Intravenous Immunoglobulins in the Prevention of Rejection of a Second or Third Kidney Graft.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) reduces acute rejection episodes in kidney transplantation, but adverse events (AEs) are common. The aim of this study was to assess whether human IVIg enhances immunosuppressive effects without increasing AEs in the prevention of acute kidney graft rejection. METHODS: Patients receiving a second or third kidney graft were treated with standard immunosuppressant therapy with (n = 18) or without (n = 10) IVIg. The primary efficacy endpoint was biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) rate at 3 months, and secondary endpoints included acute rejection rate at 12 months, intensity of rejection, and patient survival. RESULTS: Patients in the experimental arm received 3 infusions of IVIg. The BPAR rate decreased with IVIg versus standard immunosuppression alone over 12 months of follow-up. Experimental versus control rates of survival without BPAR were 94% versus 63% and 82% versus 63% at 3 and 12 months. The intensity of the acute rejection episodes (BANFF 97 grade) was similar between groups. One patient from each group died during the 12-month follow-up period. Treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 100% and 94.4% of the control and experimental arms. Most AEs were considered unrelated or unlikely to be related to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the efficacy and safety of IVIg in highly sensitized transplant patients for improving transplant rates and reducing graft rejection episodes.

European Renal Best Practice Guideline on kidney donor and recipient evaluation and perioperative care

The European Best Practice Guideline group (EBPG) issued guidelines on the evaluation and selection of kidney donor and kidney transplant candidates, as well as post-transplant recipient care, in the year 2000 and 2002. The new European Renal Best Practice board decided in 2009 that these guidelines needed updating. In order to avoid duplication of efforts with kidney disease improving global outcomes, which published in 2009 clinical practice guidelines on the post-transplant care of kidney transplant recipients, we did not address these issues in the present guidelines.The guideline was developed following a rigorous methodological approach: (i) identification of clinical questions, (ii) prioritization of questions, (iii) systematic literature review and critical appraisal of available evidence and (iv) formulation of recommendations and grading according to Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The strength of each recommendation is rated 1 or 2, with 1 being a 'We recommend' statement, and 2 being a 'We suggest' statement. In addition, each statement is assigned an overall grade for the quality of evidence: A (high), B (moderate), C (low) or D (very low). The guideline makes recommendations for the evaluation of the kidney transplant candidate as well as the potential deceased and living donor, the immunological work-up of kidney donors and recipients and perioperative recipient care.All together, the work group issued 112 statements. There were 51 (45%) recommendations graded '1', 18 (16%) were graded '2' and 43 (38%) statements were not graded. There were 0 (0%) recommendations graded '1A', 15 (13%) were '1B', 19 (17%) '1C' and 17 (15%) '1D'. None (0%) were graded '2A', 1 (0.9%) was '2B', 8 (7%) were '2C' and 9 (8%) '2D'. Limitations of the evidence, especially the lack of definitive clinical outcome trials, are discussed and suggestions are provided for future research.We present here the complete recommendations about the evaluation of the kidney transplant candidate as well as the potential deceased and living donor, the immunological work-up of kidney donors and recipients and the perioperative recipient care. We hope that this document will help caregivers to improve the quality of care they deliver to patients. The full version with methods, rationale and references is published in Nephrol Dial Transplant (2013) 28: i1-i71; doi: 10.1093/ndt/gft218 and can be downloaded freely from http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/ndt/era_edta.html.

Daclizumab Versus Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin in High-Risk Renal Transplants: Five-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Study.

We previously reported a randomized controlled trial in which 227 de novo deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients were randomized to rabbit antithymocyte (rATG, Thymoglobulin) or daclizumab if they were considered to be at high immunological risk, defined as high panel reactive antibodies (PRA), loss of a first kidney graft through rejection within 2 years of transplantation, or third or fourth transplantation. Patients treated with rATG had lower incidences of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and steroid-resistant rejection at 1 year. Patients were followed to 5 years posttransplant in an observational study; findings are described here. Treatment with rATG was associated with a lower rate of BPAR at 5 years (14.2% vs. 26.0% with daclizumab; p = 0.035). Only one rATG-treated patient (0.9%) and one daclizumab-treated patient (1.0%) developed BPAR after 1 year. Five-year graft and patient survival rates, and renal function, were similar between the two groups. Overall graft survival at 5 years was significantly higher in patients without BPAR (81.0% vs. 54.8%; p < 0.001). In conclusion, rATG is superior to daclizumab for the prevention of BPAR among high-immunological-risk renal transplant recipients. Overall graft survival at 5 years was approximately 70% with either induction therapy, which compares favorably to low-risk cohorts.

