Anesthetic Management of a Patient with DRESS Syndrome for Renal Transplantation.

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a rare but potentially life-threatening hypersensitivity reaction characterized by widespread erythematous skin eruptions with fever, lymphadenopathy and visceral involvement-hepatitis, nephritis, pericarditis, and pneumonitis. There are numerous reports describing the management of such patients in intensive care units but hardly any describing the intraoperative anesthetic management of such patients. Herein, we report on a patient with DRESS syndrome who was scheduled for renal transplantation. The main goal in this case was to prevent a hypersensitive drug reaction intraoperatively and develop a safe alternative anesthesia plan for the patient. After pre-operative skin and intradermal tests, we chose the drugs that could be safely used for anesthesia. Usually general anesthesia is preferred for renal transplantation but in this patient we opted for combined spinal epidural anesthesia. Precautions that are to taken in such a case and the anesthetic management are discussed in detail herewith.

Intercity deceased donor renal transplantation: a single-center experience from a developing country.

In a developing country such as India, deceased donor renal transplantation (DDRTx) accounts for only about 1% of all renal transplants (RTx). Our institute initiated an intercity DDRTx in the year 2006, which significantly increased the number of RTx. We retrieved 74 kidneys from 37 deceased donors from various cities of Gujarat from January 2006 to December 2009. We transplanted the allografts in 66 recipients and a retrospective analysis of the donor profile and management and recipient outcome was performed. The mean age of the donors was 43.3 ± 18.8 years. The causes of death included road traffic accident in 51.35% of the donors and cerebrovascular stroke in 48.65% of the donors; 83.78% of the donors required ionotropes for hemodynamic stability in addition to vigorous intravenous fluid replacement. The average urine output of the donors was 350 ± 150 mL. The organs were perfused and stored in HTK solution. The mean cold ischemia time (CIT) was 9.12 ± 5.25 h. The mean anastomosis time in the recipient was 30.8 ± 8.7 min. 57.6% of the recipients established urine output on the operating table and 42.4% developed delayed graft function. At the end of 1 month after transplantation, the mean serum creatinine was comparable to the Ahmadabad city DDRTx, although the CIT was significantly longer in the intercity patients. Intercity organ harvesting is a viable option to increase the donor pool. Distance may not be an impediment, and good recipient outcome is possible in spite of prolonged CIT in case of proper harvesting and preservation.

Carbon dioxide absorption during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparison between retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches.

AIM: Previous studies have suggested that retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are associated with variable carbon dioxide (CO(2)) absorption, which can cause significant morbidity. The approach that results in greater CO(2) absorption is a matter of debate. We studied patients undergoing transperitoneal/retroperitoneal donor nephrectomy to determine relative CO(2) absorption, incidence of subcutaneous emphysema, pneumothorax, and pneumomediastinum, seeking to establish a correlation between the incidence of subcutaneous emphysema and CO(2) elimination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective nonrandomized, single-center, two-arm clinical study of 60 kidney donors undergoing laparoscopic nephrectomy by transperitoneal (n = 30) or retroperitoneal (n = 30) approach. CO(2) elimination was calculated using end tidal CO(2), tidal volume, respiratory rate, and weight of the donor. We studied intraoperative CO(2) elimination and CO(2) retention-related morbidities. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in CO(2) elimination in the first 30 minutes of insufflation followed by a plateau for the remainder of procedure. There was no difference in CO(2) elimination in either procedure at any time interval. Patients with subcutaneous emphysema showed significantly greater CO(2) elimination, which decreased with desufflation. CONCLUSION: CO(2) absorption during laparoscopy did not depend on the route of surgery. Subcutaneous emphysema was strongly and independently associated with a greater degree of CO(2) absorption during laparoscopic surgery.