Clinical outcomes of intestinal transplant recipients receiving maintenance basiliximab, sublingual tacrolimus and prednisone: A case series.

INTRODUCTION: Intestinal transplantation poses a unique challenge in the field of solid organ transplantation. The combination of tacrolimus and prednisone stands as the foundational cornerstone of maintenance immunosuppression in the field of intestinal transplantation. This case series aims to describe 1-year clinical outcomes of 5 intestinal transplant recipients who received a novel immunosuppression regimen consisting of monthly basiliximab, sublingual tacrolimus, and prednisone. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent intestinal transplantation in our center between January 01, 2020, and January 31, 2022, was conducted. Each recipient was followed for at least 1-year post-transplant. Recipient baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and follow-up data were obtained from the electronic health records. Data collection included recipient demographics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, BMI), cause of intestinal failure, immunological data, infectiology data and treatment information. RESULTS: A total of five patients underwent intestinal transplantation, of which two males (40 %) and three females (60 %), with a median age of 20.1 years (17.4-28.8). The median (IQR) tacrolimus trough by month 1 was 10.4 (8.4-13.2) ng/mL. Subsequently, the median (IQR) tacrolimus troughs at specified periods are as follows, respectively: month 3: 10.2 (8.2-13.2) ng/mL; month 6: 8.4 (7.6-9.6) ng/mL; and month 12: 8.8 (6.2-9.8) ng/mL. Three patients (60.0 %) had biopsy proven rejection, but all of them had resolution after the optimization of immunosuppression. All patients were alive and had a functioning intestinal allograft at 1-year. CONCLUSION: The combination of monthly basiliximab, sublingual tacrolimus, and prednisone is an effective novel maintenance immunosuppression in intestinal transplantation. A larger and more extended study duration would be necessary to thoroughly assess the safety and sustained benefits of the novel maintenance immunosuppression regimen.

Single-center retrospective assessment of robotic-assisted simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants: Exploring clinical utility.

The diabetic population is witnessing a rise in obesity rates, creating specific hurdles for individuals seeking pancreas transplantation because they are frequently disqualified due to their elevated body weight. Introducing a robotic-assisted approach to transplantation has been proven to yield improved outcomes, particularly in patients with obesity. A retrospective analysis was conducted between January 2015 and September 2023. The study included a total of 140 patients, with 16 receiving robotic-assisted simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (RSPK) and 124 undergoing open approach simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (OSPK) during the study period. The median age was 45 (36.8-52.7) and 44.5 years (36.8-51.8) (RSPK vs OSPK, P = .487). There were no significant differences in demographics except body mass index (RSPK vs OSPK, 34.9 vs 28.1, P < .001) and a higher percentage of patients with high cardiac risk in the RSPK group. The robotic approach has a lengthier overall operative time and warm ischemia time. Surgical and nonsurgical complications at 30-days and 1-year grafts and patient survival (93.8% vs 96.8%, RSPK vs OSPK, P = .521) were similar. Our findings suggest that employing robotic assistance in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation is safe. Wider adoption and utilization of this technique could potentially improve transplant accessibility for individuals with obesity and diabetes.

Obesity and Kidney Transplantation-How to Evaluate, What to Do, and Outcomes.

Obesity is a growing issue that is spreading worldwide; its prevalence is ever increasing in patients with end-stage renal disease and represents a potential barrier to transplantation. The lack of unanimous guidelines exacerbates the current disparity in treatment, which can affect outcomes, leading to a significantly longer time on the waiting list. Multidisciplinary and multimodal management (encompassing several healthcare professionals such as nephrologists, transplant physicians and surgeons, primary care providers, and nurses) is of paramount importance for the optimal management of this patient population in a continuum from waitlisting to transplantation. Development of this guideline followed a standardized protocol for evidence review. In this review, we report on our clinical experience in transplantation of obese patients; strategies to manage this condition, including bariatric surgery, suitable timing for transplantation among this patient population, and clinical experience in robotic sleeve gastrectomy; and simultaneous robotic kidney transplantation to achieve optimal outcomes.

Robotic kidney transplantation from deceased donors: A single-center experience.

