Optimizing outcomes in pancreas transplantation: Impact of organ preservation time.

Recent changes to pancreas graft allocation policy have increased the number of organs available for regional and distant sharing, which results in a corresponding increase in preservation time. We sought to systematically assess the impact of cold ischemia time (CIT) on outcomes post-transplant. A retrospective review of 1253 pancreas transplants performed at a single transplant center was performed to correlate CIT to transplant outcomes. The rate of technical failure (TF) increased with 20+ hours of CIT, with a 2.7-fold to 6.2-fold increased rate of TF for pancreas after kidney (PAK), simultaneous pancreas and kidney (SPK), and pancreas transplants overall. Long-term graft survival was best with <12 hours of CIT; graft failure increased 1.2-fold to 1.4-fold with 12-24 hours of CIT and 2.2-fold with 24+ hours. CIT had less influence on the pancreas transplant alone category than either SPK or PAK and had markedly more influence on grafts from older (age >25 years) and overweight (body mass index >25) donors. In the final analysis, grafts with <12 hours of CIT performed the best overall, and strategies that reduce CIT (such as early allocation, pre-recovery cross-matching, and chartered flights for organs) should be considered whenever possible.

Outcomes of pancreas retransplantation.

BACKGROUND: Pancreas retransplantation is associated with increased rates of technical failure and rejection compared to other organ transplants. As such, it is not routinely done, and outcomes are mostly known through registry data. Here we analyze the outcomes of primary versus retransplant for all pancreas transplants done in our program over nearly 35 years. METHODS: Donor and recipient characteristics and outcomes data were prospectively gathered and recorded in our institutional database. Outcomes of primary and retransplants were reported overall, and then subgrouped by number (second, third, fourth). An in-depth analysis of transplants done after 2003 was included. Rates of technical failure, 1 year acute rejection, graft survival, and patient survival were compared. RESULTS: Two thousand one hundred forty-five pancreas transplants were performed at our institution between 1978 and 2012. Four hundred fifteen of these were retransplants. Improvements were seen in technical failure rates and graft survival for both primary and retransplants over time. There were no significant differences in technical failure or patient survival for primary versus retransplants overall, or by transplant number (second, third, fourth). Modern era retransplants had more acute rejection in the first year after transplantation. Retransplants (vs primary) had decreased mid-term death censored graft survival. Transplant type continues to be an important driver of outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Retransplant outcomes have improved over time, yet increased rejection and immunologic graft loss rates remain associated with pancreas retransplantation. In contrast, risk of technical failure and patient death for primary versus retransplants are similar. Therefore, pancreas retransplantation in highly selected candidates should be considered in experienced centers.