[Renal allograft rupture attributed to coughing while asleep: a case report].

Renal allograft rupture (RAR) is a rare but serious complication of renal transplantation. The most common cause of RAR is acute rejection but other causes have increased in frequency with advances in immunosuppressive therapy. We report a patient with RAR attributed to coughing while asleep. A 53-year-old male received a living-donor renal transplantation for end-stage renal failure due to diabetic nephropathy. The clinical course was satisfactory, and he was discharged on the 12th postoperative day with a serum creatinine level of 1.24 mg/dl. On the 24th morning, he felt sudden swelling and pain over the incision area soon after a big cough. Ultrasound and computed tomography revealed a perinephric hematoma. Emergency surgical exploration showed complete laceration of the abdominal fascia and 4-cm rupture at the anterolateral aspect of the kidney. High intra-abdominal pressure when coughing had torn the fascia, and the graft appeared to have ruptured under the fascial tension. Bleeding was controlled with a polyglactin 910 2/0 mattress parenchymal suture enforced with application of a fibrin tissue-adhesive collagen fleece. Twelve months after the repair, the patient's renal function was stable with a serum creatinine level of 1.3 mg/dl.

Comparison of the acute rejection incidence rate in spousal donor transplantation before and after anti-CD20 antibody (rituximab) protocol as desensitization therapy.

Recipients of spousal donor transplantation (SDT) have poorer histocompatibility and higher human leukocyte antigen (HLA) sensitization due to pregnancy than those receiving related donor transplantation (RDT). Thus, SDT carries a higher risk of acute rejection (AR). In our department, patients at a high immunological risk, such as those with ABO incompatibility and HLA sensitization, were considered for desensitization by double filtration plasmapheresis and preoperative administration of rituximab. In this study we compared the AR incidence rates between SDT and RDT according to their immunological risk. We performed RDT in 279 and SDT in 100 patients, a total of 379 cases, between 2000 and 2008; 48.7% of RDT and 67.0% of SDT cases were considered to be at a high immunological risk and underwent preoperative desensitization (P=0.002). Even though the AR incident rate of SDT was higher than RDT in the low immunological risk group, in which the patients had undergone transplantation without desensitization (RDT 24.4%, SDT 37.0%, P=0.012), there was no significant difference between the two donor type groups in the high immunological risk group, in which transplantation with desensitization occurred (RDT 21.3%, SDT 31.3%, P>0.05). Preoperative administration of rituximab significantly reduced AR from 37.4% to 10.6% (P<0.001), especially T-cell mediated rejection (36.4% to 20.2%, P=0.01). SDT no longer carries a high risk when appropriate desensitization, including the use of rituximab, is performed. Overall, the five-year graft survival rates were similar between RDT and SDT.

[Gemcitabine and cisplatin therapy in advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer: comparison of side effect with MVAC (methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin)].

OBJECTIVE: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy has been considered as standard therapy for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. A recent study has, however, revealed that gemcitabine may have the potential to act synergistically with cisplatin. Therefore, the side effects of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) therapy were compared with those of methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin (MVAC) therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-two patients received GC therapy. Gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) was administered on days 1, 8 and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Cisplatin (70 mg/m2) was administered on day 2 of each cycle. As a control group, 24 patients received MVAC therapy (methotrexate at 30 mg/m2 on days 1, 15, 22, vinblastine at 3 mg/m2 on days 2, 15, 22, doxorubicin at 30 mg/m2 on day 2, and cisplatin at 70 mg/m2 on day 2 of each 28-day cycle. RESULTS: In the group of patients which received GC therapy, the overall response rates based on independent radiologic reviews of the 20 patients with measurable disease were 55%, with 20% CR and 35% PR. Fewer GC patients as compared with MVAC patients had grade 3/4 anorexia (4.5% vs. 75%, respectively), stomatitis (9.0% vs. 66.7%, respectively), and alopecia (27.3% vs. 100%, respectively). On the other hand, there were no significant differences in the incidence or pattern of hematologic toxicities between the group receiving GC therapy and that receiving MVAC therapy. Fatal neutropenic sepsis occurred in one patient receiving MVAC therapy. CONCLUSION: GC therapy is effective for the treatment of advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with an acceptable clinical safety profile. This study also indicates that GC therapy may be better tolerated and safer than MVAC therapy.

Primary retroperitoneal lymphocele in a pregnant woman: the first report.

In a 32-year-old pregnant woman, routine ultrasonography revealed right hydronephrosis and a huge retroperitoneal mass (20 x 7 cm) containing a fluid collection. Percutaneous drainage of the mass was performed and 2 L of clear, yellowish fluid was collected. Four months following the delivery, a recurrent retroperitoneal lymphocele was identified. Six months after the delivery, laparoscopic marsupialization was performed through a 10-mm umbilical camera port and two 5-mm ports on the right side of the abdomen. A posterior peritoneal window was established by creating a wide opening in the anterior wall of the lymphocele. Subsequent ultrasonography did not indicate a recurrence of the lymphocele or right hydronephrosis over a follow-up period of 8 months.

Effects of angiotensin II receptor blocker on proteinuria in renal transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Therapeutic approaches directed at reducing proteinuria are under development. The aim of the present study was to prospectively elucidate the impact of losartan treatment in renal transplant recipients with persistent proteinuria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with persistent proteinuria or mild hypertension were assigned to receive losartan. Proteinuria was defined as a ratio of urinary protein to urinary creatinine (U(P)/U(Cr)) >0.5 in continual urinary tests in the outpatient setting. RESULTS: All patients with mild hypertension reached target blood pressure (BP) with losartan treatment, but the change was not significant. In twelve patients with proteinuria before initiation of the study, urinary protein excretion was significantly reduced with treatment. No correlation was observed between reductions in proteinuria and mean BP. A significant decrease was identified in the hemoglobin concentration of patients with serum creatinine concentrations >2.0 mg/dl before the study. DISCUSSION: Losartan efficiently reduces proteinuria in renal transplant recipients with adequate tolerance. Multicentric prospective studies are required to confirm its clinical effectiveness.

Effects of gentamicin on the recovery of renal function after unilateral hydronephrosis.

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infection is a complication of hydronephrosis and antibiotics such as gentamicin are indicated for treatment. However, gentamicin can cause drug-induced nephropathy in dehydrated patients. We used a rat kidney model to investigate the effects of gentamicin administration on functional recovery from unilateral hydronephrosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Gentamicin was intraperitoneally injected twice for 48 hours following the release of a unilateral ureteral obstruction. The function of both kidneys was separately quantified by Technetium-99mDMSA renoscintigraphy. We examined morphological changes in renal tubular cells by electron microscopy and by in situ DNA 3'-end labeling. RESULTS: Renal function in the contralateral, but not the obstructed, kidney was significantly damaged by gentamicin administration under our conditions and electron microscopy confirmed the presence of myeloid bodies in renal tubular cells. In situ DNA 3'-end labeling revealed characteristic damage to the renal tubules. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that damage to each kidney should be considered individually after gentamicin administration during recovery from hydronephrosis.