Impact of Pretransplant C-Reactive Protein, Neutrophiles, Platelets, and Albumin Levels on Recipient Survival After Simultaneous Pancreas and Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Long-lasting diabetes mellitus type 1 and end-stage renal disease induce severe metabolic and immunologic deterioration. Pretransplant C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin (ALB) levels impact kidney transplantation. We evaluated the effects of preoperative CRP, ALB, neutrophils (NEU), and platelet (PLT) counts on 1- and 5-year recipient survival after simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation (SPK).

METHODS

Among 103 SPK recipients, the parameters were as follows: CRP (mean: 4.5 ± 4.97 mg/L); NEU (mean: 5.12 ± 2.13 × 103/mm3); PLT (mean: 244 ± 84 × 103/mm3); ALB (mean 4.5 ± 0.75 g/dL) were obtained before transplantation. Cox regression, uni-, multivariate analysis for 1- and 5-year survivals were performed with 95% CIs, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was assessed.

RESULTS

In Cox regression, ALB <3.65 g/dL significantly affected 1- and 5-year survivors with hazard ratios of 8 (95% CI, 1.5-38.28; P < .05) and 3.13 (95% CI, 1.45-6.73; P < .05), respectively. In univariate analysis, we found significantly decreased 1-year survival when PLT <180×103/mm3, ALB <3.65 g/dL, NEU >5.8×103/mm3 and CRP >2.25 mg/L with odds ratios (OR) of 6.75 (95% CI, 2.12-21.15); 4.05 (95% CI, 1.3-12.09); 2.97 (95% CI, 1.02-8.64) and 5.51 (95% CI, 1.67-18.19), respectively. Independent factors for 5-year survival were CRP, ALB, and PLT with OR of 4.72 (95% CI, 1.67-13.29), 3.31 (95% CI, 1.18-9.25), and 4.2 (95% CI, 1.39-12.68), respectively. In multivariate analysis, we built 2 models for 1-year survival. Model 1 (ALB+PLT) with ORs of 3.12 (95% CI, 0.97-10.07) and 5.55 (95% CI, 1.67-18.4); and model 2 (CRP+PLT) with ORs of 5.51 (95% CI, 1.5-17.3) and 4.3 (95% CI, 1.2-15.06), respectively. The AUC for models 1 and 2 were 0.74 and 0.759, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

NEU, PLT, ALB, and CRP levels assessed before transplantation are independent factors for 1- and 5-year SPK recipient survival.

Survival Benefit of Solid-Organ Transplantation: 10-Year Update

IMPORTANCE

Transplantation has transformed into a burgeoning field that is rapidly evolving to optimize organ distribution and survival outcomes. The years since 2012 (the last comprehensive study) have seen changes in transplantation, such as advances in immunotherapy and novel indices, that necessitate an updated analysis of survival benefit.

DESIGN

Our goal was to determine the survival benefit for solid-organ transplants in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database for a three decade period and provide updates on advancements since 2012. Our retrospective analysis examined data containing U.S. patient records from September 1, 1987, to September 1, 2021.

RESULTS

We found that 3,430,272 life-years were saved over our transplant period (4.33 life-years saved per patient); kidney-1,998,492 life-years; liver -767,414; heart-435,312; lung-116,625; pancreas-kidney-123,463; pancreas-30,575; intestine-7901. After matching, 3,296,851 life-years were saved. Life-years saved and median survival increased for all organs between 2012 and 2021. Compared to 2012, median survival increased in kidney (from 12.4 to 14.76 years), liver (from 11.6 to 14.59), heart (9.5 to 11.73), lung (5.2 to 5.63), pancreas-kidney (from 14.5 to 16.88), pancreas (from 13.3 to 16.10). When compared to 2012, the percent transplanted increased in kidney, liver, heart, lung, and intestine, while pancreas-kidney and pancreas show decreased percent transplanted.

CONCLUSION

Our study underscores the tremendous survival benefits of solid organ transplantation (over 3.4 million life-years saved) and shows improvements since 2012. Our study also highlights areas of transplantation, notably pancreas transplants, that may necessitate reinvigorated attention.

