PURPOSE: To compare the incidence of immediate surgical complications after renal transplantation between mycophenolate mofetil (MMF group)-based and mTOR inhibitors (mTOR group)-based immunosuppressive regimens. METHODS: The preoperative parameters in the recipients, rejection rates and surgical complications within 12 months in the recipients were analyzed in 80 patients who had live related renal transplantation. The immunosuppressive regimen was based on MMF (MMF, prednisolone, cyclosporine) in 40 patients and mTOR inhibitors (sirolimus/everolimus, prednisolone, cyclosporine) in 40 patients. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Infective complications (urinary tract infections, pulmonary infections and superficial wound infection) occurred in 27.5% (11/40) and 12.5% (5/40) of patients from MMF and mTORI groups, respectively (P = 0.096). Patients in mTORI group had significantly more wound dehiscence (8/40 i.e., 20%) than in MMF group (1/40 i.e., 2.5%) (P = 0.014). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of clinically significant or symptomatic lymphoceles that needed intervention (3 vs. 2). The hospital stay was significantly prolonged in mTORI group mainly because of wound-related problems (35 vs. 24 days). CONCLUSION: In the post-renal transplant setting, use of mTORI results in significantly higher wound complications compared to that of MMF leading to prolonged hospital stay. There is no significant difference in infective complications or lymphocele incidence between these two immunosuppressive regimens.
PURPOSE: To compare the incidence of immediate surgical complications after renal transplantation between mycophenolate mofetil (MMF group)-based and mTOR inhibitors (mTOR group)-based immunosuppressive regimens. METHODS: The preoperative parameters in the recipients, rejection rates and surgical complications within 12 months in the recipients were analyzed in 80 patients who had live related renal transplantation. The immunosuppressive regimen was based on MMF (MMF, prednisolone, cyclosporine) in 40 patients and mTOR inhibitors (sirolimus/everolimus, prednisolone, cyclosporine) in 40 patients. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Infective complications (urinary tract infections, pulmonary infections and superficial wound infection) occurred in 27.5% (11/40) and 12.5% (5/40) of patients from MMF and mTORI groups, respectively (P = 0.096). Patients in mTORI group had significantly more wound dehiscence (8/40 i.e., 20%) than in MMF group (1/40 i.e., 2.5%) (P = 0.014). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of clinically significant or symptomatic lymphoceles that needed intervention (3 vs. 2). The hospital stay was significantly prolonged in mTORI group mainly because of wound-related problems (35 vs. 24 days). CONCLUSION: In the post-renal transplant setting, use of mTORI results in significantly higher wound complications compared to that of MMF leading to prolonged hospital stay. There is no significant difference in infective complications or lymphocele incidence between these two immunosuppressive regimens.
Authors: W Schuler; R Sedrani; S Cottens; B Häberlin; M Schulz; H J Schuurman; G Zenke; H G Zerwes; M H Schreier Journal: Transplantation Date: 1997-07-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Stuart M Flechner; Lingmei Zhou; Ithaar Derweesh; Barbara Mastroianni; Kathy Savas; David Goldfarb; Charles S Modlin; Venkatesh Krishnamurthi; Andrew Novick Journal: Transplantation Date: 2003-12-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Mahesh Goel; Stuart M Flechner; Lingme Zhou; Barbara Mastroianni; Kathy Savas; Ithaar Derweesh; Pratik Patel; Charles Modlin; David Goldfarb; Andrew C Novick Journal: J Urol Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: John F Valente; Donald Hricik; Kelly Weigel; David Seaman; Thomas Knauss; Christopher T Siegel; Kenneth Bodziak; James A Schulak Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Patrick G Dean; William J Lund; Timothy S Larson; Mikel Prieto; Scott L Nyberg; Michael B Ishitani; Walter K Kremers; Mark D Stegall Journal: Transplantation Date: 2004-05-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Ho Yee Tiong; Stuart M Flechner; Lingme Zhou; Alvin Wee; Barbara Mastroianni; Kathy Savas; David Goldfarb; Ithaar Derweesh; Charles Modlin Journal: Transplantation Date: 2009-01-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Dong Jin Joo; Chul Woo Yang; Hyeon Joo Jeong; Beom Jin Lim; Kyu Ha Huh; Byung Ha Chung; Yeong Jin Choi; Shin-Wook Kang; Yu Seun Kim Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2014-07-30 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: R Brian Stevens; Kirk W Foster; Clifford D Miles; Andre C Kalil; Diana F Florescu; John P Sandoz; Theodore H Rigley; Tamer Malik; Lucile E Wrenshall Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: R Brian Stevens; Kirk W Foster; Clifford D Miles; James T Lane; Andre C Kalil; Diana F Florescu; John P Sandoz; Theodore H Rigley; Kathleen J Nielsen; Jill Y Skorupa; Anna M Kellogg; Tamer Malik; Lucile E Wrenshall Journal: Transplantation Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 4.939