BACKGROUND: The expansion of the donor pool achieved with living kidney donation (LKD) is particularly beneficial for diabetic patients, who have a worse prognosis during dialysis when compared to other kidney recipients. Simultaneous cadaver pancreas-living kidney transplantation (SPLKTx) merges the advantages of LKD with those of cadaver donation, and may be an attractive alternative to simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation (SPKTx). METHODS: The outcomes of 18 SPLKTx were compared with those of 33 SPKTx. RESULTS: LKD expanded the donor pool from 33 to 51 (P =.004). Median wait time was shorter for SPLKTx (14 days) than for SPKTx (95 days) (P =.006). The risk for surgical complications was not increased by SPLKTx, as witnessed by relaparotomy rates (SPLKTx: 2/18, 11.1%; SPKTx: 2/33, 6.1%; P >.05). Hospital stay averaged 26.1 +/- 11.2 days for SPLKTx and 27.1 +/- 16.3 for SPKTx (P >.05) with equivalent 30-day readmission rates (SPLKTx: 5.5%; SPKTx: 6.1%); (P >.05). One acute kidney rejection occurred in SPLKTx (5.5%) as compared with four in SPKTx (12.1%); (P >.05). Equivalent rates for the pancreas were 5.5% (1/18) for SPLKTx and 3.0% (1/33) for SPKTx (P >.05). Two-year recipient survival rates were 100% for SPLKTx as compared with 96.9% for SPKTx. Equivalent figures for kidney and pancreas were 80.0% and 84.0% for SPLKTx and 96.9% and 96.9% for SPKTx. CONCLUSIONS: SPLKTx is a valuable alternative to SPKTx. Further development of SPLKTX relies on increased rates of living kidney donation.
Simultaneous cadaver pancreas-living donor kidney transplantation
VISTOLI, FABIO;
2004-01-01
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The expansion of the donor pool achieved with living kidney donation (LKD) is particularly beneficial for diabetic patients, who have a worse prognosis during dialysis when compared to other kidney recipients. Simultaneous cadaver pancreas-living kidney transplantation (SPLKTx) merges the advantages of LKD with those of cadaver donation, and may be an attractive alternative to simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation (SPKTx). METHODS: The outcomes of 18 SPLKTx were compared with those of 33 SPKTx. RESULTS: LKD expanded the donor pool from 33 to 51 (P =.004). Median wait time was shorter for SPLKTx (14 days) than for SPKTx (95 days) (P =.006). The risk for surgical complications was not increased by SPLKTx, as witnessed by relaparotomy rates (SPLKTx: 2/18, 11.1%; SPKTx: 2/33, 6.1%; P >.05). Hospital stay averaged 26.1 +/- 11.2 days for SPLKTx and 27.1 +/- 16.3 for SPKTx (P >.05) with equivalent 30-day readmission rates (SPLKTx: 5.5%; SPKTx: 6.1%); (P >.05). One acute kidney rejection occurred in SPLKTx (5.5%) as compared with four in SPKTx (12.1%); (P >.05). Equivalent rates for the pancreas were 5.5% (1/18) for SPLKTx and 3.0% (1/33) for SPKTx (P >.05). Two-year recipient survival rates were 100% for SPLKTx as compared with 96.9% for SPKTx. Equivalent figures for kidney and pancreas were 80.0% and 84.0% for SPLKTx and 96.9% and 96.9% for SPKTx. CONCLUSIONS: SPLKTx is a valuable alternative to SPKTx. Further development of SPLKTX relies on increased rates of living kidney donation.Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