A more than 20% increase in deceased-donor organ procurement and transplantation activity after the use of donation after circulatory death.

BACKGROUND: Organ procurement and transplant activity from controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) was evaluated over an 11-year period to determine whether this program influenced the transplant and donation after brain death (DBD) activities. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Deceased donor (DD) procurement and transplant data were prospectively collected in a local database for retrospective review. RESULTS: There was an increasing trend in the potential and actual DCD numbers over time. DCD accounted for 21.9% of the DD pool over 11 years, representing 23.7% and 24.2% of the DD kidney and liver pool, respectively. The DBD retrieval and transplant activity increased during the same time period. Mean conversion rate turning potential into effective DCD donors was 47.3%. Mean DCD donor age was 54.6 years (range, 3-83). Donors ≥60 years old made up 44.1% of the DCD pool. Among referred donors, reasons for nondonation were medical contraindications (33.7%) and family refusals (19%). Mean organ yield per DCD donor was 2.3 organs. Mean total procurement warm ischemia time was 19.5 minutes (range, 6-39). In 2012, 17 DCD and 37 DBD procurements were performed in the Liege region, which has slightly >1 million inhabitants. CONCLUSIONS: This DCD program implementation enlarged the DD pool and did not compromise the development of DBD programs. The potential DCD pool might be underused and seems to be a valuable organ donor source.

A comparative, randomized trial of concentration-controlled sirolimus combined with reduced-dose tacrolimus or standard-dose tacrolimus in renal allograft recipients.

BACKGROUND: The clinical safety and efficacy of sirolimus plus reduced-dose tacrolimus was evaluated in de novo renal allograft recipients enrolled in a comparative, open-label study. METHODS: One hundred twenty-eight renal allograft recipients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive reduced-dose tacrolimus plus sirolimus (rTAC) or standard-dose tacrolimus and sirolimus (sTAC) for 6 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was calculated creatinine clearance values at 6 months. RESULTS: Demographic variables were similar between groups. At 6 months, mean (± standard deviation) calculated creatinine clearance was significantly improved in the rTAC group (63.8 vs 52.7 mL/min, P = .005), although mean serum creatinine values were not significantly different. Patient survival (95.2% and 96.9%) and graft survival (93.7% and 98.5%) were similar between the rTAC and sTAC groups, respectively. Acute rejection rates were 17.5% with rTAC and 7.7% with sTAC (P = .095). CONCLUSIONS: The rTAC regimen provided effective immunosuppression and was associated with improved creatinine clearance. Adequate immunosuppressant exposure must be achieved in the early postoperative period to minimize the risk of acute rejection.

Categories of donation after cardiocirculatory death.

The interest in donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD) was renewed in the early 1990s, as a means to partially overcome the shortage of donations after brain death. In some European countries and in the United States, DCD has become an increasingly frequent procedure over the last decade. To improve the results of DCD transplantation, it is important to compare practices, experiences, and results of various teams involved in this field. It is therefore crucial to accurately define the different types of DCD. However, in the literature, various DCD terminologies and classifications have been used, rendering it difficult to compare reported experiences. The authors have presented herein an overview of the various DCD descriptions in the literature, and have proposed an adapted DCD classification to better define the DCD processes, seeking to provide a better tool to compare the results of published reports and to improve current practices. This modified classification may be modified in the future according to ongoing experiences in this field.

Pancreas preservation for pancreas and islet transplantation: a minireview.

Pancreas preservation by cold storage using University of Wisconsin solution was the mainstay method used for pancreas transplantation during the past 2 decades. Other solutions, such as HTK, Celsior, and SCOT 15, could not demonstrate any advantage for short preservation periods. But the advent of clinical islet transplantation and the larger use of controlled non-heart-beating donors have prompted the transplantation community to develop methods for increasing pancreas graft quality while preventing ischemic reperfusion damages. Oxygenation by 1- or 2-layer methods during pancreas preservation, as well as the use of perfluorocarbons, might increase the islet yield. Based on the former methods, there is a renewed interest in machine perfusion and oxygenation in pancreas preservation for pancreas transplantation and islet preparation.

End of life care in the operating room for non-heart-beating donors: organization at the University Hospital of Liège.

