RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Grafts from elderly donors (ECD) are increasingly allocated to single (SKT) or dual (DKT) kidney transplantation according to biopsy score. Indications and benefits of either procedure lack universal agreement. METHODS: A total of 302 ECD-transplants in period from Jan 1, 2000, to Dec 31, 2015, were allocated to SKT (SKTpre) on clinical grounds alone (before Dec 2010, pre-DKT era, n = 170) or according to a clinical-histological protocol (after Dec 2010, DKT era, n = 132) to DKT (n = 48), SKT biopsy-based protocol ("high-risk", SKThr, n = 51), or SKT clinically based protocol ("low-risk", SKTlr, n = 33). Graft and patient survival were compared between the two periods and between different transplant categories. RESULTS: Graft and overall survival in recipients from ECD in pre-DKT and DKT era did not differ (5-year graft survival 87.7% and 84.2%, resp.); equal survival in the 2 ECD periods was shown in both donor age ranges of 60-69 and >70-years, and in low-risk or high-risk ECD categories. Within the DKT protocol SKThr showed worst graft and overall survival in the 60-69 donor age range; DKT did not result in significantly better outcome than SKT from ECD in either era. One-year posttransplant creatinine clearance in recipients did not differ between any ECD transplant category. At 3 and 5 years after transplantation there were significantly higher total dialysis-free recipient life years from an equal donor number in the pre-DKT era than in the DKT protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a biopsy-based protocol to allocate grafts from aged donors to SKT or DKT did not result in better short term graft survival than a clinically based protocol with allocation only to SKT and reduced overall recipient dialysis-free life years in time.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The main purpose of this paper, written by a group of Italian expert transplant surgeons, is to provide clinical support and to help through the decision-making process over pre-transplant surgical procedures in potential kidney recipients, as well as selection of pancreas transplant candidates and perioperative management of kidney recipient. Current topics such as different approaches in minimally invasive donor nephrectomy, methods of graft preservation and treatment of failed allograft were addressed.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: As compared with traditional laparoscopy, robotic-assisted surgery provides better EndoWrist instruments and three-dimensional visualization of the operative field. Studies published so far indicate that living donor nephrectomy using the robot-assisted technique is safe, feasible, and provides remarkable advantages for the patients. METHODS: From 5 papers reporting detailed descriptions of surgical technique for robotic assisted nephrectomy (RAN) in living donor kidney transplantation, we have gathered information about the surgical techniques as well as about patients' intra- and postoperative outcome. Data from these articles were analyzed together with the data from our own experience (33 cases) so that the total number of analyzed cases was 292. RESULTS: In the analyzed populations, no case of donor death occurred, and no case developed complication above grade 2 of Clavien score. Perioperative complications occurred in 37 of the 292 patients (12.6%). Accidental acute hemorrhage occurred in 5 of the 292 cases (1.7%). The average overall intraoperative blood loss was 67.8 mL (range 10 to 1,500). The average warm ischemia time was 3.5 minutes (range .58 to 7.6). Conversion to the open technique occurred in only 4 cases (1.3%). The average overall operative time was 192 minutes (range 60 to 400). The average length of the hospital stay was 2.7 days (range 1 to 10). CONCLUSIONS: Safety and feasibility of RAN are pointed out in all the reviewed article, both as hand-assisted and as totally robotic technique. RAN appears to be significantly easier for the surgeons and the results are comparable with the ones obtained with the pure laparoscopic technique.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Chromogranin A (CgA) is the most accurate general marker of neuroendocrine tumours. Supranormal CgA concentrations have been recorded in patients with tumours of neuroectodermal origin such as phaeochromocytoma and paraganglioma. DESIGN: The present study was performed to assess the role of CgA determination in the management of patients with phaeochromocytoma, in comparison with urinary catecholamines and their metabolites. PATIENTS: The patients studied included 22 cases with phaeochromocytoma at initial presentation or at relapse some years after surgical cure or during follow-up of a malignant phaeochromocytoma. Seventeen patients were evaluated before and after surgical removal of phaeochromocytoma. To assess the specificity of the hormonal parameters, 20 subjects were enrolled as controls; they were from a group of patients referred to our observation for possible phaeochromocytoma and who were subsequently proven not to have the disease. RESULTS: Urinary epinephrine and norepinephrine were supranormal in 82% and 77% of patients, respectively. Urinary metanephrines and normetanephrines were supranormal in 84% and 89% of patients, respectively. The combination of urinary metanephrine and normetanephrine had a sensitivity of 100% in identifying a phaeochromocytoma. CgA was supranormal in 91% of patients. Combining the results of CgA and urinary catecholamines (epinephrine and norepinephrine), the sensitivity for diagnosis of phaeochromocytoma was 100%. Urinary catecholamines, metabolites (metanephrine and normetanephrine) and CgA levels in patients with malignant phaeochromocytoma did not differ significantly from those of patients with benign lesions. In most cases, CgA normalized after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that CgA is a good marker of phaeochromocytoma; measurement of CgA could have a role in the follow-up of patients operated on for phaeochromocytoma.

Asunto(s)