Andrew S Weiss1, Gerard Smits, Alexander C Wiseman. 1. Division of Renal Diseases and Hypertension, Transplant Center, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPK) is regarded as the treatment of choice for type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and kidney dysfunction, despite the morbidity associated with pancreas transplantation. These morbidities often influence selection of SPK versus living-donor kidney alone (LD KA) transplant. This study quantifies the impact of pancreas graft function on outcomes following SPK. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Using the SRTR database, SPK wait-listed patients transplanted from 1997 to 2005 were evaluated and segregated as: (1) SPK recipients with functioning pancreas graft 12 mo posttransplant (SPK, P+); (2) SPK recipients with loss of pancreas graft function within 12 mo posttransplant (SPK, P-); (3) recipients of deceased donor (DD) KA; (4) recipients of LD KA. The study compared patient and kidney graft survival to 84 mo posttransplant. RESULTS: Patient survival for SPK, P+ was significantly better than the LD KA; SPK, P-; and DD KA cohorts (88.6% versus 80.0%, 73.9% and 64.8%, respectively [P < 0.001]), a finding confirmed by multivariate analysis and not influenced by pancreas-after-kidney transplantation (PAK) rates and outcomes. Unadjusted graft survival was also highest in the SPK, P+ cohort (72.0% versus 63.6%, 59.8%, 49.7%, P = 0.015 versus LD KA). CONCLUSIONS: SPK recipients with functioning pancreas grafts have superior survival compared with LD KA and DD KA, including in the setting of PAK. Early pancreas graft failure results in kidney and patient survival rates similar to KA. These data help further clarify the decision-making of SPK versus KA transplant options for patients and providers.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPK) is regarded as the treatment of choice for type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and kidney dysfunction, despite the morbidity associated with pancreas transplantation. These morbidities often influence selection of SPK versus living-donor kidney alone (LD KA) transplant. This study quantifies the impact of pancreas graft function on outcomes following SPK. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Using the SRTR database, SPK wait-listed patients transplanted from 1997 to 2005 were evaluated and segregated as: (1) SPK recipients with functioning pancreas graft 12 mo posttransplant (SPK, P+); (2) SPK recipients with loss of pancreas graft function within 12 mo posttransplant (SPK, P-); (3) recipients of deceased donor (DD) KA; (4) recipients of LD KA. The study compared patient and kidney graft survival to 84 mo posttransplant. RESULTS:Patient survival for SPK, P+ was significantly better than the LD KA; SPK, P-; and DD KA cohorts (88.6% versus 80.0%, 73.9% and 64.8%, respectively [P < 0.001]), a finding confirmed by multivariate analysis and not influenced by pancreas-after-kidney transplantation (PAK) rates and outcomes. Unadjusted graft survival was also highest in the SPK, P+ cohort (72.0% versus 63.6%, 59.8%, 49.7%, P = 0.015 versus LD KA). CONCLUSIONS: SPK recipients with functioning pancreas grafts have superior survival compared with LD KA and DD KA, including in the setting of PAK. Early pancreas graft failure results in kidney and patient survival rates similar to KA. These data help further clarify the decision-making of SPK versus KA transplant options for patients and providers.
Authors: P Fiorina; E La Rocca; M Venturini; F Minicucci; I Fermo; R Paroni; A D'Angelo; M Sblendido; V Di Carlo; M Cristallo; A Del Maschio; G Pozza; A Secchi Journal: Diabetes Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: D E Sutherland; R W Gruessner; D L Dunn; A J Matas; A Humar; R Kandaswamy; S M Mauer; W R Kennedy; F C Goetz; R P Robertson; A C Gruessner; J S Najarian Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: R Koznarová; F Saudek; T Sosna; M Adamec; T Jedináková; P Boucek; V Bartos; V Lánská Journal: Cell Transplant Date: 2000 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: N Berger; R Wirmsberger; R Kafka; C Margreiter; C Ebenbichler; I Stelzmueller; R Margreiter; W Steurer; W Mark; H Bonatti Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: W Steurer; H Bonatti; P Obrist; B Spechtenhauser; R Ladurner; W Mark; A Gardetto; R Margreiter; A Königsrainer Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2000 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: A O Ojo; H U Meier-Kriesche; J A Hanson; A Leichtman; J C Magee; D Cibrik; R A Wolfe; F K Port; L Agodoa; D B Kaufman; B Kaplan Journal: Transplantation Date: 2001-01-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Kalathil K Sureshkumar; Tariq Mubin; Nabil Mikhael; Mohammed Ahmer Kashif; Dai D Nghiem; Richard J Marcus Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: E La Rocca; P Fiorina; V di Carlo; E Astorri; C Rossetti; G Lucignani; F Fazio; D Giudici; M Cristallo; G Bianchi; G Pozza; A Secchi Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: S C Rayhill; A M D'Alessandro; J S Odorico; S J Knechtle; J D Pirsch; D M Heisey; A D Kirk; W Van der Werf; H W Sollinger Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Suphamai Bunnapradist; Yong W Cho; J Michael Cecka; Alan Wilkinson; Gabriel M Danovitch Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: J P Lindahl; A Hartmann; R Horneland; H Holdaas; A V Reisæter; K Midtvedt; T Leivestad; O Oyen; T Jenssen Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Krista L Lentine; Tarek Alhamad; Wisit Cheungpasitporn; Jane C Tan; Su-Hsin Chang; Matthew Cooper; Darshana M Dadhania; David A Axelrod; Mark A Schnitzler; Rosemary Ouseph; Franco H Cabeza Rivera; Bertram L Kasiske; Kenneth J Woodside; Ronald F Parsons Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2020-08-21