of the renal graft (NS). Patient survival at 1, 2, and 5 years was similar in white (92, 87, 69%) and black (91, 91, 69%) patients (NS). Kidney graft survival at 1, 2, and 5 years in the KA group was 72, 62, and 42% in blacks, compared with 79, 76, and 53% in whites (NS). Kidney graft survival at 1, 2, and 5 years in the KP group was 92, 92, and 74% in blacks, compared with 83, 77, and 58% in whites (NS). Pancreas graft survival at 1, 2, and 5 years was 81, 81, and 81% in blacks, compared with 81, 75, and 62% in whites (NS). Cox regression analysis revealed that donor age > or = 40 years increased the risk of renal graft failure 6.2-fold (P = 0.0001), whereas the addition of a pancreas transplant to a kidney and a living-related transplant decreased the risk of failure of the kidney graft 0.2 (P = 0.005) and 0.1 times (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that when compared with whites, there may be a trend toward an improved kidney and pancreas graft outcome in blacks undergoing KP transplants. These findings suggest that diabetes may override the risk factors that account for the pronounced disparity in outcome observed between nondiabetic white and black recipients.

Graft outcome in cadaver renal transplants treated with full-dose cyclosporine induction without antibody, irrespective of graft function.

Cyclosporine (CSA) induction has been shown to prolong delayed graft function which in turn may compromise graft outcome. In this study we report our experience with full-dose CSA induction without antibody treatment irrespective of graft function and stress the importance of achieving therapeutic CSA levels in the early post-transplant period. The records of 293 first cadaver renal transplant recipients who were transplanted between January 1992 and December 1995 were reviewed. Patients were divided into those who had immediate graft function (IGF, n = 197) and the ones who had delayed graft function (DGF, n = 96). Twenty-six (13%) patients in the IGF group and 27 (28%) patients in the DGF group experienced at least one episode of acute rejection (AR), (P = 0.002). Patient and graft survival rates at 1, 2 and 5 yr were similar in the IGF and DGF groups. Cox regression analysis revealed that the absence of both DGF and AR was independently associated with a 0.44 times lower risk of graft failure (P = 0.06), whereas AR without DGF was associated with a 1.9 times increased risk of graft failure (P = 0.02). DGF, with or without AR, did not affect the risk of graft failure. Logistic regression analysis showed that DGF was associated with a 3.6 times higher risk-of AR (P = 0.003). A non-traumatic cause of donor death and preservation time > 24 h were associated with 1.9 and 2.4 times higher risks of DGF (P = 0.01, P = 0.08), whereas female donor gender reduced the risk of DGF by 0.6 (P = 0.1). In conclusion, our results suggest that full-dose CSA induction with achievement of therapeutic target levels in the early post-transplant period is associated with an acceptable graft outcome. Graft outcome was not compromised by delayed function, whereas acute rejection was an independent predictor of graft failure.

Renal allograft failure after simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation: univariate and multivariate analyses of donor and recipient risk factors.

Although donor and recipient risk factors for renal allograft failure are well known after kidney transplantation, they are less well defined after simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of donor and recipient risk factors on the outcome of the renal allograft in simultaneous pancreas-kidney recipients. Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant performed between 4/88 and 6/94 were reviewed (n = 61) and univariate (Kaplan-Meier) and multivariate (Cox regression) analyses of factors which affect kidney graft survival were performed. Twelve donor and eleven pre- and post-transplant recipient risk factors were evaluated. Overall kidney allograft survival rates at 1, 2 and 5 yr were 81%, 76% and 66%. Donor age > and = 40 yr (RR = 2.3), donor female gender (RR = 3.5), donor admission to pronouncement of brain death > and = 48 h (RR = 3), the occurrence of surgical complications (RR = 2.1), and serum > and = 2 mg/dl on post-transplant day (RR = 1.9) were independently associated with an increased hazard of graft failure. With the exception of length of donor admission, all of these factors were also shown to predict the risk of renal graft failure by univariate analysis. In conclusion, we have identified donor and recipient risk factors which independently predict the risk of renal graft failure after simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation. Whether the differences between our center-specific risk factors and those obtained from renal transplant registry data are true differences or simply reflect sampling error is unclear.

Treatment of renal allograft acute rejection with methylprednisolone: effect of fixed dose versus dose per body mass index.

Considerable interpatient variability in steroid pharmacokinetics has been observed in renal transplant recipients. The purpose of this retrospective study is to evaluate the relationship between the dose of methylprednisolone (MP) used to treat acute rejection (AR) after renal transplantation and the response to treatment. 117 first AR episodes from 408 renal transplants were reviewed. The dose of MP used to treat AR was < 45 mg/kg/m2 in 60 patients and > and = 45 mg/kg/m2 in 57 patients. The correlation between fixed dose ( < 1.25 vs. > and = 1.25 g) and dose based on BMI was evaluated by simple linear regression analysis (r2 = 0.78, p < 0.0005). Response to treatment was as follows: MP successful (Group 1, n = 80); MP failed, OKT3 successful (Group 2, n = 17); MP and OKT3 failed (Group 3, n = 3) and MP failed, no further treatment (n = 17). No relationship was observed between the dose of MP, whether fixed or based on BMI, and (1) response to treatment of the first AR, (2) incidence of a second AR and (3) response to subsequent treatment with OKT3. Actuarial graft survival was higher in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (p < 0.0005), lower in Black recipients (p = 0.02) and higher when > and = 45 mg/kg/m2 of MP was used to treat AR (p = 0.06). In conclusion, no relationship between the dose of MP, whether fixed or based on BMI, and the response to treatment of AR was observed. MP dosage based on BMI may be a reasonable alternative to a fixed-dose regimen with the advantage of limiting steroid exposure and the consequent side-effects.