Non-heart-beating (NHB) organ donation has become an alternative source to increase organ supply for transplantation. A NHB donation program was implemented in our institution in 2002. As in many institutions the end of life care of the NHB donor (NHBD) is terminated in the operating room (OR) to reduce warm ischemia time. Herein we have described the organization of end of life care for these patients in our institution, including the problems addressed, the solution proposed, and the remaining issues. Emphasis is given to our protocol elaborated with the different contributors of the chain of the NHB donation program. This protocol specifies the information mandatory in the medical records, the end of life care procedure, the determination of death, and the issue of organ preservation measures before NHBD death. The persisting malaise associated with NHB donation reported by OR nurses is finally documented using an anonymous questionnaire.

The prognostic value of renal resistance during hypothermic machine perfusion of deceased donor kidneys.

Vascular renal resistance (RR) during hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) is frequently used in kidney graft quality assessment. However, the association between RR and outcome has never been prospectively validated. Prospectively collected RR values of 302 machine-perfused deceased donor kidneys of all types (standard and extended criteria donor kidneys and kidneys donated after cardiac death), transplanted without prior knowledge of these RR values, were studied. In this cohort, we determined the association between RR and delayed graft function (DGF) and 1-year graft survival. The RR (mmHg/mL/min) at the end of HMP was an independent risk factor for DGF (odds ratio 38.1 [1.56-934]; p = 0.026) [corrected] but the predictive value of RR was low, reflected by a c-statistic of the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.58. The RR was also found to be an independent risk factor for 1-year graft failure (hazard ratio 12.33 [1.11-136.85]; p = 0.004). Determinants of transplant outcome are multifactorial in nature and this study identifies RR as an additional parameter to take into account when evaluating graft quality and estimating the likelihood of successful outcome. However, RR as a stand-alone quality assessment tool cannot be used to predict outcome with sufficient precision.

Contribution of donors after cardiac death to the deceased donor pool: 2002 to 2009 University of Liege experience.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we have evaluated the organ procurement and transplantation activity from donors after cardiac death (DCD) at our institution over an 8-year period. Our aim was to determine whether this program influenced transplantation programs, or donation after brain death (DBD) activity. METHODS: We prospectively collected our procurement and transplantation statistics in a database for retrospective review. RESULTS: We observed an increasing trend in potential and actual DCD number. The mean conversion rate turning potential into effective donors was 58.1%. DCD accounted for 16.6% of the deceased donor (DD) pool over 8 years. The mean age for effective DCD donors was 53.9 years (range, 3-79). Among the effective donors, 63.3% (n = 31) came from the transplant center and 36.7% (n = 18) were referred from collaborative hospitals. All donors were Maastricht III category. The number of kidney and liver transplants using DCD sources tended to increase. DCD kidney transplants represented 10.8% of the DD kidney pool and DCD liver transplants made up 13.9% of the DD liver pool over 8 years. The DBD program activity increased in the same time period. In 2009, 17 DCD and 33 DBD procurements were performed in a region with a little >1 million inhabitants. CONCLUSION: The establishment of a DCD program in our institution enlarged the donor pool and did not compromise the development of the DBD program. In our experience, DCD are a valuable source for abdominal organ transplantation.

A retrospective monocenter review of simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: Herein we have reviewed a consecutive series of simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplantations performed at our institution over a 6-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population included 22 patients (15 males and 7 females) who underwent SPK transplantation between 2001 and 2007. The mean recipient age was 47 years (range, 26-63 years). Eighteen patients suffered type 1 and 4 type 2 diabetes mellitus. The mean donor age was 33 years (range, 14-56 years). The mean HLA match was 2.1 (range, 1-5). Immunosuppressive treatment consisted of basiliximab induction followed by tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone. RESULTS: The mean hospital stay was 20 days (range, 11-52 days). After a mean follow-up of 44 months (range, 17-88 months), patient, kidney, and pancreas graft survivals were 86%, 82%, and 73%, respectively. Two patients died in the immediate postoperative period due to, respectively, disseminated intravascular coagulation and pulmonary embolism. A kidney graft was lost due to early hyperacute rejection. Other early complications associated with the pancreas graft included 2 cases of immediate reperfusion defects that led to early vascular thrombosis in 1 patient and a duodenal graft fistula in the other patient; a third patient developed type 2 diabetes mellitus. Beyond the postoperative period, graft loss was limited to 1 case of noncompliance to the immunosuppressive medications and 1 death secondary to pulmonary infection with a functional allograft after 4 years. CONCLUSIONS: SPK transplantation is a valid therapeutic option for patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and renal failure due to diabetic nephropathy. The main complications of SPK transplantation occur in the immediate postoperative period consequent to vascular or rejection processes.

