Transporting live donor kidneys for kidney paired donation: initial national results.

Optimizing the possibilities for kidney-paired donation (KPD) requires the participation of donor-recipient pairs from wide geographic regions. Initially it was envisaged that donors would travel to the recipient center; however, to minimize barriers to participation and simplify logistics, recent trends have involved transporting the kidneys rather than the donors. The goal of this study was to review outcomes of this practice. KPD programs throughout the United States were directly queried about all transplants involving live donor kidney transport. Early graft function was assessed by urine output in the first 8 h, postoperative serum creatinine trend, and incidence of delayed graft function. Between April 27, 2007 and April 29, 2010, 56 live donor kidneys were transported among 30 transplant centers. Median CIT was 7.2 h (IQR 5.5-9.7, range 2.5-14.5). Early urine output was robust (>100 cc/h) in all but four patients. Creatinine nadir was <2.0 mg/dL in all (including the four with lower urine output) but one patient, occurring at a median of 3 days (IQR 2-5, range 1-49). No patients experienced delayed graft function as defined by the need for dialysis in the first week. Current evidence suggests that live donor kidney transport is safe and feasible.

Evaluation of voiding cystourethrography prior to renal transplantation.

In many centers, voiding cystourethrography is a routine part of pretransplantation assessment of the lower urinary tract. To assess the value of this investigation, a retrospective review of transplant candidates evaluated in our center over 2 years was undertaken. A total of 517 patients were fully evaluable. Only 13 voiding cystourethrograms (VCUGs) (2.5%) of 517 were found to be abnormal. Three patients with reflux alone did not require intervention before transplantation. Four patients with decreased bladder capacity underwent hydrodistention. Two patients increased their capacity to over 150 ml and two patients failed distention, one requiring an ileal conduit and the other requiring an augmentation cystoplasty. Three patients had increased postvoid residual (PVR). Two patients started clean intermittent catheterization. One required prostate resection for benign prostatic hypertrophy. One patient with reflux and decreased bladder capacity refused treatment. One patient with reflux combined with increased PVR started clean intermittent catheterization and was cleared for transplant surgery. One patient with decreased bladder capacity and increased PVR had a stroke and was excluded from transplantation. All 13 patients with abnormal VCUGs had a prior urologic history. In total, only 56 of 517 patients evaluated had a prior urological history. Each VCUG costs approximately $500. Limiting VCUG studies to those patients with a prior urological history would have resulted in a significant cost savings. Hence, we recommend that only patients with a prior urological history should undergo this costly and often distressing examination.

Preliminary experience with split liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of split liver transplantation is to alleviate the organ shortage for patients with end-stage liver disease. The procedure, however, has not gained wide acceptance. This is related not only to the complexity of the procedure but also to poorer results and the complications reported to be associated with the technique. STUDY DESIGN: We report 12 split liver transplantation procedures, seven in children and five in adults. Selection criteria were the same as those for whole-size liver transplantation. Patient and graft survival as well as complications were analyzed. Results were analyzed by Wilcoxon life tables. RESULTS: Patient and graft survival rates are 91.6 and 75 percent, respectively. One patient died at 2.5 months after transplantation because of lymphoproliferative disease. Another had acute vanishing bile duct syndrome and required retransplantation at 1.5 months. One patient had retransplantation because of hepatic artery thrombosis. Bile leaks occurred in two patients and hemothorax in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that split liver transplantation has become a more acceptable method of hepatic transplantation and should be encouraged. Several guidelines can enhance success rates.

Pretransplant status and patient survival following liver transplantation.

The current liver allocation system has been criticized, since available organs go to those who are the most critically ill. These recipients have the poorest overall survival. Identification of pretransplant risk factors for mortality would allow better allocation of donor livers. This study was a retrospective analysis of pretransplant clinical and laboratory parameters and subsequent postoperative liver transplant mortality to identify high-risk subgroups. Of 347 consecutive consecutive primary liver transplant recipients, 59 (17%) met United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) criteria for status 4. Pretransplant factors included liver function, coagulation, albumin and ammonia levels, renal function, the presence of ascites, and etiology of liver disease. Overall 1-year patient survival was significantly worse for the status 4 recipients (89.0% vs. 67.7%; P = 0.01). In a univariate analysis of pretransplant risk factors for all recipients, elevated creatinine (P = 0.008) and ammonia (P = 0.009), and UNOS status 4 (P = 0.01) significantly affected postoperative survival. In multivariate analysis of pretransplant risk factors for all recipients, elevated creatinine (P = 0.003) was the only factor to significantly affect postoperative survival. In UNOS status 4 patients, univariate analysis of pretransplant risk factors and their influence on patient survival demonstrated that prolonged coagulation partial thromboplastin time (P = 0.04) and a higher grade of encephalopathy (P = 0.02) significantly affected postoperative survival. Advanced encephalopathy (P = 0.009) and prolonged partial thromboplastin time (P = 0.01) were the only significant risk factors by multivariate analysis in status 4 patients. In status 4 and non-status 4 patients, we identified risk factors that adversely affected patient survival, but their predictive power was insufficient to deny transplantation. Despite the higher mortality in status 4 recipients, their long-term survival is only slightly worse than that of non-status 4 patients. Until better predictors of survival are ascertained, our data do not support limiting the use of donor livers in UNOS status 4 recipients.

Pancreas transplantation.

During the past decade, marked improvement has been made in the field of pancreas transplantation. The best results have been obtained in patients receiving a simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant using the bladder drainage technique. An overall improvement in the secondary complications of diabetes has been documented in patients receiving successful pancreatic grafts. Pancreatic islet cell transplantation remains largely experimental at this time.

Living-unrelated renal donor transplantation: the UNOS experience, 1987-1991. United Network for Organ Sharing.

1. LURD transplants were associated with excellent one-year graft survival of 92%. This survival was superior to that for cadaver transplants performed during the same period. 2. High-risk groups for LURDs are children (age < 18 years) and repeat transplant recipients. Both groups were associated with significantly decreased graft survival. 3. The effects of HLA matching and donor-specific transfusions are not significant. 4. Because of the critical shortage of donor organs and the increasing waiting time for renal transplantation, the use of LURDs can be recommended as a means to expand the number of available organs.