Optimal timing for a pancreas transplant after a successful kidney transplant

The time interval between kidney and pancreas transplantation and the clinical outcomes of pancreas after kidney transplantation

Pancreas after kidney (PAK) transplantation is one of the accepted pancreas transplant modalities. We studied the impact of time interval between kidney and pancreas transplantation on the outcomes of PAK transplantation. Using OPTN/SRTR data, we included 1853 PAK transplants performed between 1996 and 2005 with follow-up until November 1, 2008. Kaplan-Meier survival and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed using the time interval between kidney and pancreas transplantation either as a categorical (less than one yr, between one and less than three yr, and greater than or equal to three yr) or as a continuous variable (months) to assess kidney graft and patient survival. Patients who received a pancreas transplant three yr or later after kidney transplantation had higher risk of death-censored kidney graft loss (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.04, 2.32, p = 0.03). Each month beyond three yr between kidney and pancreas transplantation incurred 1% higher risk of subsequent death-censored kidney graft loss (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.001, 1.02, p = 0.03). In conclusion, time interval between pancreas and kidney transplantation is an independent risk factor of kidney graft loss following pancreas transplantation. Shortening the time interval between pancreas and kidney transplantation to less than three yr may reduce the risk of kidney graft loss in qualified PAK transplant candidates.

The impact of pancreas transplantation on kidney allograft survival

Whether pancreas after kidney transplantation (PAK) compromises kidney allograft survival, and what pre-PAK glomerular filtration rate (GFR) should be used to select patients for PAK is unclear. We analyzed all (n = 2776) PAK recipients in the United States between 1989 and 2007 and compared their risk of kidney failure to a comparator group of n = 13 635 young adult diabetic kidney only transplant recipients during the same time after accounting for selection bias by the use of a propensity score for PAK in a multivariate time to event analysis. In a secondary analysis, we determined the association of pre-PAK GFR with subsequent kidney allograft survival. Despite an increased risk of death early after pancreas transplantation, PAK recipients had a decreased long-term risk of kidney allograft failure compared to diabetic kidney only transplant recipients HR = 0.89; 95% CI: [0.78-1.00]; p = 0.05. An association of pre-PAK GFR with kidney survival was not evident until 3 years after pancreas transplantation, and patients with a pre-PAK GFR of 30-39 mL/min still attained 10-year post-PAK kidney survival of 69%. We conclude that PAK is associated with improved kidney allograft survival, and pre-PAK GFR 30-39 mL/min should not preclude PAK. Expanded use of PAK is warranted.

Pancreas transplantation

Since the introduction of pancreas transplantation more than 40 years ago, efforts to develop more minimally invasive techniques for endocrine replacement therapy have been in progress, yet this surgical procedure still remains the treatment of choice for diabetic patients with end-stage renal failure. Many improvements have been made in the surgical techniques and immunosuppressive regimens, both of which have contributed to an increasing number of indications for pancreas transplantation. This operation can be justified on the basis that patients replace daily injections of insulin with an improved quality of life but at the expense of a major surgical procedure and lifelong immunosuppression. The various indications, categories, and outcomes of patients having a pancreas transplant are discussed, particularly with reference to the effect on long-term diabetic complications.

[Pancreatic transplantation: 1. Indications and results]

In the face of a rising incidence of diabetes, pancreatic transplantation seems to be the only treatment capable of normalizing glycosylated hemoglobin and stabilizing or improving the complications of diabetes. To date, more than 19,000 pancreatic transplantations have been done worldwide. Surgical indications must take into account the constraints and risks specific to the diabetic illness, the risks of a complex surgical procedure, and the absolute necessity for long term immunosuppression. Combined kidney/pancreas transplantation is the most common procedure (90% of cases) and is the most effective treatment for renal insufficiency due to diabetes. Results have improved significantly over the last ten Years due to improvements in the surgical technique and to improvement of immunosuppressive regimens. Results are at least as good and perhaps better than those achieved in the transplantation of other solid organs; patient survival, renal graft survival, and pancreatic graft survival are respectively 95%, 92%, and 85% at one Year. Results of pancreatic transplantation alone have improved and now seem equal to those of combined organ transplantation. Transplantation seems to be cost-effective in the overall care of advanced diabetes, particularly in those patients on chronic dialysis or having degenerative complications.