Pancreas Transplantation: Current Challenges, Considerations, and Controversies

Pancreas transplantation (PTx) reestablishes an autoregulating source of endogenous insulin responsive to normal feedback controls. In addition to achieving complete β-cell replacement that frees the patient with diabetes from the need to monitor serum glucose and administer exogenous insulin, successful PTx provides counterregulatory hormone secretion and exocrine function. A functioning PTx mitigates glycemic variability, eliminates the daily stigma and burden of diabetes, restores normal glucose homeostasis in patients with complicated diabetes, and improves quality of life and life expectancy. The tradeoff is that it entails a major surgical procedure and requisite long-term immunosuppression. Despite the high likelihood of rendering patients euglycemic independent of exogenous insulin, PTx is considered a treatment rather than a cure. In spite of steadily improving outcomes in each successive era coupled with expansion of recipient selection criteria to include patients with a type 2 diabetes phenotype, a decline in PTx activity has occurred in the new millennium related to a number of factors including: (1) lack of a primary referral source and general acceptance by the diabetes care community; (2) absence of consensus criteria; and (3) access, education, and resource issues within the transplant community. In the author's experience, patients who present as potential candidates for PTx have felt as though they needed to circumvent the conventional diabetes care model to gain access to transplant options. PTx should be featured more prominently in the management algorithms for patients with insulin requiring diabetes who are failing exogenous insulin therapy or experiencing progressive diabetic complications regardless of diabetes type. Furthermore, all patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease should undergo consideration for simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation independent of geography or location.

Modern indications for referral for kidney and pancreas transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pancreas transplantation (PTx) is currently the only therapy that can predictably achieve sustained euglycemia independent of exogenous insulin administration in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. This procedure involves a complex abdominal operation and lifetime dependence on immunosuppressive medications. Therefore, PTx is most frequently performed in combination with other organs, usually a kidney transplant for end stage diabetic nephropathy. Less frequently, solitary PTx may be indicated in patients with potentially life-threatening complications of diabetes mellitus. There remains confusion and misperceptions regarding indications and timing of patient referral for PTx.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this review, the referral, evaluation, and listing process for PTx is described, including a detailed discussion of candidate assessment, indications, contraindications, and outcomes.

SUMMARY

Because the progression of diabetic kidney disease may be less predictable than other forms of kidney failure, early referral for planning of renal and/or pancreas transplantation is paramount to optimize patient care and allow for possible preemptive transplantation.

Pancreas Transplantation in Minorities including Patients with a Type 2 Diabetes Phenotype

Background: Prior to year 2000, the majority of pancreas transplants (PTx) were performed as simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants (SPKTs) in Caucasian adults with end stage renal failure secondary to type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) who were middle-aged. In the new millennium, improving outcomes have led to expanded recipient selection that includes patients with a type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) phenotype, which excessively affects minority populations. Methods: Using PubMed® to identify appropriate citations, we performed a literature review of PTx in minorities and in patients with a T2DM phenotype. Results: Mid-term outcomes with SPKT in patients with uremia and circulating C-peptide levels (T2DMphenotype) are comparable to those patients with T1DM although there may exist a selection bias in the former group. Excellent outcomes with SPKT suggests that the pathophysiology of T2DM is heterogeneous with elements consisting of both insulin deficiency and resistance related to beta-cell failure. As a result, increasing endogenous insulin (Cp) production following PTx may lead to freedom checking blood sugars or taking insulin, better metabolic counter-regulation, and improvements in quality of life and life expectancy compared to other available treatment options. Experience with solitary PTx for T2DM or in minorities is limited but largely mirrors the trends reported in SPKT. Conclusions: PTx is a viable treatment option in patients with pancreas endocrine failure who are selected appropriately regardless of diabetes type or recipient race. This review will summarize data that unconventional patient populations with insulin-requiring diabetes may gain value from PTx with an emphasis on contemporary experiences and appropriate selection in minorities in the new millennium.

Patient and kidney transplant survival in type 1 diabetics after kidney transplant alone compared to simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant

Background

Donor and other differences mean understanding drivers of transplant survival for type 1 diabetics is challenging. We aimed to compare outcomes of simultaneous pancreas‐kidney transplant over kidney transplant alone for people with end‐stage kidney disease (ESKD) and type 1 diabetes.

Methods

We performed a population‐based cohort study comparing outcomes from kidney alone and kidney‐pancreas transplants using registry data. Our study population was people in Australia and New Zealand with type 1 diabetes and ESKD who received a kidney transplant in 1984–2016. Primary outcomes were time to kidney transplant failure and all‐cause death. Secondary outcomes were time to cardiovascular and non‐cardiovascular death. We compared adjusted survival using Cox regression (hazard ratio HR and 95% confidence intervals CI).

