BACKGROUND: Although percutaneous biopsies are considered to be the gold standard in diagnosing pancreas graft rejection, they are not performed routinely because of their association with severe complications. On the other hand, correct diagnosis of rejection is essential but may be difficult in cases of enteric drainage, particularly in patients with a pancreas transplant alone or a pancreas after kidney transplant. METHODS: Pancreas recipients who underwent enteroscopy between May 2005 and September 2009 were included in this retrospective analysis. Biopsies were graded 0 to 4 for interstitial and vascular changes. RESULTS: During the study period a total of 65 simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants, 13 pancreas after kidney transplants and 4 pancreas transplants alone were performed. Sixty-three patients underwent a single enteroscopy, 10 had two, and 6 had three or more. Indications were protocol graft monitoring (n=73), graft dysfunction (n=17), enteric hemorrhage (n=9), or other (n=3). The duodenal segment was accessed in 76 instances (75%) with abnormal findings in 23. A total of 69 biopsies were obtained and revealed normal mucosa in 49 cases (71%). Histology showed signs of acute rejection in 11 cases. The upper gastrointestinal tract was also assessed, and, in 13 cases, additional pathologies were identified including gastroduodenitis (n=10), gastric/duodenal ulcer (n=2), and hemorrhagic esophagitis (n=1). No procedure-related complication occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This series of enteroscopies demonstrates that the duodenal segment of a pancreatic graft is accessible using our implant technique, and thus permitting biopsies to be obtained and endoscopic interventions to be performed.
BACKGROUND: Although percutaneous biopsies are considered to be the gold standard in diagnosing pancreas graft rejection, they are not performed routinely because of their association with severe complications. On the other hand, correct diagnosis of rejection is essential but may be difficult in cases of enteric drainage, particularly in patients with a pancreas transplant alone or a pancreas after kidney transplant. METHODS: Pancreas recipients who underwent enteroscopy between May 2005 and September 2009 were included in this retrospective analysis. Biopsies were graded 0 to 4 for interstitial and vascular changes. RESULTS: During the study period a total of 65 simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants, 13 pancreas after kidney transplants and 4 pancreas transplants alone were performed. Sixty-three patients underwent a single enteroscopy, 10 had two, and 6 had three or more. Indications were protocol graft monitoring (n=73), graft dysfunction (n=17), enteric hemorrhage (n=9), or other (n=3). The duodenal segment was accessed in 76 instances (75%) with abnormal findings in 23. A total of 69 biopsies were obtained and revealed normal mucosa in 49 cases (71%). Histology showed signs of acute rejection in 11 cases. The upper gastrointestinal tract was also assessed, and, in 13 cases, additional pathologies were identified including gastroduodenitis (n=10), gastric/duodenal ulcer (n=2), and hemorrhagic esophagitis (n=1). No procedure-related complication occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This series of enteroscopies demonstrates that the duodenal segment of a pancreatic graft is accessible using our implant technique, and thus permitting biopsies to be obtained and endoscopic interventions to be performed.
Authors: Stephen T Bartlett; James F Markmann; Paul Johnson; Olle Korsgren; Bernhard J Hering; David Scharp; Thomas W H Kay; Jonathan Bromberg; Jon S Odorico; Gordon C Weir; Nancy Bridges; Raja Kandaswamy; Peter Stock; Peter Friend; Mitsukazu Gotoh; David K C Cooper; Chung-Gyu Park; Phillip OʼConnell; Cherie Stabler; Shinichi Matsumoto; Barbara Ludwig; Pratik Choudhary; Boris Kovatchev; Michael R Rickels; Megan Sykes; Kathryn Wood; Kristy Kraemer; Albert Hwa; Edward Stanley; Camillo Ricordi; Mark Zimmerman; Julia Greenstein; Eduard Montanya; Timo Otonkoski Journal: Transplantation Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: S Gasteiger; B Cardini; G Göbel; R Oberhuber; F Messner; T Resch; C Bösmüller; C Margreiter; S Schneeberger; M Maglione Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2018-07-14 Impact factor: 6.939