Continuous flow local anesthetic wound infusion for post-operative analgesia following kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Some patients with end stage renal disease are or will become narcotic-dependent. Chronic narcotic use is associated with increased graft loss and mortality following kidney transplantation. We aimed to compare the efficacy of continuous flow local anesthetic wound infusion pumps (CFLAP) with patient controlled analgesia pumps (PCA) in reducing inpatient narcotic consumption in patients undergoing kidney transplantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective analysis of patients undergoing kidney transplantation, we collected demographic and operative data, peri-operative outcomes, complications, and inpatient oral morphine milligram equivalent (OME) consumption. RESULTS: Four hundred and ninety-eight patients underwent kidney transplantation from 2020 to 2022. 296 (59%) historical control patients received a PCA for postoperative pain control and the next 202 (41%) patients received a CFLAP. Median age [53.5 vs. 56.0 years, p = .08] and BMI [29.5 vs. 28.9 kg/m2, p = .17] were similar. Total OME requirement was lower in the CFLAP group [2.5 vs. 34 mg, p < .001]. Wound-related complications were higher in the CFLAP group [5.9% vs. 2.7%, p = .03]. Two (.9%) patients in the CFLAP group experienced cardiac arrhythmia due to local anesthetic toxicity and required lipid infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to PCA, CFLAP provided a 93% reduction in OME consumption with a small increase in the wound-related complication rate. The utility of local anesthetic pumps may also be applicable to patients undergoing any unilateral abdominal or pelvic incision.

Does Severity of Donor Acute Kidney Injury Influence Outcomes Following Kidney Transplantation?

INTRODUCTION: The study purpose was to review retrospectively our single-center experience transplanting kidneys from deceased donors (DD) with acute kidney injury (AKI) according to terminal serum creatinine (tSCr) level. METHODS: AKI kidneys were defined by a doubling of the DD's admission SCr and a tSCr ≥ 2.0 mg/dL. RESULTS: From 1/07 to 11/21, we transplanted 236 AKI DD kidneys, including 100 with a tSCr ≥ 3.0 mg/dL (high SCr AKI group, mean tSCr 4.2 mg/dL), and the remaining 136 from DDs with a tSCr of 2.0-2.99 mg/dL (lower SCr AKI group, mean tSCr 2.4 mg/dL). These two AKI groups were compared to 996 concurrent control patients receiving DD kidneys with a tSCr < 1.0 mg/dL. Mean follow-up was 69 months. Delayed graft function (DGF) rates were 51% versus 46% versus 29% (p < 0.0001), and 5-year patient and death-censored kidney graft survival rates were 96.8% versus 83.5% versus 82.2% (p = 0.002) and 86.7% versus 77.8% versus 78.8% (p = 0.18) in the high tSCr AKI versus lower tSCr AKI versus control groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a higher incidence of DGF, patients receiving kidneys from DDs with tSCr levels ≥3.0 mg/dL have acceptable medium-term outcomes compared to either AKI DDs with a lower tSCr or DDs with a tSCr < 1.0 mg/dL.

Bladder Stones in Renal Transplant Patients: Presentation, Management, and Follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: The study aim was to analyze the presentation, management, and follow-up of renal transplant patients developing bladder calculi. METHODS: Patients who underwent renal transplant with postoperative follow-up at our institution were retrospectively analyzed (1984-2023) to assess for the development of posttransplant bladder stones. All bladder stones were identified by computerized tomography imaging and stone size was measured using this imaging modality. RESULTS: The prevalence of bladder calculi post-renal transplantation during the study window was 0.22% (N = 20/8,835) with a median time to bladder stone diagnosis of 13 years posttransplant. Of all bladder stone patients, 6 (30%) received deceased donor and 14 (70%) living donor transplants. There were 11 patients with known bladder stone composition available; the most common being calcium oxalate (N = 6). Eleven (55%) patients had clinical signs or symptoms (most commonly microhematuria). Fourteen of the bladder stone cohort patients (70%) underwent treatment including cystolitholapaxy in 12 subjects. Of these 14 patients, 9 (64%) were found to have nonabsorbable suture used for their ureteroneocystostomy closure. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of bladder stones post-renal transplant is low. The utilization of nonabsorbable suture for ureteral implantation was the main risk factor identified in our series. This technique is no longer used at our institution. Other factors contributing to bladder stone formation in this population warrant identification.

