The impact of time to death in donors after circulatory death on recipient outcome in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation.

The time to arrest donors after circulatory death is unpredictable and can vary. This leads to variable periods of warm ischemic damage prior to pancreas transplantation. There is little evidence supporting procurement team stand-down times based on donor time to death (TTD). We examined what impact TTD had on pancreas graft outcomes following donors after circulatory death (DCD) simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation. Data were extracted from the UK transplant registry from 2014 to 2022. Predictors of graft loss were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model. Adjusted restricted cubic spline models were generated to further delineate the relationship between TTD and outcome. Three-hundred-and-seventy-five DCD simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplant recipients were included. Increasing TTD was not associated with graft survival (adjusted hazard ratio HR 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.68-1.41, P = .901). Increasing asystolic time worsened graft survival (adjusted hazard ratio 2.51, 95% confidence interval 1.16-5.43, P = .020). Restricted cubic spline modeling revealed a nonlinear relationship between asystolic time and graft survival and no relationship between TTD and graft survival. We found no evidence that TTD impacts pancreas graft survival after DCD simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation; however, increasing asystolic time was a significant predictor of graft loss. Procurement teams should attempt to minimize asystolic time to optimize pancreas graft survival rather than focus on the duration of TTD.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection Can Lead to an Increase in Tacrolimus Levels in Renal Transplant Patients: A Cohort Study.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection on serum tacrolimus levels. Tacrolimus levels of 34 transplant patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 in 2020 were compared with their pre-infection values and those of a control group with alternative infections. 20 out of 34 (59%) had high levels. At diagnosis, median tacrolimus level in the SARS-CoV-2 cohort was 9.6 µg/L (2.7-23) compared to 7.9 µg/L in the control group (p = 0.07, 95% CI for difference -0.3-5.8). The ratio of post-infection to pre-infection tacrolimus values was higher in the SARS-CoV-2 group (1.7) compared to the control group (1.25, p = 0.018, 95% CI for difference 0.08-0.89). The acute kidney injury rate was 65% (13 of 20) in SARS-CoV-2 patients with a level >8 µg/dl, compared to 29% (4 of 14) in those with lower levels (p = 0.037). Median length of stay was 10 days among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with high tacrolimus levels compared to 0 days in the rest (p = 0.04). Four patients with high levels died compared to 2 in the control group. Clinicians should be aware of this potential effect on tacrolimus levels and take appropriate measures.

SARS-CoV-2 in Kidney Transplant and Waitlisted Patients During the First Peak: The Welsh Experience.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) global pandemic has led to many health care services, including transplantation, being temporarily suspended. For transplantation to safely recommence, there is a need to understand the effects of SARS-CoV-2 in transplant and waitlist patients. We identified 21 patients with proven SARS-CoV-2 infection (13 transplant; 8 waitlist) during the first peak of coronavirus disease 2019 in Wales. Median patient age was 57 years (range, 24-69), 62% were male, and all were white. Median body mass index was 29 kg/m2 (range, 22-42), and 81% had 1 or more significant comorbidities. Median time from transplant to SARS-CoV-2 infection was 135 months (range, 9-356) and median time since being listed was 17.5 months (range, 5-69) for waitlisted patients. Seventeen patients were admitted to the hospital (81%), 18% (n = 3) in intensive care unit, and 5 patients died (4 transplant recipients and 1 waitlist patient; 24%). Two of the 4 transplant patients who died had recent malignancy. Although the mortality of hospitalized transplant patients was high, their infection rate of 0.87% meant that the overall mortality of transplant patients due to SARS-CoV-2 was low and comparable to that of patients on the waitlist. These data provide confidence in restarting the transplant program, provided that a series of measures aiming to avoid infections in newly transplanted patients are taken.