Transplantation as a therapeutic option for diabetic nephropathy

Diabetic nephropathy affects both type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients with a frequency of 20-30%. The first sign is microalbuminuria within a range of 30-300 mg/24h, frequently evolving towards frank proteinuria and renal failure. Tight glucose control, control of arterial hypertension with the use of ACEi or ARB can retard progression. Once renal failure is established, kidney transplantation can be considered for type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients. Quality of life and survival are improved with this procedure. In type 1 diabetes, simultaneous grafting of a kidney and pancreas considerably improves quality of life and diabetic complications. Surgical and infectious complications are sporadic drawbacks of this procedure. Pancreas transplantation alone (PTA) remains controversial, since a retrospective study in 2003 by Venstrom concluded that survival for PTA patients is worse than for comparable patients remaining on the waiting list. PTA can be considered for type 1 diabetic patients without advanced renal failure with severe and frequent metabolic instability (hypoglycaemia, ketoacidosis). Islet transplantation is still an experimental but promising procedure in highly selected patients, avoiding major abdominal surgery.

Dialysis, kidney transplantation, or pancreas transplantation for patients with diabetes mellitus and renal failure: a decision analysis of treatment options

Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and end-stage renal disease may remain on dialysis or undergo cadaveric kidney transplantation, living kidney transplantation, sequential pancreas after living kidney transplantation, or simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation. It is unclear which of these options is most effective. The objective of this study was to determine the optimal treatment strategy for type 1 diabetic patients with renal failure using a decision analytic Markov model. Input data were obtained from the published medical literature, the United Network for Organ Sharing registry, and patient interviews. The outcome measures were life expectancy (in life-years [LY]) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (in quality-adjusted life-years [QALY]). Living kidney transplantation was associated with 18.30 LY and 10.29 QALY; pancreas after kidney transplantation, 17.21 LY and 10.00 QALY; simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation, 15.74 LY and 9.09 QALY; cadaveric kidney transplantation, 11.44 LY and 6.53 QALY; dialysis, 7.82 LY and 4.52 QALY. The results were sensitive to the value of several key variables. Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation had the greatest life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy when living kidney transplantation was excluded from the analysis. These data indicate that living kidney transplantation is associated with the greatest life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy for type 1 diabetic patients with renal failure. Treatment strategies involving pancreas transplantation should be considered for patients with frequent metabolic complications of diabetes and for those patients who favor kidney-pancreas transplantation over kidney transplantation alone. For patients without a living donor, simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation is associated with the greatest life expectancy.

Rapid discontinuation of steroids in living donor kidney transplantation: a pilot study

Steroids are associated with significant postoperative complications (hypertension, cosmetic changes, bone loss, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and cataracts). Most develop early; in addition, late post-transplant steroid withdrawal in kidney transplant recipients has been associated with increased acute rejection (AR). To obviate these problems, we studied outcome of a protocol of rapid discontinuation of prednisone (RDS) (steroids stopped on POD6). Between November 1, 1999 and October 31, 2000, 51 adult living donor (LD) first transplant recipients (2 HLA-id, 28 non-id relative, 21 LURD) were immunosuppressed with thymoglobulin (1.25 mg/kg intraoperatively and then qdx4); prednisone (P) (500 mg methylprednisolone intraoperatively, 1 mg/kg x 1 day, 0.5 mg/kg x 2 days, 0.25 mg/kg x 2 days, then d/c); MMF, 1 g b.i.d.; and CSA, 4 mg/kg b.i.d. adjusted to achieve levels of 150-200 ng/mL (by HPLC). Exclusion criteria were delayed graft function or primary disease requiring P. Minimum follow-up was 5.5 months (range 5.5 to 17.5 months). Outcome was compared vs. previous cohorts of LD recipients immunosuppressed with P/AZA/CSA (n = 171) or P/MMF/CSA (n = 43) (both without antibody induction).

