The analysis of benefit and risk of combined pancreatic and renal transplantation versus renal transplantation alone

R. J. Stratta, R. J. Taylor, C. F. Ozaki, J. S. Bynon, S. A. Miller, T. L. Baker, C. Lykke, M. E. Krobot, Alan Norman Langnas, B. W. Shaw

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Currently, diabetes mellitus is the most common cause of renal failure in adults. However, combined pancreatic and renal transplantation (PRT) remains controversial when compared with renal transplantation alone (RTA) in diabetic recipients. We analyzed the results and morbidity in four age- matched groups-31 patients with Type I diabetes undergoing PRT before dialysis, 30 patients with diabetes who are dependent of dialysis undergoing PRT, 31 concurrent and historic patients with Type I diabetes undergoing RTA and 31 concurrent patients without diabetes undergoing RTA. All patients received cadaver donor organs and were managed with cyclosporine and prednisone immunosuppression with selective OKT3 induction. The four groups were comparable with respect to age, weight, gender, duration and severity of diabetes, dialysis type, number of retransplants, degree of sensitization, preservation time and matching. The groups differed with regard to duration of dialysis and period of follow-up evaluation, pretransplant blood transfusions, racial distribution and OKT3 induction therapy. PRT was associated with a greater morbidity rate as evidenced by a slightly higher incidence of rejection, infections and reoperations. The number of readmissions and hospitalization period during the first 12 months was also greater after PRT versus RTA. However, none of these differences were significant. No detrimental effect was noted on renal allograft function at one year; patient and graft survival was actually higher in the PRT groups. Quality of life was improved in nearly 90 percent of PRT recipients. Although the improved results after PRT may be attributed to selection bias, only lesser differences were noted among the four study groups. The aforementioned data suggest that appropriate patient selection can overcome the morbidity associated with PRT, resulting in excellent patient and graft survival with the potential for complete rehabilitation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)163-171
Number of pages9
JournalSurgery Gynecology and Obstetrics
Volume177
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jan 1 1993

Fingerprint

Kidney Transplantation
Dialysis
Muromonab-CD3
Graft Survival
Morbidity
Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus
Selection Bias
Prednisone
Reoperation
Cadaver
Blood Transfusion
Immunosuppression
Patient Selection
Cyclosporine
Renal Insufficiency
Allografts
Diabetes Mellitus
Hospitalization
Research Design
Rehabilitation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Stratta, R. J., Taylor, R. J., Ozaki, C. F., Bynon, J. S., Miller, S. A., Baker, T. L., ... Shaw, B. W. (1993). The analysis of benefit and risk of combined pancreatic and renal transplantation versus renal transplantation alone. Surgery Gynecology and Obstetrics, 177(2), 163-171.

The analysis of benefit and risk of combined pancreatic and renal transplantation versus renal transplantation alone. / Stratta, R. J.; Taylor, R. J.; Ozaki, C. F.; Bynon, J. S.; Miller, S. A.; Baker, T. L.; Lykke, C.; Krobot, M. E.; Langnas, Alan Norman; Shaw, B. W.

In: Surgery Gynecology and Obstetrics, Vol. 177, No. 2, 01.01.1993, p. 163-171.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stratta, RJ, Taylor, RJ, Ozaki, CF, Bynon, JS, Miller, SA, Baker, TL, Lykke, C, Krobot, ME, Langnas, AN & Shaw, BW 1993, 'The analysis of benefit and risk of combined pancreatic and renal transplantation versus renal transplantation alone', Surgery Gynecology and Obstetrics, vol. 177, no. 2, pp. 163-171.
Stratta RJ, Taylor RJ, Ozaki CF, Bynon JS, Miller SA, Baker TL et al. The analysis of benefit and risk of combined pancreatic and renal transplantation versus renal transplantation alone. Surgery Gynecology and Obstetrics. 1993 Jan 1;177(2):163-171.
Stratta, R. J. ; Taylor, R. J. ; Ozaki, C. F. ; Bynon, J. S. ; Miller, S. A. ; Baker, T. L. ; Lykke, C. ; Krobot, M. E. ; Langnas, Alan Norman ; Shaw, B. W. / The analysis of benefit and risk of combined pancreatic and renal transplantation versus renal transplantation alone. In: Surgery Gynecology and Obstetrics. 1993 ; Vol. 177, No. 2. pp. 163-171.
@article{0cb907be6400492faf5cb67a65d3a374,
title = "The analysis of benefit and risk of combined pancreatic and renal transplantation versus renal transplantation alone",
abstract = "Currently, diabetes mellitus is the most common cause of renal failure in adults. However, combined pancreatic and renal transplantation (PRT) remains controversial when compared with renal transplantation alone (RTA) in diabetic recipients. We analyzed the results and morbidity in four age- matched groups-31 patients with Type I diabetes undergoing PRT before dialysis, 30 patients with diabetes who are dependent of dialysis undergoing PRT, 31 concurrent and historic patients with Type I diabetes undergoing RTA and 31 concurrent patients without diabetes undergoing RTA. All patients received cadaver donor organs and were managed with cyclosporine and prednisone immunosuppression with selective OKT3 induction. The four groups were comparable with respect to age, weight, gender, duration and severity of diabetes, dialysis type, number of retransplants, degree of sensitization, preservation time and matching. The groups differed with regard to duration of dialysis and period of follow-up evaluation, pretransplant blood transfusions, racial distribution and OKT3 induction therapy. PRT was associated with a greater morbidity rate as evidenced by a slightly higher incidence of rejection, infections and reoperations. The number of readmissions and hospitalization period during the first 12 months was also greater after PRT versus RTA. However, none of these differences were significant. No detrimental effect was noted on renal allograft function at one year; patient and graft survival was actually higher in the PRT groups. Quality of life was improved in nearly 90 percent of PRT recipients. Although the improved results after PRT may be attributed to selection bias, only lesser differences were noted among the four study groups. The aforementioned data suggest that appropriate patient selection can overcome the morbidity associated with PRT, resulting in excellent patient and graft survival with the potential for complete rehabilitation.",
author = "Stratta, {R. J.} and Taylor, {R. J.} and Ozaki, {C. F.} and Bynon, {J. S.} and Miller, {S. A.} and Baker, {T. L.} and C. Lykke and Krobot, {M. E.} and Langnas, {Alan Norman} and Shaw, {B. W.}",
year = "1993",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "177",
pages = "163--171",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Surgeons",
issn = "1072-7515",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The analysis of benefit and risk of combined pancreatic and renal transplantation versus renal transplantation alone