Modern indications for referral for kidney and pancreas transplantation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pancreas transplantation (PTx) is currently the only therapy that can predictably achieve sustained euglycemia independent of exogenous insulin administration in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. This procedure involves a complex abdominal operation and lifetime dependence on immunosuppressive medications. Therefore, PTx is most frequently performed in combination with other organs, usually a kidney transplant for end stage diabetic nephropathy. Less frequently, solitary PTx may be indicated in patients with potentially life-threatening complications of diabetes mellitus. There remains confusion and misperceptions regarding indications and timing of patient referral for PTx. RECENT FINDINGS: In this review, the referral, evaluation, and listing process for PTx is described, including a detailed discussion of candidate assessment, indications, contraindications, and outcomes. SUMMARY: Because the progression of diabetic kidney disease may be less predictable than other forms of kidney failure, early referral for planning of renal and/or pancreas transplantation is paramount to optimize patient care and allow for possible preemptive transplantation.

Poor utilization of deceased donor pancreata in the United States: Time for action.

The number of solid organ pancreas transplants performed in the United States has declined over the past two decades despite improving outcomes and the known benefits associated with this procedure. Although the reasons are multifactorial, high rates of deceased donor pancreata nonrecovery and nonuse have at least in part contributed to the reduction in pancreas transplant activity. The pancreas has higher nonrecovery and nonuse rates compared to the kidney and liver because of more stringent donor selection criteria, particularly with respect to donor age and body mass index, although even marginally inferior donor pancreata likely still benefit some patients compared to alternative therapies. In this editorial, we present several donor-, candidate-, and center-specific factors that are either confirmed or suspected of being associated with inferior outcomes, which contribute to high pancreas nonrecovery and nonuse rates. In addition, we have discussed several measures to increase pancreas recovery and reduce pancreas nonutilization.

Comparable kidney transplant outcomes in selected patients with a body mass index ≥ 40: A personalized medicine approach to recipient selection.

INTRODUCTION: Many kidney transplant (KT) centers decline patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥40 kg/m2 . This study's aim was to evaluate KT outcomes according to recipient BMI. METHODS: We performed a single-center, retrospective review of adult KTs comparing BMI ≥40 patients (n = 84, BMI = 42 ± 2 kg/m2 ) to a matched BMI < 40 cohort (n = 84, BMI = 28 ± 5 kg/m2 ). Patients were matched for age, gender, race, diabetes, and donor type. RESULTS: BMI ≥40 patients were on dialysis longer (5.2 ± 3.2 years vs. 4.1 ± 3.5 years, p = .03) and received lower kidney donor profile index (KDPI) kidneys (40 ± 25% vs. 53 ± 26%, p = .003). There were no significant differences in prevalence of delayed graft function, reoperations, readmissions, wound complications, patient survival, or renal function at 1 year. Long-term graft survival was higher for BMI ≥40 patients, including after adjusting for KDPI (BMI ≥40: aHR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.09-2.9). BMI ≥40 patients had similar BMI change in the first year post-transplant (delta BMI: BMI ≥ 40 +.9 ± 3.3 vs. BMI < 40 +1.1 ± 3.2, p = .59). CONCLUSIONS: Overall outcomes after KT were comparable in BMI ≥40 patients compared to a matched cohort with lower BMI with improved long-term graft survival in obese patients. BMI-based exclusion criteria for KT should be reexamined in favor of a more individualized approach.

Long-term outcomes of kidney transplantation from deceased donors with terminal acute kidney injury: Single center experience and literature review.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term outcomes of kidney transplantation from deceased donors (DDKTs) with terminal acute kidney injury (AKI) are not well defined. METHODS: Single center retrospective review of DDKTs from 1/31/07-12/31/19. AKI kidneys were defined by a doubling of the donor's admission serum creatinine (SCr) level AND a terminal SCr ≥2.0 mg/dl. RESULTS: A total of 188 AKI DDKTs were performed, including 154 from brain-dead standard criteria donors (SCD). Mean donor age was 36 years and mean Kidney Donor Profile Index was 50%; mean admission and terminal SCr levels were 1.3 and 3.1 mg/dl, respectively. With a mean follow-up of 94 months (median 89 months), overall patient (both 71.3%) and graft survival (54% AKI vs. 57% non-AKI) rates were comparable to concurrent DDKTs from brain-dead non-AKI SCDs (n = 769). Delayed graft function (DGF) was higher in AKI kidney recipients (47% vs. 20% non-AKI DDKTs, p < .0001). DGF was associated with lower graft survival in recipients of both AKI and non-AKI SCD kidneys but the impact was earlier and more pronounced in non-AKI recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite having more than twice the incidence of DGF, kidneys from deceased donors with terminal AKI have long-term outcomes comparable to non-AKI SCD kidneys and represent a safe and effective method to expand the donor pool.

