Does treatment of cadaveric organ donors with desmopressin increase the likelihood of pancreas graft thrombosis? Results of a preliminary study.

Desmopressin (DDAVP) is commonly used in cadaveric organ donors to treat diabetes insipidus. The thrombogenic potential of DDAVP is well known. Recent animal data have demonstrated that DDAVP impairs pancreas graft (PG) microcirculation and perfusion. The aim of this study was too evaluate the effect of DDAVP on the incidence of PG thrombosis in clinical pancreas transplantation. A retrospective review of simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplant (SKPT) entered in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) between 10/5/87 and 9/27/02 was performed. Patients were included for analysis if there was definitive documentation as to whether DDAVP was (DDAVP-Y) or was not (DDAVP-N) administered to the donor. Both dose and duration of DDAVP treatment were not recorded by SRTR. A total of 2804 SKPTs were available for analysis. Mean follow-up was 1.75 years (range, 1 month to 8.4 years). A total of 1287 SKPT patients (46%) received a PG from a DDAVP-Y donor. Graft ischemia times, donor and recipient ages, recipient gender distribution, surgical techniques, and immunosuppressive regimens were similar in both groups. The overall incidence of PG thrombosis was 4.3%. The incidence of PG thrombosis in recipients of grafts from DDAVP-Y donors was 5.1% compared to 3.5% in recipients of grafts from DDAVP-N donors (P =.04). Fifty-eight percent of thrombosed PG came from DDAVP-Y donors compared to 42% from DDAVP-N donors (P =.04). We conclude that there appears to be a relationship between donor treatment with DDAVP and PG thrombosis. A prospective study is needed to verify these findings and to determine their clinical significance.

Long-term outcome of sirolimus rescue in kidney-pancreas transplantation.

The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term outcome of sirolimus (SRL) rescue in kidney-pancreas transplantation (KPTx). We reviewed 112 KPTx performed at our institution from 12/3/95 to 6/27/02. All patients received antibody (Ab) induction, tacrolimus (TAC), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and steroids. Thirty-five patients (31%) had SRL substituted for MMF for the following indications: (1) acute rejection (AR) of kidney or pancreas despite adequate TAC levels; (2) intolerance of full-dose MMF; (3) rising creatinine; and (4) TAC-induced hyperglycemia. Target SRL and TAC levels were 10 ng/mL and 5 ng/mL, respectively. Mean follow-up was 3 +/- 2 years overall and 1.2 +/- 0.5 years after SRL rescue. No patients died. One- and 3-year actuarial kidney and pancreas graft survival was 97%, 97%, and 95%, 90%, respectively. Of 10 patients switched to SRL for AR, 1 kidney failed from Ab-resistant AR, 1 kidney developed borderline AR, and the other 8 remain AR-free. Seven other patients developed AR despite therapeutic SRL levels; of these, 6 (86%) had mean TAC levels of <4.5 in the month preceding AR. Mean creatinine overall and for the rising creatinine group remained stable. All patients switched to SRL for TAC-induced hyperglycemia or MMF intolerance demonstrated biochemical or clinical improvement. Sirolimus-related infection or other serious adverse events (SAE) were uncommon. In conclusion, KPTx recipients can be safely switched to SRL with long-term stabilization of renal function, excellent graft and patient survival, and no increase in SAE. A minimum TAC level of 4.5 ng/mL may be necessary to prevent late AR.

Further improvements in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: decreased pain and accelerated recovery.

Fear of postoperative pain is a disincentive to living donor kidney transplantation. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) was developed in part to dispel this disincentive. The dramatic increase in the number of laparoscopic donor nephrectomies performed at our institution has been in part due to the reduction in postoperative pain as compared to traditional, open donor nephrectomy. We sought to further diminish the pain associated with this surgical technique. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of three different postoperative pain management regimens after LDN. All living kidney donors performed laparoscopically (n=43) between September 1998 and April 2000 were included for analysis. Primary endpoints included postoperative narcotic requirements and length of stay. Narcotic usage was converted to morphine equivalents (ME) for comparison purposes. Patients received one of three pain control regimens (group 1: oral and intravenous narcotics; group II: oral and intravenous narcotics and the On-Q pump delivering a continuous infusion of subfascial bupivicaine 0.5%; and group III: oral and intravenous narcotics and subfascial bupivicaine 0.5% injection). Postoperative intravenous and oral narcotic use as measured in morphine equivalents was significantly less in group III versus groups I and II (group III: 28.7 ME versus group I: 40.2 ME, group II: 44.8 ME; P<0.05). Postoperative length of stay was also shorter for group III (1.8 days) versus group I (2.5 days) and group II (2.9 days). LDN has been shown to be a viable alternative to traditional open donor nephrectomy for living kidney donation. We observed that the use of combined oral and intravenous narcotics alone is associated with greater postoperative narcotic use and increased length of stay compared to either a combined oral and intravenous narcotics plus continuous or single injection subfascial administration of bupivicaine. The progressive modification of our analgesic regimen has resulted in decreased postoperative oral and intravenous narcotic use and a reduction in the length of stay. We recommend subfascial infiltration with bupivicaine to the three laparoscopic sites and the pfannenstiel incision at the conclusion of the procedure to reduce postoperative pain. We believe this improvement in postoperative pain management will continue to make LDN even more appealing to the potential living kidney donor.