Search

We have tested the predictive model for risk of sensitization by donor-specific transfusions developed at the University of California, San Francisco for its applicability to the DST experience at UW/Madison. Patient sample sizes between the two groups were similar (n = 249 for UW/Madison, n = 261 for UCSF) and the two groups of patients had similar compositions in terms of mean age, ABO type, baseline panel-reactive antibody, and pregnancy rate. The two groups differed in that the UW/Madison group had a higher percentage of males, diabetic patients, previously transplanted patients, and 0 haplotype-matched (2 HLA-mismatched related and unrelated) recipients. In addition, all the UW/Madison patients received azathioprine (AZA) whereas only half the UCSF group was given AZA. Despite these differences, application of the UCSF model for prediction of sensitization by DST gave remarkably similar results in our patient population, with pregnancy, prior transplant, baseline PRA, and HLA antigen sharing giving similar odds ratios and P values. However, when female sex was included in the model along with the other variables, the significance of pregnancy risk disappeared. We have developed an alternative multivariate model using stepwise logistic regression that identifies baseline PRA greater than 40%, female sex, and prior transplant as significant risk factors for sensitization, while number of HLA (A, B, DR) antigens shared and increasing recipient age significantly decreased risk of sensitization by DST.

Forty-three whole-pancreas transplantations with pancreaticocystostomy were performed. Eighteen patients received pancreas transplants after previously receiving living-related kidney transplants, 18 patients received simultaneous kidney and pancreas transplants, and seven patients received pancreas transplants after previously receiving cadaver kidney transplants. All patients were immunosuppressed with quadruple immunosuppression including antilymphocyte globulin, prednisone, cyclosporine, and azathioprine. Overall graft survival for pancreas transplants is 73.1%. In the group with pancreas after living-related kidney, 1-year graft survival was 50% for the pancreas and 95.4% for the kidney. In the pancreas after cadaver kidney group, pancreas and kidney survival rates were 100% at 1 year, and in the simultaneous pancreas and kidney group, pancreas 1-year graft survival was 87.5% and kidney transplant survival was 93.8%. Overall patient survival at 1-year is 95.6%. Technical complications occurred in 21 patients. These included wound infections, intra-abdominal abscess formation, bleeding, and disruption of the pancreaticocystostomy. We believe that pancreas transplantation can now be performed with acceptable graft and patient survival.

Two technical modifications have been suggested for whole-pancreas transplantation with bladder drainage. The duodenal button technique (DB [Madison]) and the duodenal segment technique (DS [Iowa]) are the most commonly performed procedures (1,2). From December 1985 until May 1988 we performed 32 combined pancreas-kidney transplants using DB and DS techniques in 17 and 15 patients, respectively. Bladder leaks, pancreatitis, bleeding episodes, and surgically related infections were all decreased with the duodenal segment technique. Metabolic acidosis was more common with DS but was easily managed with oral sodium bicarbonate. The one-year actuarial graft survival with DB is less when compared with DS (76.1% vs. 87.5%). Three technical graft losses occurred with DB vs. none with DS. One graft was lost in each group to rejection. Our results indicate that the duodenal segment technique of bladder implantation adds safety to whole-pancreas transplantation and must now be considered the procedure of choice.