Single center experience and literature review of kidney transplantation from non-ideal donors with acute kidney injury: Risk and reward.

INTRODUCTION: There is limited experience transplanting kidneys from either expanded criteria donors (ECD) or donation after circulatory death (DCD) deceased donors with terminal acute kidney injury (AKI). METHODS: AKI kidneys were defined by a donor terminal serum creatinine level >2.0 mg/dL whereas non-ideal deceased donor (NIDD) kidneys were defined as AKI/DCD or AKI/ECDs. RESULTS: From February 2007 to March 2023, we transplanted 266 single AKI donor kidneys including 29 from ECDs, 29 from DCDs (n = 58 NIDDs), and 208 from brain-dead standard criteria donors (SCDs). Mean donor age (43.7 NIDD vs. 33.5 years SCD), KDPI (66% NIDD vs. 45% SCD), and recipient age (57 NIDD vs. 51 years SCD) were higher in the NIDD group (all p < .01). Mean waiting times (17.8 NIDD vs. 24.2 months SCD) and dialysis duration (34 NIDD vs. 47 months SCD) were shorter in the NIDD group (p < .05). Delayed graft function (DGF, 48%) and 1-year graft survival (92.7% NIDD vs. 95.9% SCD) was similar in both groups. Five-year patient and kidney graft survival rates were 82.1% versus 89.9% and 82.1% versus 75.2% (both p = NS) in the NIDD versus SCD groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of kidneys from AKI donors can be safely liberalized to include selected ECD and DCD donors.

Does dialysis modality or duration influence outcomes in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant recipients? Single center experience and review of the literature.

AIM: The influence of dialysis modality and duration on outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPKT) remains uncertain. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective review in 255 SPKT recipients according to dialysis modality (55 preemptive/no dialysis-ND, 70 peritoneal dialysis-PD, 130 hemodialysis-HD) and duration (55 none, 137 < 2 years, 41 2-4 years, 22 > 4 years). RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 9.4 years (median 9.2 years). Early (3-month) relaparotomy rate (20% ND vs. 36% PD/HD, p = .03) was lower in ND patients. There were no differences in early graft loss, patient survival, overall or death-censored kidney or pancreas graft survival rates (GSR) at 1 or 10 years follow-up. When analyzing dialysis duration, there were no differences in rates of pancreas thrombosis or early pancreas graft loss. Kidney delayed graft function (DGF) was lower in the ND/short dialysis groups combined (1.0%), compared to the intermediate/long dialysis groups combined (9.5%, p = .003). Early relaparotomy rates were higher with longer duration of dialysis (p = .045 between ND and >4 years of dialysis). Patient survival in the long dialysis group was 50% compared to 69.5% in the other three groups combined (p = .09). However, both overall and death-censored kidney and pancreas GSR were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Preemptively transplanted patients had a lower incidence of kidney DGF and relaparotomy whereas patient survival was slightly lower with longer dialysis vintage prior to SPKT. Dialysis modality and duration did not influence either overall or death-censored pancreas or kidney GSR in patients with short waiting times, low KDPI donor organs, and dialysis duration up to 4 years.

Influence of donor and recipient sex on outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation in the new millennium: Single-center experience and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: The influence of sex on outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPKT) in the modern era is uncertain. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 255 patients undergoing SPKT from 11/2001 to 8/2020. Cases were stratified according to donor (D) sex, recipient (R) sex, 4 D/R sex categories, and D/R sex-matched versus mismatched. RESULTS: D-male was associated with slightly higher patient (p = .08) and kidney (p = .002) but not pancreas (p = .23) graft survival rates (GSR) compared to D-female. There were no differences in recipient outcomes other than slightly higher pancreas thrombosis (8% R-female vs. 4.2% R-male, p = .28) and early relaparotomy rates in female recipients (38% R-female vs. 29% R-male, p = .14). When analyzing the 4 D/R sex categories, the two D-male groups had higher kidney GSRs compared to the two D-female groups (p = .01) whereas early relaparotomy and pancreas thrombosis rates were numerically higher in the D-female/R-female group compared to the other three groups. Finally, there were no significant differences in outcomes between sex-matched and sex-mismatched groups although overall survival outcomes were lower with female donors irrespective of recipient sex. CONCLUSIONS: The influence of D/R sex following SPKT is subject to multiple confounding issues but survival rates appear to be higher in D-male/R-male and lower in D-female/R-male categories.