Robotic-assisted kidney transplant (RAKT) has proven to be a successful approach for patients with elevated body mass index (BMI). To date, a paucity of studies comprehensively analyzing the clinical outcomes of RAKT by using the grafts from deceased donors exists. This was a single-center retrospective analysis of RAKT from deceased donor kidneys (n = 93) from 2009 to 2021. The cohort was divided into 3 groups on the basis of recipient BMI (BMI ≤ 41.2 vs BMI 41.2-44.5 vs BMI ≥ 44.5 kg/m2, n = 31). Delayed graft function was significantly higher in the group with the highest BMI (BMI ≤ 41.2 vs BMI 41.2-44.5 vs BMI ≥ 44.5 kg/m2, 12.5% vs 10% vs 45.16%, P = .001). Graft survival after 12 months of follow-up was significantly lower in the group with BMI of ≥44.5 kg/m2 (BMI ≤ 41.2 vs BMI 41.2-44.5 vs BMI ≥ 44.5 kg/m2, 93.7% vs 100% vs 83.9%. P = .05). For BMI, the relative risk of patient survival was 1.10 for each increase in a BMI in the range of 5 (CI 95%, 0.98-1.21). Death-censored graft survival after 5 years was significantly better than the UNOS-matched cohort (dRAKT vs match, 86.2% vs 68.9%, P = .03). This single-center analysis shows that RAKT can be performed safely; however, caution should be used when matching marginal kidneys with patients with high BMI.

Corrigendum: Donor Size Doesn't Impact En Bloc Kidney Transplant Outcomes: A Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10731.].

Donor Size Doesn't Impact En Bloc Kidney Transplant Outcomes: A Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature.

Few transplant programs use kidneys from donors with body weight (BW)<10 kg due to higher incidence of vascular and urological complications, and DGF. The purpose of this study was to investigate the non-inferiority of pediatric en bloc kidneys from donors with BW<10 kg. We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of en bloc kidney transplants from pediatric donor cohort (n = 46) from 2003 to 2021 and stratified the outcomes by donor BW (small group, donor BW<10 kg, n = 30; standard group, donor BW<10 kg, n = 16). Graft function, rate of early post-transplant complications, graft and patient survival were analyzed. Complication rates were similar between both groups with 1 case of arterial thrombosis in the smaller group. Overall graft and patient survival rates were similar between the small and the standard group (graft survival-90% vs. 100%, p = 0.09; patient survival-96.7 vs. 100%, p = 0.48). Serum creatinine at 1, 3, 5 years was no different between groups. Reoperation rate was higher in the small group (23.3% vs. 6.25%, p = 0.03). The allograft from small donors could be related to higher reoperation rate in the early post-transplant period, but not associated with lower long-term graft and patient survival.

Tracheostomy Following Liver Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: With increased demand for liver transplantation, sicker patients are being transplanted frequently. These patients are at a higher risk of significant postoperative morbidity, including respiratory failure. This study evaluated the phenotype that characterizes liver transplant candidates who may benefit from early tracheostomy. METHODS: A single center retrospective review of all liver transplant candidates between January 2012 and December 2017. Patients who eventually required tracheostomies were identified and compared to their counterparts. RESULTS: Of the 130 liver transplants performed during the study period, 11 patients required tracheostomy. Although patients in the tracheostomized population (TP) did not have significantly worse preoperative functional status (<4 metabolic equivalents; 64% vs 42%, P = .21), they had a higher native model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (37 vs 30, P < .05) at the time of transplantation. Patients who eventually succumbed to respiratory failure had lower arterial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratios at the start of surgery and remained unchanged for the duration of surgery compared with the nontracheostomy group (P < .05). TP patients required more net fluid intraoperatively (7.3 vs 5.0 L, P < .05), increased length of time to attempted extubation (3.5 vs 1 day, P < .05), longer ventilation days (15 vs 1 day, P < .05), increased length of stay (37 vs 9 days, P < .05), and higher 1-year mortality (36% vs 8%, P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, patients with a high MELD score (>30), net postoperative fluid balance >6 L, and PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤300 who fail to wean off mechanical ventilation after 72 hours may benefit from tracheostomy during the postoperative period.