ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Advances in immunosuppression have extended patient and graft survival rates after solid organ transplantation; however, this is not free of side effects. Balancing safety and efficacy is of paramount importance, particularly in the pediatric setting. Current literature comparing different protocols is scarce, and decisions are mostly guided by physician preference. We aimed to compare three different protocols from four different centers to identify differences in outcomes after one year of follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the databases of the participating centers was performed. Consecutive patients aged <18 years with a first liver-only transplant and no other underlying congenital or acquired immunodeficiency were included. Patients were classified according to the immunosuppression protocol as follows: Group A (Prednisone + Tacrolimus + Basiliximab), Group B (Prednisone + Tacrolimus + Basiliximab + anti-thymocyte globulin), and Group C (Prednisone + Tacrolimus). Differences in survival, frequency of rejection, infections, and other complications were analyzed in the entire group (n=97) and in the group with biliary atresia (n=48). RESULTS: After one year of follow-up, no differences in patient or graft survival were observed when comparing either the entire group (n=97) or patients with biliary atresia only (n=48). The frequencies of rejection and episodes of infection were similar. Renal function showed no differences either before or after transplantation or between the groups. CONCLUSION: Immunosuppression protocols used in this study appeared to be equally safe and effective. This could offer the opportunity to tailor them to the patient's individual characteristics without compromising the outcome.