Analyzing outcomes following pancreas transplantation: Definition of a failure or failure of a definition.

Pancreas transplantation has an identity crisis and is at a crossroads. Although outcomes continue to improve in each successive era, the number of pancreas transplants performed annually in the United States has been static for several years in spite of increasing numbers of deceased donors. For most practitioners who manage diabetes, pancreas transplantation is considered an extreme measure to control diabetes. With expanded recipient selection (primarily simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation) in patients who are older, have a higher BMI, are minorities, or who have a type 2 diabetes phenotype, the controversy regarding type of diabetes detracts from the success of intervention. The absence of a clear and precise definition of pancreas graft failure, particularly one that lacks a measure of glycemic control, inhibits wider application of pancreas transplantation with respect to reporting long-term outcomes, comparing this treatment to alternative therapies, developing listing and allocation policy, and having a better understanding of the patient perspective. It has been suggested that the definition of pancreas graft failure should differ depending on the type of pretransplant diabetes. In this commentary, we discuss current challenges regarding the development of a uniform definition of pancreas graft failure and propose a potential solution to this vexing problem.

Kidney utility and futility.

Changes in kidney allocation coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic have placed tremendous strain on current systems of organ distribution and logistics. Although the number of deceased donors continues to rise annually in the United States, the proportion of marginal deceased donors (MDDs) is disproportionately growing. Cold ischemia times and kidney discard rates are rising in part related to inadequate planning, resources, and shortages. Complexity in kidney allocation and distribution has contributed to this dilemma. Logistical issues and the ability to reperfuse the kidney within acceptable time constraints increasingly determine clinical decision-making for organ acceptance. We have a good understanding of the phenotype of "hard to place" MDD kidneys, yet continue to promote a "one size fits all" approach to organ allocation. Allocation and transportation systems need to be agile, mobile, and flexible in order to accommodate the expanding numbers of MDD organs. By identifying "hard to place" MDD kidneys early and implementing a "fast-track" or open offer policy to expedite placement, the utilization rate of MDDs would improve dramatically. Organ allocation and distribution based on location, motivation, and innovation must lead the way. In the absence of change, we are sacrificing utility for futility and discard rates will continue to escalate.

Dual kidney transplants from adult marginal donors: Review and perspective.

The practice of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) from adult marginal deceased donors (MDDs) dates back to the mid-1990s with initial pioneering experiences reported by the Stanford and Maryland groups, at which time the primary indication was estimated insufficient nephron mass from older donors. Multiple subsequent studies of short and long-term success have been reported focusing on three major aspects of DKT: Identifying appropriate selection criteria and developing scoring systems based on pre- and post-donation factors; refining technical aspects; and analyzing mid-term outcomes. The number of adult DKTs performed in the United States has declined in the past decade and only about 60 are performed annually. For adult deceased donor kidneys meeting double allocation criteria, > 60% are ultimately not transplanted. Deceased donors with limited renal functional capacity represent a large proportion of potential kidneys doomed to either discard or non-recovery. However, DKT may reduce organ discard and optimize the use of kidneys from MDDs. In an attempt to promote utilization of MDD kidneys, the United Network for Organ Sharing introduced new allocation guidelines pursuant to DKT in 2019. The purpose of this review is to chronicle the history of DKT and identify opportunities to improve utilization of MDD kidneys through DKT.

Improved surgical outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation in the contemporary era.