AU - Stratta, R. J.

AU - Taylor, R. J.

AU - Ozaki, C. F.

AU - Bynon, J. S.

AU - Miller, S. A.

AU - Baker, T. L.

AU - Lykke, C.

AU - Krobot, M. E.

AU - Langnas, Alan Norman

AU - Shaw, B. W.

PY - 1993/1/1

Y1 - 1993/1/1

N2 - Currently, diabetes mellitus is the most common cause of renal failure in adults. However, combined pancreatic and renal transplantation (PRT) remains controversial when compared with renal transplantation alone (RTA) in diabetic recipients. We analyzed the results and morbidity in four age- matched groups-31 patients with Type I diabetes undergoing PRT before dialysis, 30 patients with diabetes who are dependent of dialysis undergoing PRT, 31 concurrent and historic patients with Type I diabetes undergoing RTA and 31 concurrent patients without diabetes undergoing RTA. All patients received cadaver donor organs and were managed with cyclosporine and prednisone immunosuppression with selective OKT3 induction. The four groups were comparable with respect to age, weight, gender, duration and severity of diabetes, dialysis type, number of retransplants, degree of sensitization, preservation time and matching. The groups differed with regard to duration of dialysis and period of follow-up evaluation, pretransplant blood transfusions, racial distribution and OKT3 induction therapy. PRT was associated with a greater morbidity rate as evidenced by a slightly higher incidence of rejection, infections and reoperations. The number of readmissions and hospitalization period during the first 12 months was also greater after PRT versus RTA. However, none of these differences were significant. No detrimental effect was noted on renal allograft function at one year; patient and graft survival was actually higher in the PRT groups. Quality of life was improved in nearly 90 percent of PRT recipients. Although the improved results after PRT may be attributed to selection bias, only lesser differences were noted among the four study groups. The aforementioned data suggest that appropriate patient selection can overcome the morbidity associated with PRT, resulting in excellent patient and graft survival with the potential for complete rehabilitation.

AB - Currently, diabetes mellitus is the most common cause of renal failure in adults. However, combined pancreatic and renal transplantation (PRT) remains controversial when compared with renal transplantation alone (RTA) in diabetic recipients. We analyzed the results and morbidity in four age- matched groups-31 patients with Type I diabetes undergoing PRT before dialysis, 30 patients with diabetes who are dependent of dialysis undergoing PRT, 31 concurrent and historic patients with Type I diabetes undergoing RTA and 31 concurrent patients without diabetes undergoing RTA. All patients received cadaver donor organs and were managed with cyclosporine and prednisone immunosuppression with selective OKT3 induction. The four groups were comparable with respect to age, weight, gender, duration and severity of diabetes, dialysis type, number of retransplants, degree of sensitization, preservation time and matching. The groups differed with regard to duration of dialysis and period of follow-up evaluation, pretransplant blood transfusions, racial distribution and OKT3 induction therapy. PRT was associated with a greater morbidity rate as evidenced by a slightly higher incidence of rejection, infections and reoperations. The number of readmissions and hospitalization period during the first 12 months was also greater after PRT versus RTA. However, none of these differences were significant. No detrimental effect was noted on renal allograft function at one year; patient and graft survival was actually higher in the PRT groups. Quality of life was improved in nearly 90 percent of PRT recipients. Although the improved results after PRT may be attributed to selection bias, only lesser differences were noted among the four study groups. The aforementioned data suggest that appropriate patient selection can overcome the morbidity associated with PRT, resulting in excellent patient and graft survival with the potential for complete rehabilitation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027208716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027208716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 177

SP - 163

EP - 171

JO - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

JF - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

SN - 1072-7515

IS - 2

ER -