Renal graft intolerance syndrome in late graft failure patients: efficacy and safety of embolization as first-line treatment compared to surgical removal.

Although renal graft percutaneous embolization was introduced to avoid the risk associated with graft nephrectomy, there is no universal consensus about its indications and results. In order to evaluate the efficacy of graft embolization in the treatment of graft intolerance syndrome as well as its safety compared to surgical removal with respect to complications and other morbidity measures, We performed a retrospective observational study comparing two groups of patients treated for graft intolerance syndrome: Group 1: patients who had embolization as first-line treatment and Group 2: patients directly treated by surgical removal. 72 patients were included, (32 in Group 1 and 40 in Group 2); the postintervention follow-up continued for 12 months. Patients in Group 1 are older than those in Group 2. Otherwise, the two groups are similar concerning sex, manifestations of graft intolerance syndrome, diabetes and nutritional and functional status. The overall success rate of embolization in complete resolution of graft intolerance syndrome and ultimately avoidance of surgical removal was 84.37%. The surgical removal group had more serious complications, a longer hospital stay and needed more blood transfusions. We conclude that embolization of symptomatic renal grafts has considerable efficacy with less morbidity, and no serious complications compared to the standard surgical graft removal.

Impact of graft nephrectomy on outcomes of second kidney transplantation.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of renal graft nephrectomy on second kidney transplantation survival. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective single-center study by analyzing cases performed from January 2000 to December 2011. Retransplanted patients who underwent previous allograft nephrectomy more than 3 months post-transplantation (group 1) were compared with those who did not (group 2) in terms of graft survival, incidences of acute rejection and delayed graft function. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess risk factors of graft loss after retransplantation. RESULTS: Overall, 146 patients were analyzed, including 52 (35.6%) in group 1 and 94 (64.4%) in group 2. Group 1 patients presented a significantly shorter first graft survival (0.8 vs 8.6 years, P < 0.001) and more anti-class I antibodies (90.5% vs 74.2%, P = 0.03). A total of 10 patients (19%) in group 1 and 16 patients (17%) in group 2 had at least one acute rejection episode (P = 0.74). Delayed graft function was observed in 13 patients (25%) in group 1 and 17 patients (18%) in group 2 (P = 0.32). Graft survival at 1, 5 and 10 years was, respectively, 94%, 81% and 58% in group 1, and 99%, 93% and 66% in group 2 (P = 0.10). Graft survival was decreased by increased donor age and serum creatinine, and tended to be associated with post-transplantation presence of anti-class I and II antibodies. Graft nephrectomy was not associated with graft survival in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Graft nephrectomy, probably a marker of high immunological risk patients, is not a risk factor of increased retransplant failure.