AIM: To discuss the use of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) as an immunosuppressant in steroid resistant rejection after liver transplantation. METHODS: The clinical records of 260 adult patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) were reviewed. Tacrolimus and methylprednisolone were used for primary immunosuppression. Acute rejection was first treated with steroids. When steroid resistance occurred, the patient was treated with a combination of steroids and MMF. Anti-T-cell monoclonal antibody was administered to patients who were not responsive to steroids in combination with MMF. RESULTS: A total of 90 (35%) patients developed acute rejection. The median interval time from transplantation to the first episode was 15 d. Fifty-four patients were steroid resistant. Forty-four patients were treated with MMF and the remaining 10 required anti-T-cell monoclonal antibody treatment. Progression to chronic rejection was observed in one patient. Bone marrow suppression and gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common side effects associated with MMF use. There was no significant increase in opportunistic infections. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that MMF is a potent and safe immunosuppressive agent for rescue therapy in patients with acute rejection after LDLT.
AIM: To discuss the use of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) as an immunosuppressant in steroid resistant rejection after liver transplantation. METHODS: The clinical records of 260 adult patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) were reviewed. Tacrolimus and methylprednisolone were used for primary immunosuppression. Acute rejection was first treated with steroids. When steroid resistance occurred, the patient was treated with a combination of steroids and MMF. Anti-T-cell monoclonal antibody was administered to patients who were not responsive to steroids in combination with MMF. RESULTS: A total of 90 (35%) patients developed acute rejection. The median interval time from transplantation to the first episode was 15 d. Fifty-four patients were steroid resistant. Forty-four patients were treated with MMF and the remaining 10 required anti-T-cell monoclonal antibody treatment. Progression to chronic rejection was observed in one patient. Bone marrow suppression and gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common side effects associated with MMF use. There was no significant increase in opportunistic infections. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that MMF is a potent and safe immunosuppressive agent for rescue therapy in patients with acute rejection after LDLT.
Authors: J Klupp; W O Bechstein; K P Platz; H Keck; H P Lemmens; M Knoop; J M Langrehr; R Neuhaus; J Pratschke; P Neuhaus Journal: Transpl Int Date: 1997 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: Robert Pfitzmann; Jochen Klupp; Jan Michael Langrehr; Mareen Uhl; Ruth Neuhaus; Utz Settmacher; Thomas Steinmüller; Peter Neuhaus Journal: Transplantation Date: 2003-07-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Robert A Fisher; James J Stone; Luke G Wolfe; Cheryl M Rodgers; Melodie L Anderson; Richard K Sterling; Mitchell L Shiffman; Velimer A Luketic; Melissa J Contos; A Scott Mills; Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez; Marc P Posner Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Jose Maria Moreno Planas; Valentin Cuervas-Mons Martinez; Eduardo Rubio Gonzalez; Amparo Gomez Cruz; Javier Lopez-Monclus; Victor Sánchez-Turrion; Jose Luis Lucena Poza; Manuel Jimenez Garrido; Isabel Millan Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: D L Paterson; N Singh; A Panebianco; C F Wannstedt; M M Wagener; T Gayowski; I R Marino Journal: Transplantation Date: 1998-09-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: K B Vinay; H D Revanasiddappa; M S Raghu; Sameer A M Abdulrahman; N Rajendraprasad Journal: J Anal Methods Chem Date: 2012-03-26 Impact factor: 2.193