Results

Of 1295 type 1 diabetics receiving a transplant, 430 (33%) received deceased donor kidney, 172 (13%) received living donor kidney, and 693 (54%) received pancreas‐kidney transplant. Compared to deceased donor kidney, pancreas‐kidney recipients had 40% lower rate of kidney transplant failure (adjusted HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.45–0.81; p = 0.001) and 34% lower mortality (adjusted HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.53–0.83; p < 0.001), driven by 49% reduction in cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36–0.72; p < 0.001). Pancreas‐kidney recipients had similar reductions in transplant failure and mortality compared to living kidney recipients, after adjusting for transplant timing.

Conclusions

For people with type 1 diabetes, pancreas‐kidney transplant provides improved transplant and overall survival compared to deceased donor kidney alone. Living donor kidneys may perform just as well as pancreas‐kidney transplant if waiting times are short.

Cardiovascular outcomes after simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation compared to kidney transplantation alone: a propensity score matching analysis

Background

Coronary heart disease due to arteriosclerosis is the leading cause of death in type 1 diabetic patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation (SPKT) compared to kidney transplantation alone (KTA) on survival, cardiovascular function and metabolic outcomes.

Methods

A cohort of 127 insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) patients with ESRD who underwent either SPKT (n = 100) or KTA (n = 27) between 1998 and 2019 at the University Hospital of Leipzig were retrospectively evaluated with regard to cardiovascular and metabolic function/outcomes as well as survival rates. An additional focus was placed on the echocardiographic assessment of systolic and diastolic cardiac function pretransplant and during follow-up. To avoid selection bias, a 2:1 propensity score matching analysis (PSM) was performed.

Results

After PSM, a total of 63 patients were identified; 42 patients underwent SPKT, and 21 patients received KTA. Compared with the KTA group, SPKT recipients received organs from younger donors (p < 0.05) and donor BMI was higher (p = 0.09). The risk factor-adjusted hazard ratio for mortality in SPKT recipients compared to KTA recipients was 0.63 (CI: 0.49–0.89; P < 0.05). The incidence of pretransplant cardiovascular events was higher in the KTA group (KTA: n = 10, 47% versus SPKT: n = 10, 23%; p = 0.06), but this difference was not significant. However, the occurrence of cardiovascular events in the SPKT group (n = 3, 7%) was significantly diminished after transplantation compared to that in the KTA recipients (n = 6, 28%; p = 0.02). The cardiovascular death rate was higher in KTA recipients (19%) than in SPK recipients with functioning grafts (3.3%) and comparable to that in patients with failed SPKT (16.7%) (p = 0.16).

In line with pretransplant values, SPKT recipients showed significant improvements in Hb1ac values (p = 0.001), blood pressure control (p =  < 0.005) and low-density lipoprotein/high-density lipoprotein (LDL/HDL) ratio (p =  < 0.005) 5 years after transplantation. With regard to echocardiographic assessment, SPKT recipients showed significant improvements in left ventricular systolic parameters during follow-up.

Conclusions

Normoglycaemia and improvement of lipid metabolism and blood pressure control achieved by successful SPKT are associated with beneficial effects on survival, cardiovascular outcomes and systolic left ventricular cardiac function. Future studies with larger samples are needed to make predictions regarding cardiovascular events and graft survival.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-021-02522-8.

Recipient age and outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation in the new millennium: Single-center experience and review of the literature

The influence of recipient age on outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPKT) in the modern era is uncertain.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 255 patients undergoing SPKT from 11/01 to 8/20. Recipients were stratified according to age group: age <30 years (n = 16); age 30-39 years (n = 91); age 40-49 years (n = 86) and age ≥50 years (n = 62 [24.3%], including 9 patients ≥60 years of age).

RESULTS

Three-month and one-year outcomes were comparable. The eight-year patient survival rate was lowest in the oldest age group (47.6% vs 78% in the 3 younger groups combined, p < .001). However, eight-year kidney and pancreas graft survival rates were comparable in the youngest and oldest age groups combined (36.5% and 32.7%, respectively), but inferior to those in the middle 2 groups combined (62% and 50%, respectively, both p < .05). Death-censored kidney and pancreas graft survival rates increased from youngest to oldest recipient age category because of a higher incidence of death with functioning grafts (22.6% in oldest group compared to 8.3% in the 3 younger groups combined, p = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Recipient age did not appear to significantly influence early outcomes following SPKT. Late outcomes are similar in younger and older recipients, but inferior to the middle 2 age groups.