Post-Transplant Fecal Carriage of Antibiotic Resistant and B-Lactamases-Producing Enterobacteriales among Renal Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: The intestinal colonization and transmission of antibiotic-resistant Enterobacteriales to renal transplant recipients may pose a threat to them because they are profoundly immunocompromised and vulnerable to infection. Hence, it is crucial to identify these antibiotic-resistant fecal Enterobacteriales harboring high-risk populations. The objective of this study was to determine antibiotic resistance as well as ß-lactamases production in fecal Enterobacteriales among renal transplant recipients. METHODS: The stool samples, one collected from each transplant recipient, were processed for isolation and identification of Enterobacteriales and were tested for their antibiotic susceptibility, extended-spectrum ß-lactamase, and metallo-ß-lactamase production by standard methods. RESULTS: A total of 103 Enterobacteriales comprising of Escherichia coli (86.4%), Klebsiella species (11.7%), and Citrobacter species (1.9%) were isolated and more than 60% of the E. coli were found resistant to ceftazidime and ciprofloxacin and around half of the Klebsiella species were resistant to ceftazidime and fluroquinolones. The extended-spectrum ß-lactamase production was seen in 3.4% and 8.3% and metallo-ß-lactamase production in 24.7% and 33.3% of E. coli and Klebsiella species, respectively. The high proportion of ß-lactamase-producers were resistant to piperacillin-tazobactam, meropenem, gentamicin, and amikacin than ß-lactamases non-producers. CONCLUSION: Since the antibiotic resistance is higher in fecal Enterobacteriales, each renal transplant recipient should be screened for these highly resistant intestinal colonizers after transplantation in order to prevent infections and to reduce the rate of transplant failure due to infections.

Mean Warm Ischemia Time among Kidney Transplant Patients in a Tertiary Care Centre: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study.

Introduction: In renal transplantation, warm ischemia time is the interval from the removal of a procured kidney from ice storage to initiating graft reperfusion. Successful kidney transplantation depends on warm ischemia time. The study aims to find the mean warm ischemia time among kidney transplant patients in a tertiary care centre. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among kidney transplant patients in a tertiary care centre. Data from 15 December 2012 to 15 October 2022 were collected between 1 December 2022 to 4 January 2023 from the hospital records. Ethical approval was taken from the Nepal Health Research Council (Reference number: 1341). All first-time living-related kidney transplant recipients were included in the study. All the patients undergoing kidney transplants from brain-dead donors were excluded from the study. Convenience sampling method was used. Point estimate and 95% Confidence Interval were calculated. Results: Among 230 patients, the mean warm ischemia time was 35.45±7.35 min. The mean first warm ischemia time was 4.28±2.05 min and the mean second warm ischemia time was 31.27±7.04 min. The mean age of the recipients was 35.14±10.49 years (range 14-64), of which 173 (75.20%) were male and 57 (24.80%) were female. Conclusions: The mean warm ischemia time among kidney transplant patients in a tertiary care centre was similar to the studies done in similar settings. Keywords: kidney transplantation; prevalence; warm ischemia.

Living donor kidney paired exchange: An observational study.

Background: Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESKD). Kidney paired donation (KPD) provides the chance to match an incompatible donor/recipient pair with another donor and recipient in a similar condition. We aimed to compare the outcomes of pair exchange kidney transplantation with traditional live donor kidney transplantation in our context. Method: A review of medical records of 62 patients (31 pairs) who underwent two-way conventional living kidney pair exchange from July 2016 to June 2021 was done. The control group was considered those 62 patients who had undergone classic live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) during the study period. The patient's demographics, intraoperative and postoperative variables including delayed graft function, length of hospital stay, graft survival, patient survival, and rejections rates were compared between the groups (KPD and LDKT). Results: The majority of recipients were male (77.4 and 80.6%) while donors were female (77.4 and 69.4%) in KPD and the LDKT groups. Mean ages were 37 years (range: 19-59) and 37 years (range: 17-65) for the recipient's in KPD and the LDKT. KPD transplantation was performed in 62 recipients to avoid blood group incompatibility. There were no significant differences in outcomes comprising delayed graft function (1.6 and 3.2%), graft survival (100% in both groups), patient survival (95.2 and 96.8%), and rejections rates (1.6 and 1.6%) between KPD and LDKT group (P > 0.005). The length of stay was similar (5.9 and 5.7 days) in KPD and LDKT groups (P > 0.005). Conclusions: The outcomes of KPD were comparable with classic LDKT in terms of delayed graft function, length of hospital stay, graft survival, patient survival, and rejections rates in our study. Therefore, the kidney paired donation program should be encouraged and promoted in centers where the ABO-incompatible transplant is expensive with added risk and the rate of deceased donor transplantation is very low.

Kidney transplantation from brain-dead donors in Nepal: Report of first six cases.

Introduction: and importance: Kidney transplantation is one of the best treatment options for patients with end-stage renal disease. More than 90% of patients awaiting renal transplantation die without getting the kidney for transplantation. Brain dead donor kidney transplantation can bridge this gap proficiently. We aim to report details of the first six patients who had undergone brain-dead donor kidney transplantation in the history of transplantation in Nepal. Case presentation: We conducted a descriptive analysis of clinical data of six adult recipients with kidney transplantation from three brain-dead donors. We described postoperative complications, length of stay, graft function which was documented with serum creatinine, acute rejection episode, delayed graft function, and patient/graft survival of recipient. Recipients were between 15 and 56 years old. Three patients experienced delayed graft function. Urinary tract infection was observed in two patients, both of whom were treated with antibiotics. One patient had acute graft rejection. None of our patients required reoperation. Length of hospital stay ranged from 9 to 32 days. The postoperative graft function was 100% in all patients. There was no graft loss, and no death was observed during follow-up. Clinical discussion: Following the initiation of the brain-dead donor transplantation program, a lot of work needs to be done to make it a regular practice. Thus, this program needs support from all sections of society and government. This can be the only solution to decrease the huge gap between the supply and demand of organs in Nepal. Conclusion: This case reports indeed revealed impressive success in initiating a brain-dead donor kidney transplantation program in a developing country that in terms of quality, meets comprehensive standard with acceptable graft function and patient/graft survival in under limited resources healthcare setting.