Literature DB >> 11685034

Superiority of portal venous drainage over systemic venous drainage in pancreas transplantation: a retrospective study.

B Philosophe1, A C Farney, E J Schweitzer, J O Colonna, B E Jarrell, V Krishnamurthi, A M Wiland, S T Bartlett.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare portal and systemic venous drainage of pancreas transplants and demonstrate an immunologic and survival superiority of portal venous drainage. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Traditionally, solitary pancreas transplants have been performed using systemic venous and bladder drainage, but more recently, the advantages of enteric drainage have been well documented. Although physiologic benefits for portal venous drainage have been described, the impact of portal venous drainage, especially with solitary pancreas transplants, has yet to be determined.
METHODS: Since August 1995, 280 pancreas transplants with enteric duct drainage were analyzed. One hundred and seventeen were simultaneous pancreas and kidney (SPK), 63 with systemic venous drainage (SV) and 54 with portal venous drainage (PV). The remainder were solitary transplants; 97 pancreas after kidney (PAK; 42 SV and 55 PV) and 66 transplants alone (PTA; 26 SV and 40 PV). Immunosuppressive therapy was equivalent for both groups.
RESULTS: The groups were similar with respect to recipient characteristics and HLA matching. Thirty-six month graft survival for all transplants was 79% for PV and 65% for SV (P =.008). By category, SPK graft survival was 74% for PV and 76% for SV, PAK graft survival was 70% for PV and 56% for SV, and PTA graft survival was 84% for PV and 50% for SV. The rate of at least one rejection episode was also significantly higher in the SV group. At 36 months, for all pancreas transplants, the rejection rate was 21% for PV and 52% for SV (P <.0001). For SPK, rejection rates were 9% for PV and 45% for SV. For PAK, rejection rates were 16% for PV and 65% for SV, and for PTA 36% for PV and 51% for SV. The rejection rates for kidneys following SPK were also lower in the PV group (26% versus 43% for SV). Furthermore, the grades of rejection were milder in PV for all transplants (P =.017). By multivariate analysis, portal venous drainage was the only parameter that significantly affected rejection.
CONCLUSION: Graft survival and rejection is superior for PV. These clinical findings are consistent with published reports of experimentally induced portal tolerance and strongly argue that PV drainage should be the procedure of choice for pancreas transplantation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11685034      PMCID: PMC1422095          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200111000-00016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  30 in total

1.  Protective effects of liver transplantation on a simultaneously transplanted kidney in a highly sensitized patient.

Authors:  M W Flye; B F Duffy; D L Phelan; L E Ratner; T Mohanakumar
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 4.939

2.  Speculation on the pathogenesis of prolonged cardiac allograft survival following portal venous inoculation of allogeneic cells.

Authors:  R P Lowry; S Kenick; R Lisbona
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 1.066

3.  Evidence that donor spleen cells administered through the portal vein prolong the survival of cardiac allografts in rats.

Authors:  V K Rao; D E Burris; S M Gruel; H W Sollinger; W J Burlingham
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 4.939

4.  Significance of portal venous drainage after whole-organ pancreas transplantation for endocrine graft function and prevention of diabetic nephropathy.

Authors:  R Lück; J Klempnauer; G Ehlerding; K Kühn
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 4.939

5.  Pancreas transplantation. An initial experience with systemic and portal drainage of pancreatic allografts.

Authors:  L K Rosenlof; R C Earnhardt; T L Pruett; W C Stevenson; M T Douglas; G C Cornett; J B Hanks
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Simultaneous liver and renal transplantation in man.

Authors:  T A Gonwa; J R Nery; B S Husberg; G B Klintmalm
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 4.939

Review 7.  Insulin resistance. A multifaceted syndrome responsible for NIDDM, obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  R A DeFronzo; E Ferrannini
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 19.112

8.  Simultaneous cadaver pancreas living-donor kidney transplantation: a new approach for the type 1 diabetic uremic patient.

Authors:  A C Farney; E Cho; E J Schweitzer; B Dunkin; B Philosophe; J Colonna; S Jacobs; B Jarrell; J L Flowers; S T Bartlett
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Technique of simultaneous renal pancreatoduodenal transplantation with urinary drainage of pancreatic secretion.

Authors:  D D Nghiem; R J Corry
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  The effects of perioperative portal venous inoculation with donor lymphocytes on renal allograft survival in the rat. I. Specific prolongation of donor grafts and suppressor factor in the serum.

Authors:  N Yoshimura; S Matsui; T Hamashima; C J Lee; Y Ohsaka; T Oka
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 4.939

View more
  9 in total

1.  The current state of pancreas-kidney transplantation in China: the indications, surgical techniques and outcome.

Authors:  Changsheng Ming; Nianqiao Gong; Xiaoping Chen
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2009-06-10

Review 2.  Exocrine drainage in vascularized pancreas transplantation in the new millennium.

Authors:  Hany El-Hennawy; Robert J Stratta; Fowler Smith
Journal:  World J Transplant       Date:  2016-06-24

3.  Successful pancreas transplantation alone is associated with excellent self-identified health score and glucose control: A retrospective study from a high-volume center in the United States.

Authors:  Joseph R Scalea; Lauren Pettinato; Blythe Fiscella; Amanda Bartosic; Allison Piedmonte; Jastine Paran; Niket Todi; Eric J Siskind; Stephen T Bartlett
Journal:  Clin Transplant       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 2.863

Review 4.  Evolving surgical strategies for pancreas transplantation.

Authors:  David B Leeser; Stephen T Bartlett
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.810

5.  Pancreatic Transplantation: Beta Cell Replacement.

Authors:  David L. Bigam; AM James Shapiro
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-10

Review 6.  The current state of pancreas transplantation.

Authors:  Rainer W G Gruessner; Angelika C Gruessner
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2013-07-30       Impact factor: 43.330

7.  World's longest surviving liver-pancreas recipient.

Authors:  Albert M Harary; Kareem Abu-Elmagd; Ngoc Thai; Ron Shapiro; Satoru Todo; John J Fung; Thomas E Starzl
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.799

8.  Bioengineering the Endocrine Pancreas: Intraomental Islet Transplantation Within a Biologic Resorbable Scaffold.

Authors:  Dora M Berman; R Damaris Molano; Carmen Fotino; Ulisse Ulissi; Jennifer Gimeno; Armando J Mendez; Norman M Kenyon; Norma S Kenyon; David M Andrews; Camillo Ricordi; Antonello Pileggi
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 9.461

9.  Transplantation sites for human and murine islets.

Authors:  Rebecca A Stokes; Kim Cheng; Amit Lalwani; Michael M Swarbrick; Helen E Thomas; Thomas Loudovaris; Tom W Kay; Wayne J Hawthorne; Philip J O'Connell; Jenny E Gunton
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2017-07-22       Impact factor: 10.122

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.