Association of pre-transplant statin use with delayed graft function in kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Administration of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), prior to ischemia or prior to reperfusion has been shown to decrease ischemia-reperfusion renal injury in animal studies. It is unknown whether this protective effect is applicable to renal transplantation in humans. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between prior statin use in renal transplant recipients and the subsequent risk of delayed graft function. METHODS: All patients who underwent deceased or living donor renal transplantation at the Princess Alexandra Hospital between 1 July 2008 and 1 August 2010 were included in this retrospective, observational cohort study. Graft function was classified as immediate graft function (IGF), dialysis-requiring (D-DGF) and non-dialysis-requiring (ND-DGF) delayed graft function. The independent predictors of graft function were evaluated by multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for donor characteristics, recipient characteristics, HLA mismatch and ischaemic times. RESULTS: Overall, of the 266 renal transplant recipients, 21% exhibited D-DGF, 39% had ND-DGF and 40% had IGF. Statin use prior to renal transplantation was not significantly associated with the risk of D-DGF (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.05, 95% CI 0.96 - 1.15, P = 0.28). This finding was not altered when D-DGF and ND-DGF were pooled together (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.89-1.06, p = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: The present study did not show a significant, independent association between prior statin use in kidney transplant recipients and the occurrence of delayed graft function.

Kidneys from patients with small renal tumours: a novel source of kidneys for transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: To report the use of a novel donor source as a further option to increase the number of patients who might be able to receive a renal transplant. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between May 1996 and July 2007, 43 kidneys were transplanted using kidneys obtained from patients with small (<3 cm diameter) incidentally detected tumours. After bench surgery to excise the tumour, they were all successfully transplanted into patients who were elderly or had significant comorbidities. RESULTS: Apart from four patients who died from unrelated illnesses, all grafts continued to function with a median and mean follow-up of 25 and 32 months. The follow-up, which included 3-monthly renal ultrasonography and chest X-rays, showed only one case of tumour recurrence, which occurred 9 years after transplantation; the patient remains stable under observation after 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: From our experience we consider that where nephrectomy is used for small, localized, incidentally detected renal tumours, the kidney should be considered for transplantation into carefully selected patients. Such patients with numerous medical comorbidities might benefit from renal transplantation, but not survive the waiting period if they are dependent on a deceased donor graft. Paradoxically the use of these marginal kidneys has the potential to increase the quality and length of life of these patients, despite the apparent contradiction of an intuitive principle of organ transplantation and immunosuppression.

Change in live donor characteristics over the last 25 years: a single centre experience.

AIM: While deceased donor kidney transplantation rates have remained stagnant, live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) rates have increased significantly over the last decade, and are now a major component of renal transplantation programmes worldwide. Additionally, there has been an increased utilization of more marginal donors, including donors who are obese, older and subjects with well-controlled hypertension. METHOD: A retrospective audit of all live donors at the Princess Alexandra Hospital Renal Transplantation unit was performed from 24 August 1982 to 29 May 2007 to assess any change in donor characteristics over time. RESULTS: There were 373 live donor operations. Over the last 25 years there has been a significant increase in the number of donors who are either older or obese. Furthermore, there is a greater proportion of spousal and emotionally related LDKT. CONCLUSION: It is imperative that donors, in particular marginal donors, are followed up long-term to determine their risk of kidney and cardiovascular disease and initiation of appropriate treatment if required.

Laparoscopic vs open living donor nephrectomy: a contemporary series from one centre.

OBJECTIVE: To report our experience of laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (LDN) vs open donor nephrectomy (ODN), as LDN offers potential advantages to the donor and has become a routine procedure for live kidney procurement worldwide. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 2000 and August 2005 we performed 183 donor-recipient operations at our institution (ODN, 83; LDN, 100). We prospectively collected information on all donors and recipients for the same period to audit our experience with the first 100 LDNs. Patients made their operative choice after discussions that included unit experience and published information. We present our findings with the emphasis on donor operative details and early recipient graft outcome. RESULTS: Donor and recipient age, gender, body mass index, human leukocyte antigen mismatches, and vascular anastomotic times did not differ significantly between the groups. There were two conversions to an open operation in the LND group; neither affected recipient-graft outcome. The mean (sd) operative duration was 178 (38) min for the LDN and 159 (34) min for the ODN (P < 0.05). The mean (sd) hospital stay was 4.7 (1.2) days in the LND group and 6.8 (1.5) days in the ODN group (P < 0.05). There was one case of delayed graft function in both groups. Serum creatinine levels at 1, 6 and 12 months after transplantation did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our contemporaneous series shows the safe introduction of a laparoscopic living-donor programme without compromising donor patient safety or allograft outcome.

A systematic review of laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review was undertaken to assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy (LLDN) compared with open live-donor nephrectomy (OLDN). METHODS: Literature databases were searched from inception to March 2003 inclusive. Comparative studies of LLDN versus OLDN (randomized and nonrandomized) were included. RESULTS: There were 44 included studies, and the quality of the available evidence was average. There was only one randomized controlled trial and six nonrandomized comparative studies with concurrent controls identified. In terms of safety, for donors, there did not seem to be any distinct difference between the laparoscopic and open approaches. No donor mortality was reported for either procedure, and the complication rates were similar although the types of complications experienced differed between the two procedures. The conversion rate for LLDN to an open procedure ranged from 0% to 13%. In terms of efficacy, LLDN seemed to be a slower operation with longer warm ischemia times than OLDN, but this did not seem to have resulted in increased rates of delayed graft function for recipients. Donor postoperative recovery and convalescence seemed to be superior for LLDN, making it a potentially more attractive operation for living donors. Although in the short-term, graft function and survival did not seem to differ between the two techniques, long-term complication rates and allograft function could not be determined and further long-term follow-up is required. CONCLUSIONS: LLDN seems to be at least as safe and efficacious as OLDN in the short-term. However, it remains a technique in evolution. Further high-quality studies are required to resolve some of the outstanding issues surrounding its use, in particular, long-term follow-up of donor complications and recipient graft function and survival.

Liver transplantation for hepatolithiasis.

Hepatolithiasis is frequently encountered in Asia, but is relatively uncommon in Western societies. The improved surgical and stone fragmentation techniques that have evolved over the past decade have reduced the incidence of retained or recurrent stones with a consequent reduction in progressive liver damage and cirrhosis. Nonetheless, disease-related mortality from liver failure, bleeding oesophageal varices and cholangiocarcinoma still exists and a proportion of patients are cirrhotic at their initial presentation. There have been good long-term results following liver transplantation for a variety of cholestatic liver diseases, but transplantation for hepatolithiasis has seldom been reported. This paper reports four patients who underwent successful liver transplantation for hepatolithiasis with secondary biliary cirrhosis.