Pharmacokinetics for once- versus twice-daily tacrolimus formulations in de novo kidney transplantation: a randomized, open-label trial.

Tacrolimus, a cornerstone immunosuppressant, is widely available as a twice-daily formulation (Tacrolimus BID). A once-daily prolonged-release formulation (Tacrolimus QD) has been developed that may improve adherence and impart long-lasting graft protection. This study compared the pharmacokinetics (PK) of tacrolimus in de novo kidney transplant patients treated with Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. A 6-week, open-label, randomized comparative study was conducted in centers in Europe and Australia. Eligible patients received Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. PK profiles were obtained following the first tacrolimus dose (day 1), and twice under steady-state conditions. As secondary objectives, efficacy and safety parameters were also evaluated. Sixty-six patients completed all PK profiles (34 Tacrolimus QD, 32 Tacrolimus BID). Mean AUC(0-24) of tacrolimus on day 1 was approximately 30% lower for Tacrolimus QD than Tacrolimus BID (232 and 361 ng.h/mL, respectively), but was comparable by day 4. There was a good correlation and a similar relationship between AUC(0-24) and C(min) for both formulations. Efficacy and safety data were also comparable over the 6-week period. Tacrolimus QD can be administered once daily in the morning on the basis of the same systemic exposure and therapeutic drug monitoring concept as Tacrolimus BID.

Liver transplant donation after cardiac death: experience at the University of Liege.

OBJECTIVE: Donation after cardiac death (DCD) has been proposed to overcome in part the organ donor shortage. In liver transplantation, the additional warm ischemia time associated with DCD procurement may promote higher rates of primary nonfunction and ischemic biliary lesions. We reviewed the results of liver transplantation from DCD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 2003 to 2007, we consecutively performed 13 controlled DCD liver transplantations. The medical records of all donors and recipients were retrospectively reviewed, evaluating in particular the outcome and occurrence of biliary complications. Mean follow-up was 25 months. RESULTS: Mean donor age was 51 years, and mean intensive care unit stay was 5.4 days. Mean time between ventilation arrest and cardiac arrest was 9.3 minutes. Mean time between cardiac arrest and arterial flushing was 7.7 minutes. No-touch period was 2 to 5 minutes. Mean graft cold ischemia time was 295 minutes, and mean suture warm ischemia time was 38 minutes. Postoperatively, there was no primary nonfunction. Mean peak transaminase level was 2546 UI/mL. Patient and graft survival was 100% at 1 year. Two of 13 patients (15%) developed main bile duct stenosis and underwent endoscopic management of the graft. No patient developed symptomatic intrahepatic bile duct strictures or needed a second transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience confirms that controlled DCD donors may be a valuable source of transplantable liver grafts in cases of short warm ischemia at procurement and minimal cold ischemia time.

The history of pancreas transplantation: past, present and future.

The first attempt to cure type 1 diabetes by pancreas transplantation was done at the University of Minnesota, in Minneapolis, on December 17, 1966, followed by a series of whole pancreas transplantation. Due to the lack of potent immunosuppressive drugs, rejections and infections, it was concluded that pancreas was less antigenic than the kidney which was less antigenic than the duodenum. It opened the door to a period, between the mid 70's to mid 80's where only segmental pancreatic grafts were used in the recipient. Numerous techniques for diverting or dealing with the pancreas juice secretion were described, none of them being satisfactory. In the late 70's - early 80's, three major events happened and boosted the development of pancreas transplantation: firstly the introduction of Cyclosporine A in the clinical field, secondly the organization on March 1980, of the first international meeting on Pancreas Transplantation with the first report of the International Pancreas Transplantation Registry (IPTR) and finally in 1982, the organization of the first informal so-called Spitzingsee meetings where pancreas transplantation successes but mainly failures were discussed which precluded the onset of IPITA (International Pancreas and Islet Transplantation Association), EuroSPK (European Study Group for simultaneous Pancreas and Kidney Transplantation) and EPITA (European Pancreas and Islet Transplantation Association). During one of the Spitzingsee meetings, participants had the idea to renew the urinary drainage technique of the exocrine secretion of the pancreatic graft with segmental graft and eventually with whole pancreaticoduodenal transplant. That was clinically achieved during the mid 80's and remained the mainstay technique during the next decade. In parallel, the Swedish group developed the whole pancreas transplantation technique with enteric diversion. It was the onset of the whole pancreas reign. The enthusiasm for the technique was rather moderated in its early phase due to the rapid development of liver transplantation and the need for sharing vascular structures between both organs, liver and pancreas. During the modern era of immunosuppression, the whole pancreas transplantation technique with enteric diversion became the gold standard for simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation (SPK), with portal drainage of the venous effluent of the pancreas, even for pancreas after kidney (PAK) or pancreas transplantation alone (PTA). Today, there remains room for improvement: safety of using the duodeno-duodenal anastomosis technique must be confirmed by prospective analysis while preventing ischemic reperfusion injuries, using specific drugs; that must be assessed in new trials.

