Sleepiness and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Kidney Transplant Recipients in a Low-Middle Income Country: A Cross-Sectional Study.

This study aims to describe daytime sleepiness and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among Lebanese kidney transplant (KT) recipients and to examine the medical, psychosocial and transplant factors related to them. It is a cross-sectional multi-center study involving KT recipients >18 years. Daytime sleepiness was assessed using ESS Questionnaire. HRQoL was measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Social support was self-reported. A multivariable regression analysis evaluated factors associated with daytime sleepiness and HRQoL in our sample. 118 patients were recruited over a 2 years period. Excessive daytime sleepiness was prevalent in 12.7%. It was associated with Diabetes Mellitus (OR 3.97, 95% CI 0.94-16.81, p = 0.06) and obesity (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02, 1.27, p = 0.02). Social support and higher eGFR were associated with better scores on the MCS (ß 24.13 p < 0.001 and ß 0.26 p < 0.01) and the PCS (ß 15.48 p < 0.01 and ß 0.22 P 0.02). Conversely, depression and hospitalization were negatively associated with the MCS (ß -27.44, p < 0.01 and ß -9.87, p < 0.01) and the PCS (ß -0.28.49, p < 0.01 and ß -10.37, p < 0.01).

Prevalence of Y-chromosomal microdeletions and karyotype abnormalities in a cohort of Lebanese infertile men.

BACKGROUND: Male infertility is the main issue that accounts for 50% of infertility in couples. There are about 25% of men suffering from nonobstructive infertility with chromosomal abnormalities and/or microdeletions of the long arm of the Y-chromosome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on 241 men who performed Y-chromosome microdeletions and karyotype testing. RESULTS: Six patients had microdeletions. Three patients had AZFc microdeletion, of which one had both AZFc/d microdeletions. Three patients had AZFb/c microdeletion. There was no AZFa microdeletion. One out of the six patients had abnormal karyotype (mos, X[17]/46, XY[13]). Four patients were azoospermic, two had severe oligospermia, with sperm count <5 million/ml, and two patients had small size testicles on ultrasound. All were advised microsurgical testicular sperm extraction. Three were done, and one was successful resulting in sperm retrieval. The most common karyotype abnormalities were 47, XXY (Klinefelter syndrome) in 27% of cases. CONCLUSION: Laboratory genetic testing is advised for males with nonobstructive infertility. Any abnormal finding can yield substantial consequences to assisted reproductive techniques or fertility treatment. It can offer a stable diagnosis for those with infertility issues. It is important to conduct counseling and routine genetic testing before assisted reproductive techniques.

Cadaveric Organ Donation in Lebanon: Proposed Suggestions for Improvement.

Organ transplantation is the treatment of choice for most end-stage diseases, despite the continuous advancements in the medical and surgical field. The dilemma of the shortage between supply and demand of organs for transplantation has been an ongoing debate and concern. The well-known "Spanish Model" was established in 1989 and adopted by the National Transplant Organization. The main commitment of the National Transplant Organization is to increase organ donation and transplantation rates. The program was also successfully adopted in countries such as Australia and Great Britain as well as Latin-American countries. The system is based on recruitment of cadaveric organs by a specialized team in hospitals at the regional and national level. Lebanon hopes to initialize a model similar to the Spanish Model but faces several obstacles. Adopting such a model could help increase cadaveric organ donation in Lebanon.

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: The Middle East experience.

OBJECTIVES: To summarize the experience of the Middle East in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN), to discuss the associated advantages and salient problems, to examine the learning curve encountered compared with that of the pioneering centres in the West, and the contribution of the regional centres to the worldwide experience. METHODS: We searched Medline and PubMed for all centres performing LDN in the Middle East. Questionnaires were e-mailed to the regional transplantation centres, and programme directors, and leading urological and transplant surgeons were contacted by telephone. RESULTS: LDN in the Middle East was first introduced in 2000; this approach has been pioneered and practised at seven transplant centres within five countries in the region, and was restricted to only three Arab countries, i.e. Lebanon, Egypt and Kuwait. Data collection yielded a total of 888 procedures over one decade, representing only 2% of the total of ≈50,000 transplants during the same period. Despite variability of accurate reporting the overall outcomes were similar to those of open DN. The spectrum of complications was comparable to that from major centres in the USA during their learning curve. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of LDN in the Middle East has been gratifying. The relative hesitancy in introducing LDN in the rest of the Arab Middle East is multifaceted. The advantages conferred to the donor underscore the need for further expansion of this approach for kidney retrieval.

Evaluation of right versus left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

OBJECTIVES: With the advent of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, there has been a general underuse of right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus left because of concerns regarding higher complication rates and poorer outcomes. We performed a retrospective analysis of our laparoscopic donor nephrectomy series with an emphasis on the side of the kidney retrieved and the outcomes of donors and recipients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on 94 consecutive donor-recipient pairs (188 patients) were reviewed. All donor nephrectomies were performed by pure laparoscopy. There were 74 left laparoscopic donor nephrectomies and 20 right laparoscopic donor nephrectomies. Intraoperative parameters and graft outcome were recorded and the data were analyzed to compare right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy using a computer software system. Follow-up ranged from 1 to 6 years (mean, 3.4 y). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in any intraoperative or postoperative parameters, except in a slightly higher warm ischemia time in right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, but this did not translate into an adverse effect on renal recovery. Acute graft rejection was observed in 2 of 74 patients who had a left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (2.7%) and none of the patients who had a right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Chronic graft loss was observed in 2 of 74 patients who had a left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (2.7%); 1 of recurrent pyelonephritis and sepsis and 1 renal oxalosis. No graft losses were observed in any patient who had a right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Mean serum creatinine levels in recipients at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months were equivalent for right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy; they were 120, 110, 110, 110, 110 µmol/L, versus 110, 110, 110, 110, 110 µmol/L. (1.35, 1.21, 1.24, 1.21, 1.26 mg/dL versus 1.22, 1.17, 1.17, 1.17, 1.23 mg/dL). CONCLUSIONS: This single center study demonstrates equivalent results with left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with no adverse effects of right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy on donor-recipient outcome or renal function.