Search

Background: Ideally, no live kidney donor should regret their decision or feel they were not fully prepared for the process. Unfortunately, this is not a reality for all donors. The aim of our study is to identify areas for improvement, focusing on factors (red flags) that predict less favorable outcomes from a donor perspective., Materials and Methods: A total of 171 living kidney donors responded to a questionnaire with 24 multiple-choice questions and space for comments. Less favorable outcomes were defined as lower satisfaction, extended physical recovery period, long-term fatigue, and longer sick leave., Results: Ten red flags were identified. Of these factors, more fatigue (range, P = .000-0.040) or pain (range, P = .005-0.008) than expected while still in hospital, the actual experience being harder or different than expected (range, P = .001-0.010), and the donor wishing to have had but not having been offered a previous donor as mentor (range, P = .008-.040) correlated significantly with at least 3 of the 4 less favorable outcomes. Another significant red flag was keeping existential issues to oneself (P = .006)., Conclusion: We identified several factors indicating that a donor could be at an increased risk for a less favorable outcome after donation. Four of these factors have, to our knowledge, not been described earlier: more early fatigue than expected, more postoperative pain than anticipated, not having been offered a mentor at an early stage, and keeping existential issues to oneself. Attention to these red flags already during the donation process could help health care professionals to act early to avoid unfavorable outcomes., Competing Interests: DISCLOSURE All the authors declare no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Simultaneous kidney and pancreas transplantation (SKPT) has become an effective treatment for patients who have diabetes mellitus type I with advanced nephropathy. This study assesses the progress of the SKPT program at Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden, and evaluates prognostic factors for graft survival., Materials and Methods: Between February 1986 and September 2009, we performed 113 SKPT. The immunosuppression protocols changed over time and are defined as era 1, cyclosporine (CyA), atzathioprine (AZA) and steroids (C/A/S); era 2, C/A/S with antithymocyte globulin (ATG) induction (C/A/S/A); era 3, CyA, mycophenolate mofetic (MMF), steroids and ATG induction (C/M/S/A); era 4, tacrolimus (TAC), MMF, steroid, and ATG induction (T/M/S/A) and era 5, TAC, MMF, steroids and basiliximab induction (T/M/S/B). We analyzed donor/recipient/operative and postoperative variables to assess their influence on pancreas graft and patient survivals., Results: The overall 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survivals were 95.5%, 84.1%, and 65.5%, respectively. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year overall pancreas graft survivals were 77.6%, 58.4%, and 48.4%. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year pancreas graft survivals in SKPT patients transplanted between October 1997 and September 2009. (T/M/S/A and T/M/S/B; eras 4 and 5) were 95.3%, 72.7%, and 63.1%, respectively, which was significantly better than those of patients transplanted between February 1986 and September 1997 (era, 1 through 3) (P < 0.01, P < 0.0001, respectively). The quadruple regimen with TAC and MMF (eras 4 and 5) decreased the incidence of acute rejection episodes compared with eras 1 through 3 (P < 0.0001). Basiliximab induction (T/M/S/B; era 5) reduced the CMV infection rate compared with eras 1 through 4 (P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed that donor age (younger than 40 years), immunosuppressive regimen with TAC and MMF (eras 4 and 5), and absence of acute rejection episodes independently affected pancreas graft survival., Conclusions: We demonstrate a superiority of the quadruple protocol with T/M/S/B for graft and patient survival with a decreased incidence of CMV infection after SKPT., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Living donor kidney transplantation accounts for about 50% of the total number of renal transplantations at our center. From 1999 through 2005, 75 out of 220 living donor nephrectomies were performed with a laparoscopic technique (LLDN). In June 2005, we introduced the technique of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy (HARS) for living donors. Since the introduction until the end of 2005, 11 out of 18 living donor nephrectomies (LDN) were performed with HARS. Reduced operation time was observed for the HARS group (mean, 166 minutes) compared with the LLDN (mean, 244 minutes). Two grafts showed delayed function, one in the LLND group and one in the HARS group. No major perioperative or postoperative complications were observed in the HARS group, whereas one patient who underwent LLDN developed severe pancreatitis. So far in our hands HARS is a fast and safe procedure with results comparable with open LDN. Compared to LLDN, we experienced reduced operation time together with the advantage of retroperitoneal access.