Severe diarrhea in renal transplant patients: results of the DIDACT study.

Diarrhea is common in transplant recipients. While the majority of cases are mild and transient, some are severe and prolonged, which can threaten graft survival through dehydration. While it is known that some immunosuppressive agents can elicit diarrhea, there does not appear to be any consensus on the role that other nonimmunosuppressive causes can play in transplant patients. The aim of the present open, nonrandomized, multicenter study was to identify nonimmunosuppressive factors involved in severe diarrhea in renal transplant patients. Patients (n = 108) with severe diarrhea (>/=3 stools/day for >/=7 days) were enrolled from 16 Belgian transplant centers. Patients were diagnosed according to an agreed flowchart that consisted of identification of possible infections, followed by changes in empirical and immunosuppressive treatment. Approximately 50% of patients experienced resolution of severe diarrhea following treatment for infections, dietary problems or diarrhea-causing concomitant medications. In conclusion, a large proportion of the severe diarrhea observed in renal transplant recipients is not associated with immunosuppressive therapy and can be treated through anti-infectives, changes to concomitant medication and other empirical treatments. Correct diagnosis of the cause of severe diarrhea in such patients should help to protect graft survival in transplant recipients.

Non-heart-beating donor, renewal of an old procedure: a Belgian experience.

The shortage of donated organs has become a problem in transplantation throughout the world. Transplant teams are looking for other ways to increase and improve the donor pool. Non-heart-beating donation may be a source to increase the number of donors, even if some technical, logistical, and emotional problems are encountered. The results obtained by our team should stimulate other centers to implement this kind of donation in their hospitals. We describe our experience in the policy of non-heart-beating donation and encourage transplant centers to develop such a program.

The use of cyclosporine in renal and pancreas transplantation.

Pancreas transplantation started in December 1966 at the University of Minnesota but the number of transplants eventually increased in the early 1980s for two main reasons: the refinement in surgical techniques and the advent of cyclosporine. In that period, we moved from segmental grafts (duct injection, open-duct, pancreaticojejunostomy on a Roux-en-Y loop) to whole pancreaticoduodenal transplants with bladder and enteric drainage of the exocrine secretion. Despite its toxic effect at high dosage, cyclosporine was the basic immunosuppressive therapy and helped to develop the principle of the combination therapy as well as the pancreas transplantation field. Today, simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation is the gold standard procedure for end-stage type 1 diabetic nephropathy recipients.

Cardiovascular risk factors of sirolimus compared with cyclosporine: early experience from two randomized trials in renal transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Renal transplant recipients are at a higher risk of cardiovascular events, including death. This paper examines cardiovascular risk factors in two phase II studies comparing cyclosporine (CsA) with sirolimus-based therapy. METHODS: In two phase II studies, patients (n = 161) were randomized at the time of transplantation to receive either sirolimus or CsA in triple-therapy regimens with either azathioprine (Study A) or mycophenolate mofetil (Study B), and corticosteroids. Sirolimus whole blood trough levels were targeted to 30 ng/mL for 2 months and 15 ng/mL thereafter. Pooled results of the two studies are reported. RESULTS: When patients receiving sirolimus were compared with those receiving CsA, peak cholesterol and trigylcerides at 2 months were markedly and significant higher with sirolimus therapy. The difference between groups decreased thereafter and was not significant from 12 through 24 months. Control of lipid parameters in sirolimus-treated patients was achieved by decreasing the target trough levels after 2 months and by using lipid-lowering agents. Sirolimus-based therapy was associated with a lower incidence of treatment-emergent hypertension (47.5% vs 29.6%, P <.024). At 24 months, the calculated glomerular filtration rate was significantly better with sirolimus (51.3 vs 65.1 mL/min, P <.001). There were no significant differences in the incidences of diabetes or death due to cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving sirolimus experience an initial increase in lipid levels, but these effects are manageable with the use of lipid-lowering agents. Hypertension was less frequent and renal function was improved with CsA-free, sirolimus-based therapy. Based on this early experience, overall cardiovascular risk does not appear to be increased with sirolimus-based compared with CsA-based therapy.