Urologic Complications After Transplantation of Kidneys With Duplicated Ureter: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Duplication of ureters is a common anatomic abnormality and occurs in 0.7% to 1% of the general population. In this article we focus on the safety of using of kidneys with complete ureteral duplication, provided no hydronephrosis or ureterocele was present in the donor. METHODS: From 1998 to March 2018 there were 1965 kidneys transplanted at our institution, including 27 kidneys with duplicated ureter, which corresponds to incidence of 1.4%. Patients' medical records, surgery protocols, and Poltransplant registries were searched for urinary complications. RESULTS: In the double ureter group, urologic complications occurred in 4 patients (15.4%). Similarly, severe urinary complications developed in 4 patients from the control group (17.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Transplantation of kidneys with duplicated ureters appears to be a safe and feasible procedure.

Analysis of Distribution of Expanded- and Standard-Criteria Donors and Complications Among Polish Recipients by Kidney Donor Risk Index Value.

INTRODUCTION: The approach toward transplanting kidneys from expanded-criteria donors (ECDs) in Poland is largely site-dependent. The Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) allows for obtaining a more precise characteristic of ECDs and further stratification into "better" and "worse" quality grafts. METHODS: Comparison of the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) and biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), median of hospitalization time and median of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 1 year after transplantation among kidney graft recipients (n = 468), divided by donor status (ECD/standard-criteria donor [SCD]) and KDRI value (I: 0.67-1.2, II: 1.21-1.6, III: 1.61-2.0, IV: 2.01-3.48). RESULTS: ECD kidneys have been transplanted to 32.47% of recipients. There were no ECD recipients in KDRI compartment I, 16.55% in compartment II, 79.22% in compartment III, and 100% in IV. In KDRI compartment II, DGF was diagnosed in 34.9% of SCDs and 56% of ECDs (P = .003), BPAR occurred in 7.8% of SCDs and 16% of ECDs (P = .073), median hospital stay was 12 days for SCDs and ECDs (P = 1), and eGFR was 50.7 mL/min for SCDs and 49.4 mL/min for ECDs (P = .734). In KDRI compartment III, DGF was diagnosed in 43.8% of SCDs and 49.2% of ECDs (P = .139), BPAR occurred in 6.3% of SCDs and 31.7% of ECDs (P = .001), median hospital stay was 10 days for SCDs and 12 days for ECDs (P = .634), and eGFR was 49.5 mL/min for SCDs and 45.2 mL/min for ECDs (P = .382). Among ECD recipients, DGF was diagnosed in 56.0%, 49.2%, and 47.7% of patients for KDRI compartments II, III, and IV respectively (P = .776); BPAR occurred in 16% (compartment II), 31.7% (compartment III), and 23.1% (compartment IV) (P = .273); the median hospital stay was 12 days (compartment II), 12 days (compartment III), and 12.5 days (compartment IV) (P = 1); and eGFR was 49.5 mL/min (compartment II), 45.4 mL/min (compartment III), and 36.1 mL/min (compartment IV) (P = .002). CONCLUSION: Assessment using both the ECD and KDRI systems allows for a more precise evaluation of prognosis and predicting complications among recipients.

National Transplants Registry in Poland: Early and Long-term Results of Organ Transplantations in the Years 1998 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: In 2006, the National Transplants Registry, administered by the national transplant organization, was introduced in Poland for monitoring the results of organ transplantations. Statistical analysis is published yearly in Poltransplant Bulletin and publicly available on the website and reported to European institutions. The Transplants Registry cooperates with another registers functioning on-line, based on the web-net tool www.rejestry.net. We present the formal analysis of data collected for the years 1998 to 2014. METHODS: Analysis covered the total number of organ transplantations in every transplant center; outcomes after 3 months and 1, 3, and 5 years; and if data were available after 10, 15, and 20 years from transplantation. Results presented are real, not extrapolated. RESULTS: Some examples are as follows. The total number of deceased kidney transplantations was 15,009; 1-year recipient survival was 95%, graft survival was 88% (data completeness of 81%), 5-year recipient survival was 87%, and graft survival was 74% (data completeness of 82%). The total number of deceased liver transplantations was 3143; 1-year recipient survival was 84%, graft survival was 81% (data completeness of 99%), 5-year recipient survival was 73%, and graft survival was 89% (data completeness of 99%). CONCLUSIONS: The National Transplant Registry is an important tool for quality and safety systems in the transplantation field on the national level. Nowadays, the Registry efficiently and effectively fulfills its tasks related to collecting records of all performed transplantations. Monitoring function for graft and recipient survival is also satisfied. Collected numbers are an important and unique source of information to be used by transplant institutions and referred to in the literature.

Renal Transplantation Using Kidneys Procured From Elderly Donors Older Than 70 Years.

AIM: A major problem for the transplant society is a shortage of organs for transplantation compared with the number of patients on the waiting list. This study aimed to assess the results of the transplantation of kidneys procured from older donors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 27 kidneys procured from donors age 70 years or older were transplanted between January 1, 2010, and April 25, 2015. These represented only 4.1% of the 657 kidneys transplanted from deceased donors during this period at the same center. RESULTS: Delayed graft function (DGF) in the recipients of kidneys procured from donors age 70 or older occurred in 46.1% of patients, whereas the recipients of kidneys from younger donors showed DGF at a frequency of 32.7% (P = NS). The annual and 3-year survival rates of kidneys in the study group were 85% and 80%, respectively, and in the control group were 92.5% and 88.6%, respectively (P = NS). According to the Polish National Organ Procurement Organization (Poltransplant), the annual survival rate of a transplanted kidney in Poland stands at 89%, whereas the 3-year survival rate is 82%. We detected no significant posttransplantation differences in the serum creatinine concentration and in the estimated glomerular filtration rate between the study and control groups. The donor age and donor creatinine were the variables independently associated with DGF. CONCLUSIONS: The results of transplantation of kidneys from elderly donors were comparable to those of transplantation from younger donors. Kidneys harvested from elderly donors should be used for a transplant after a preliminary assessment.

Risk factors in cadaveric donors of livers procured for elective and urgent recipients.

Use of livers from cadaveric nonstandard donors has become justified, especially for recipients awaiting urgent transplantations. However, it is known that results are superior when organs are obtained from ideal rather than expanded-criteria donors. We designed a study to compare the characteristics of 582 liver donors whose organs were used for elective versus urgent transplantations in 2006-2008 and the recipients' outcomes. Donors and recipients were classified into 2 groups: 1) elective (n = 387); and 2) urgent transplantations (n = 195). We evaluated 12 donor risk factors: age >55 years, alcohol ingestion, intensive care unit stay >4 days, hypotensive episodes (<70 mm Hg >10 min), noradrenaline dose >0.1 µg/kg/min, anti-hepatitis B of core (+), Na level >155 mmol/L, international normalized ratio >1.5, aspartate transaminase >140 U/L, alanine transaminase >170 U/L, bilirubin >2.0 mg/dL, and changes in liver sonography. There were no significant differences in the frequency of incidence of 11 donor risk factors in both groups. Only sodium level >155 mEq/L significantly (P = .04) differed. Donors for elective recipients showed this factor more frequently than the urgent cohort. The mean number of risk factors per donor among the elective cases was 2.28 and for the urgent cases 2.3, a difference that was not significant. In almost all cases of liver transplantations (94%), donor-related risk factors were acceptable. The criteria for cadaveric liver donors were not different for elective versus urgent recipients; biologic characteristics of the transplanted organs were similar in both groups. A tendency was not observed to expand donor criteria for urgent recipients.