RESULTS

For the RDS group, average CSA level (+/- S.E.) at 3 and 6 months was 190 +/- 12 and 180 +/- 9; avg. MMF dose, 1.7 +/- 0.1 g and 1.7 +/- 0.1 g. There was no significant difference in 6- and 12-month actuarial patient survival, graft survival and rejection-free graft survival between recipients on the RDS protocol vs. historical controls. For RDS recipients, actuarial 6- and 12-month rejection-free graft survival was 87%. Of the 51 RDS recipients, five (10%) have had AR (at 20 days, 1 month, 3 months, 3 months, and 3.5 months post-transplant). After treatment, all five were maintained on 5 mg P; there have been no second AR episodes. Two additional recipients were started on 5 mg P due to low white blood count (WBC) and low/no MMF. Of the 51 grafts, one has failed (death with function). Average serum Cr level (+/- S.E.) at 3 and 6 months for RDS recipients was 1.7 +/- 0.5 (NS vs. historical controls).

CONCLUSION

For low-risk LD recipients, a kidney transplant with an RDS protocol does not increase risk of AR or graft loss. Future studies will need to be done to assess AR rates with an RDS protocol in cadaver transplant recipients and in recipients with delayed graft function.

Pancreas after kidney transplants

BACKGROUND

For certain uremic diabetic patients, a sequential transplant of a kidney (usually from a living donor) followed by a cadaver pancreas has become an attractive alternative to a simultaneous transplant of both organs. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes with simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) versus pancreas after kidney (PAK) transplants to determine advantages and disadvantages of the two procedures.

METHODS

Between January 1, 1994, and June 30, 2000, we performed 398 cadaver pancreas transplants at our center. Of these, 193 were SPK transplants and 205 were PAK transplants. We compared these two groups with regard to several endpoints, including patient and graft survival rates, surgical complications, acute rejection rates, waiting times, length of hospital stay, and quality of life.

RESULTS

Overall, surgical complications were more common for SPK recipients. The total relaparotomy rate was 25.9% for SPK recipients versus 15.1% for PAK recipients (P = 0.006). Leaks, intraabdominal infections, and wound infections were all significantly more common in SPK recipients (P = 0.009, P = 0.05, and P = 0.01, respectively, versus PAK recipients). Short-term pancreas graft survival rates were similar between the two groups: at 1 year posttransplant, 78.0% for SPK recipients and 77.9% for PAK recipients (P = not significant). By 3 years, however, pancreas graft survival differed between the two groups (74.1% for SPK and 61.7% for PAK recipients), although this did not quite reach statistical significance (P = 0.15). This difference in graft survival seemed to be due to increased immunologic losses for PAK recipients: at 3 years posttransplant, the incidence of immunologic graft loss was 16.2% for PAK versus 5.2% for SPK recipients (P = 0.01). Kidney graft survival rates were, however, better for PAK recipients. At 3 years after their kidney transplant, kidney graft survival rates were 83.6% for SPK and 94.6% for PAK recipients (P = 0.001). The mean waiting time to receive the pancreas transplant was 244 days for SPK and 167 days for PAK recipients (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PAK transplants are a viable option for uremic diabetics. While long-term pancreas graft results are slightly inferior to SPK transplants, the advantages of PAK transplants include the possibility of a preemptive living donor kidney transplant, better long-term kidney graft survival, significantly decreased waiting times, and decreased surgical complication rates. Use of a living donor for the kidney transplant expands the donor pool. Improvements in immunosuppressive regimens will hopefully eliminate some of the difference in long-term pancreas graft survival between SPK and PAK transplants.