Pancreas Donor Risk Index and Preprocurement Pancreas Suitability Score for Prediction of Pancreas Transplant Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: The Pancreas Donor Risk Index and Preprocurement Pancreas Suitability Score were designed to assist in the evaluation of pancreases for transplant. Preprocurement Pancreas Suitability Score <17 and PancreasDonor Risk Index ≤1.57 were deemed ideal.We aimed to determine the ability ofthese scores to predict pancreas transplant outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Pancreas Donor Risk Index and the Preprocurement Pancreas Suitability Score were retrospectively calculated from a prospectively maintained database of consecutive pancreas transplants performed during a 13-year period (December 2004 to November 2017). Outcomes measuredwere rejection rate, graft and patient survival, and duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: Of 159 pancreas transplants (108 simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplants, 33 pancreas after kidney transplants, 18 pancreas-only transplants), full data were available for 155 (97%) to calculate Pancreas Donor Risk Indexes and 129 (81%) to calculate Preprocurement Pancreas Suitability Scores. Fortyseven patients (30%) experienced at least 1 episode of acute rejection. We calculated Pancreas Donor Risk Indexes for 155 patients, and 19 (23%) and 27 (38%) were in the ≤1.57 and >1.57 groups, respectively (P = .047). We calculated Preprocurement Pancreas Suitability Scores for 129 patients, and 12 (21%) and 27 (32%) were in the <17 and ≥17 groups, respectively (P = .202). Donor age and recipientfemale sex were the main predictors forrejection (binary logistic regression, P < .05). One-year graft survival rates were 95% and 81% forthe ≤1.57 and >1.57 PancreasDonor Risk Index groups,respectively, and 95% and 80% forthe <17 and ≥17 Preprocurement Pancreas Suitability Score groups, respectively (not significant). CONCLUSIONS: Pancreas Donor Risk Index and Preprocurement Pancreas Suitability Score were not helpful to predict graft/patient survival in our population. A higher Pancreas Donor Risk Index was associated with higher risk of graft rejection. Further studies with larger cohorts are required.

The role of nutritional assessment and early enteral nutrition for combined pancreas and kidney transplant candidates.

BACKGROUND: Early post-operative enteral nutrition is an important part of perioperative management and is strongly supported by ESPEN Guidelines. However, there is limited evidence into the use of Early Enteral Nutrition (EEN) after combined Pancreas and Kidney Transplantation (PKT). We know malnutrition in type-1 diabetics with end stage renal failure (ESRF) is a common problem and a significant risk factor. Therefore, we introduced EEN in our patients. METHOD: We monitored and recorded nutritional data on 29 PKT recipients who underwent transplantation between Oct 2007 and Jan 2010 without a nutritional assessment or EEN [Monitored Group (MG)] and on 30 PKT recipients between Feb 2010 and Dec 2013 who received a nutritional assessment and EEN (Naso-jejunal feed or oral intake with supplementation, according to their nutritional status) [Fed Group (FG)]. The end-point was to assess patients' daily post-transplant nutritional intake. This was calculated as a percentage of estimated nutritional requirements using the Schofield equation with a 25% added stress factor and relevant activity factor. Following a literature search and realistic targets our aim was to reach >60% requirements: achievement of ≥60% energy requirements by day-7 (7d-60%) and at the time of discharge (total-60%) [13,14]. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between MG and FG patients in cold ischemic time (CIT), recipient-age and donor-age, Length of Stay and donor-creatinine. In contrast, FG patients were less frequently in predialysis status 41.4% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.001; and had higher incidence of BMI <22.5 kg/m2 63.3% vs. 48.3%, p = <0.005. In outcomes, FG patients more frequently achieved a higher average % of nutritional requirements in the first week 39.69% vs. 22.37%, p = <0.005; as well as during whole in-patient stay 57.24% vs. 44.43%, p = <0.005 (Table 3, Figs. 1 and 2). The FG spent a greater proportion during the first week 66.7% vs. 31%, p = <0.005; and of whole their admission 93.3% vs. 75.9%, p = <0.005; meeting more than 60% of nutritional requirements. Most important, the need for parenteral nutrition within the FG was significantly lower, 7.1% vs. 20.7%, p < 0.005 (Table 3). CONCLUSION: Our results show that these patients benefit from planned EEN and receive better nutritional support when compared to the patients managed with the historic, reactive approach to nutritional care. Nutritional intake in the first week as well as during the whole admission was superior in patients receiving active EEN despite a more difficult post-operative course due to higher incidence of re-operations compared to the control group. Also the need for parenteral nutrition was significantly lower in this group. In addition, pre-transplant nutritional assessment is beneficial and accurately highlights those who may be at risk of malnutrition pre and post-operatively.