BACKGROUND: Complications leading to early technical failure have been the Achilles' heel of simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPKT). The study purpose was to analyze longitudinally our experience with early surgical complications following SPKT with an emphasis on changes in practice that improved outcomes in the most recent era. STUDY DESIGN: Single center retrospective review of all SPKTs from 11/1/01 to 8/12/20 with enteric drainage. Early relaparotomy was defined as occurring within 3 months of SPKT. Patients were stratified into two sequential eras: Era 1 (E1): 11/1/01-5/30/13; Era 2 (E2) 6/1/13-8/12/20 based on changes in practice that occurred pursuant to donor age and pancreas cold ischemia time (CIT). RESULTS: 255 consecutive SPKTs were analyzed (E1, n = 165; E2, n = 90). E1 patients received organs from older donors (mean E1 27.3 vs. E2 23.1 years) with longer pancreas cold CITs) (mean E1 16.1 vs. E2 13.3 h, both p < .05). E1 patients had a higher early relaparotomy rate (E1 43.0% vs. E2 14.4%) and were more likely to require allograft pancreatectomy (E1 9.1% vs. E2 2.2%, both p < .05). E2 patients underwent systemic venous drainage more frequently (E1 8% vs. E2 29%) but pancreas venous drainage did not influence either relaparotomy or allograft pancreatectomy rates. The most common indications for early relaparotomy in E1 were allograft thrombosis (11.5%) and peri-pancreatic phlegmon/abscess (8.5%) whereas in E2 were thrombosis, pancreatitis/infection, and bowel obstruction (each 3%). CONCLUSION: Maximizing donor quality (younger donors) and minimizing pancreas CIT are paramount for reducing early surgical complications following SPKT.

Does prolonged cold ischemia affect outcomes in donation after cardiac death donor kidney transplants?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to analyze the combined effect of cold ischemia time (CIT) and donation after cardiac death (DCD, with requisite warm ischemia time, WIT) on kidney transplant (KT) outcomes. METHODS: Single center retrospective review of DCD KT recipients stratified by CIT. RESULTS: From 6/08 to 10/20, we performed 446 DCD KTs (115 CIT ≤20, 205 CIT 20-30, 88 CIT 30-40, 38 CIT ≥40 h). Mean WITs (26/25/27/23 min) and KDPI values (59%/55%/55%/59%) were similar while mean CITs (16.4/23.6/33.4/42.5 h) and pump times (10.3/13.6/16.1/20.4 h) differed across groups (P < .05). With a mean 6-year follow-up, patient survival (84%/84%/74%/84%) was similar. Kidney graft survival (GS) (72%/72%/56%/58%) and death censored GS (DCGS) (82%/80%/63%/67%) rates decreased whereas rates of primary nonfunction (PNF, .9%/2.4%/9.1%/7.9%) and delayed graft function (DGF) (36%/48%/50%/69%) increased with longer CIT (≥30 h, P < .05). Meaningful years free of dialysis, which we refer to as Allograft Life Years, were achieved in all cohorts (4.5/4.3/3.9/4.3 years per patient transplanted). CONCLUSION: DCD donor kidneys with prolonged CIT (≥30 h) are associated with increased rates of DGF and PNF, along with decreased GS and DCGS. Despite this, Allograft Life Years were gained even with longer CITs, demonstrating the utility of using these allografts.

Do pretransplant C-peptide levels predict outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation? A matched case-control study.

Following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPKT), survival outcomes are reported as equivalent in patients with detectable pretransplant C-peptide levels (Cp+) and a "type 2″ diabetes mellitus (DM) phenotype compared to type 1 (Cp negative [Cp-]) DM. We retrospectively compared 46 Cp+ patients pretransplant (≥2.0 ng/mL, mean 5.4 ng/mL) to 46 Cp- (level < 0.5 ng/mL) case controls matched for recipient age, gender, race, and transplant date. Early outcomes were comparable. Actual 5-year patient survival (91% versus 94%), kidney graft survival (69% versus 86%, p = .15), and pancreas graft survival (60% versus 86%, p = .03) rates were lower in Cp+ versus Cp- patients, respectively. The Cp+ group had more pancreas graft failures due to insulin resistance (13% Cp+ versus 0% Cp-, p = .026) or rejection (17% Cp+ versus 6.5% Cp-, p = .2). Post-transplant weight gain > 5 kg occurred in 72% of Cp+ versus 26% of Cp- patients (p = .0001). In patients with functioning grafts, mean one-year post-transplant HbA1c levels (5.0 Cp+ versus 5.2% Cp-) were comparable, whereas Cp levels were higher in Cp+ patients (5.0 Cp+ versus 2.6 ng/mL Cp-). In this matched case-control study, outcomes were inferior in Cp+ compared to Cp- patients following SPKT, with post-transplant weight gain, insulin resistance, and rejection as potential mitigating factors.

Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation in Caucasian versus African American patients: Does recipient race influence outcomes?

The influence of African American (AA) recipient race on outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPKT) is uncertain. METHODS: From 11/01 to 2/19, we retrospectively studied 158 Caucasian (C) and 57 AA patients (pts) undergoing SPKT. RESULTS: The AA group had fewer patients on peritoneal dialysis (30% C vs. 14% AA), more patients with longer dialysis duration (28% C vs. 51% AA), more sensitized (PRA ≥20%) patients (6% C vs. 21% AA), and more patients with pretransplant C-peptide levels ≥2.0 ng/ml (11% C vs. 35% AA, all P < .05). With a mean 9.2 year follow-up, patient survival (65% C vs. 77% AA, P = .098) slightly favored the AA group, whereas kidney (55% C vs. 60% AA) and pancreas (48% C vs. 54% AA) graft survival rates (GSRs) were comparable. Death-censored kidney (71% C vs. 68% AA) and pancreas (both 62%) GSRs demonstrated that death with a functioning graft (DWFG) was more common in C vs. AA patients (23% C vs. 12% AA, P = .10). The incidence of death-censored dual graft loss (usually rejection) was 7% C versus 21% AA (P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Following SPKT, AA patients are at a greater risk for dual immunological graft loss whereas C patients are at greater risk for DWFG.

The use of marginal kidneys in dual kidney transplantation to expand kidney graft utilization.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to chronicle the history of dual kidney transplantation (DKT) and identify opportunities to improve utilization of marginal deceased donor (MDD) kidneys through DKT. RECENT FINDINGS: The practice of DKT from adult MDDs dates back to the mid-1990s, at which time the primary indication was projected insufficient nephron mass from older donors. Multiple subsequent studies of short- and long-term success have been reported focusing on three major aspects: Identifying appropriate selection criteria/scoring systems based on pre- and postdonation factors; refining technical aspects; and analyzing longer-term outcomes. The number of adult DKTs performed in the United States has declined in the past decade and only about 60 are performed annually. For adult deceased donor kidneys meeting double allocation criteria, >60% are ultimately not transplanted. MDDs with limited renal functional capacity represent a large proportion of potential kidneys doomed to either discard or nonrecovery. SUMMARY: DKT may reduce organ discard and optimize the use of kidneys from MDDs. New and innovative technologies targeting ex vivo organ assessment, repair, and regeneration may have a major impact on the decision whether or not to use recovered kidneys for single or DKT.

The demise of islet allotransplantation in the United States: A call for an urgent regulatory update.

Islet allotransplantation in the United States (US) is facing an imminent demise. Despite nearly three decades of progress in the field, an archaic regulatory framework has stymied US clinical practice. Current regulations do not reflect the state-of-the-art in clinical or technical practices. In the US, islets are considered biologic drugs and "more than minimally manipulated" human cell and tissue products (HCT/Ps). In contrast, across the world, human islets are appropriately defined as "minimally manipulated tissue" and not regulated as a drug, which has led to islet allotransplantation (allo-ITx) becoming a standard-of-care procedure for selected patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. This regulatory distinction impedes patient access to islets for transplantation in the US. As a result only 11 patients underwent allo-ITx in the US between 2016 and 2019, and all as investigational procedures in the settings of a clinical trials. Herein, we describe the current regulations pertaining to islet transplantation in the United States. We explore the progress which has been made in the field and demonstrate why the regulatory framework must be updated to both better reflect our current clinical practice and to deal with upcoming challenges. We propose specific updates to current regulations which are required for the renaissance of ethical, safe, effective, and affordable allo-ITx in the United States.

Recipient age and outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation in the new millennium: Single-center experience and review of the literature.

The influence of recipient age on outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPKT) in the modern era is uncertain. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 255 patients undergoing SPKT from 11/01 to 8/20. Recipients were stratified according to age group: age <30 years (n = 16); age 30-39 years (n = 91); age 40-49 years (n = 86) and age ≥50 years (n = 62 [24.3%], including 9 patients ≥60 years of age). RESULTS: Three-month and one-year outcomes were comparable. The eight-year patient survival rate was lowest in the oldest age group (47.6% vs 78% in the 3 younger groups combined, p < .001). However, eight-year kidney and pancreas graft survival rates were comparable in the youngest and oldest age groups combined (36.5% and 32.7%, respectively), but inferior to those in the middle 2 groups combined (62% and 50%, respectively, both p < .05). Death-censored kidney and pancreas graft survival rates increased from youngest to oldest recipient age category because of a higher incidence of death with functioning grafts (22.6% in oldest group compared to 8.3% in the 3 younger groups combined, p = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Recipient age did not appear to significantly influence early outcomes following SPKT. Late outcomes are similar in younger and older recipients, but inferior to the middle 2 age groups.