Home About us Current issue Back issues Submission Instructions Advertise Contact Login   

Search Article 
  
Advanced search 
 
Saudi Journal of Kidney Diseases and Transplantation
Users online: 526 Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size 
 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE Table of Contents   
Year : 2008  |  Volume : 19  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 59-61
Outcome of Patients without any Immunosuppressive Therapy after Renal Allograft Failure


Department of Nephrology, Khorshid Hospital, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Isfahan, Iran

Click here for correspondence address and email
 

   Abstract 

Continuation of low-dose maintenance immunosuppressive therapy in end­stage renal allografts (ESRAs) that are left in situ is controversial. We studied the outcome of 85 patients (mean age 33.3 ± 13.4 and range of 12-56 years) on hemodialysis with ESRAs, and without immunosuppressive therapy in our center from July 1991 to July 2003. Twelve (14.1%) study patients underwent allograft nephrectomy within a mean interval of 44.5 months after graft failure. The rest of the patients remained stable without fever, hematuria, graft tenderness, or localized edema during a mean interval of 46.5 ± 45.2 months of follow-up. These results are promising and suggest that maintenance immuno­suppressive therapy in patients with ESRAs and on dialysis may not be necessary to avoid allograft nephrectomy. Prospective studies are warranted to substantiate these results.

Keywords: Immunosuppression, Outcome, Allograft Failure, In Situ, Nephrectomy, Hemodialysis

How to cite this article:
Naini AE, Harandi AA, Daemi P, Kosari R, Gharavi M. Outcome of Patients without any Immunosuppressive Therapy after Renal Allograft Failure. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl 2008;19:59-61

How to cite this URL:
Naini AE, Harandi AA, Daemi P, Kosari R, Gharavi M. Outcome of Patients without any Immunosuppressive Therapy after Renal Allograft Failure. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl [serial online] 2008 [cited 2019 Dec 8];19:59-61. Available from: http://www.sjkdt.org/text.asp?2008/19/1/59/37434

   Introduction Top


There are various strategies for the management of maintenance immunosuppressive the­rapy in patients who return to hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis with end-stage renal allo­grafts (ESRAs). The strategies include early discontinuation of immunosuppressive drugs [1] followed by removal of the ESRAs, [2] or con­tinuation of low-dose maintenance immuno­suppressive therapy to avoid rejections and maintain residual diuresis. [3],[4],[5] The continuation of low dose maintenance immunosuppressive therapy in ESRAs that are left in situ is controversial [6],[7],[8],[9] and there are scarcity of studies on this subject. Some studies recommended discontinuation of immunosuppressive the­rapy, [10] while others recommended continua­tion of immunosuppression for the ESRAs that may postpone or prevent the need for nephrectomy and they suggest prolonged or gradual tapering immunosuppression. [11],[12]

Considering the benefit of retaining ESRAs in situ and with existence of serious adverse effects related to immunosuppressive medi­cation, we aim in our study to determine whe­ther discontinuation of immunosuppressive therapy might have adverse effect on acce­lerating the necessity for ESRA nephrectomy.


   Method and Materials Top


We retrospectively studied all patients who were maintained on chronic hemodialysis due to ESRAs, and underwent the first living kidney transplantation in transplant centers in Isfahan, Iran from July 1991 to July 2003. we included in the study the patients in whom the immunosuppressive therapy was dis­continued after graft failure, and excluded the re-transplanted patients, and the ones who died with a any related or not related cause to the underlying renal disease.

We analyzed the patients' demographic data, and the interval from the date of graft failure to the date of nephrectomy or the end of observation period, March 2004. The reasons of nephrectomy included fever, hematuria, graft tenderness, localized edema, and severe hypertension. [9] Immunosuppressive medication protocol consisted of prednisolone, cyclospo­rine A, azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil. These medications were tapered immediately after graft failure in all patients.


   Results Top


There were 85 patients who fulfilled the criteria of study. They all were residents in Isfahan province. The mean age of the patients was 33.3 ± 13.4 (ranged from 12 to 56 years), and 50 (58.8%) patients were males. All the patients had living donated allografts, and panel reaction antibody (PRA) less than 5 percent before transplantation. The mean previous transfusion history was 2.4 times per patient. Primary diseases were glomerulo­nephritis, diabetes mellitus, urological and hypertension with frequency of 22(25.8%), 17 (20.0%), 14(16.4%) and 6(7.0%), respect­tively. Polycystic kidney disease (PKD) and Alport's syndrome were reported in one patient each. There were 24(28.2%) study patients with unknown causes of primary kidney disease.

Twelve (14.1%) study patients underwent allograft nephrectomy within a mean interval of 44.5 months after graft failure. The rest of the patients remained stable without fever, hematuria, pain, graft tenderness, or localized edema during a mean interval of 46.5 ± 45.2 months of follow-up (median: 43 months, and range: 7-132 months).


   Discussion Top


The promising results of our study suggest that continuation of maintenance immuno­suppressive therapy in patients on hemo­dialysis with ESRAs may not delay the need for nephrectomy. Gregoor et al, reported that very low-dose immunosuppression might not be sufficient to suppress reactive anti­bodies, and further rejection. They concluded that there might be no benefit of continuing low-dose immunosuppressive therapy to prevent further rejection in ESRAs. [10]

Benefits of unremoved ESRAs such as residual diuresis, remaining clearance, and urine output during hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, were counter balanced in our decision making by the increased risk of morbidity and mortality due to infection and malig­nancies secondary to continued exposure to the immunosuppressive agents. Considering the low rate of nephrectomy in our study (14%), it seemed more rational to discon­tinue the maintenance immunosuppressive therapy. However, little is known about the characteristics that make patients more likely to require allograft nephrectomy. [11]

Unfortunately, our study had some restrict­tions. We did not have any control groups for comparison. Furthermore, the different length of follow-up period in these cases did not allow the use of complementary methods of data analysis.

We conclude that our study is promising and suggests that maintenance immuno­suppressive therapy in patients with ESRAs and on dialysis may not be necessary to avoid allograft nephrectomy. Prospective studies are warranted to substantiate these results.

 
   References Top

1.Vanrenterghem Y, Khamis S. The manage­ment of the failed renal allograft. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1996;11: 955-7.  Back to cited text no. 1  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]
2.Glicklich D, Greenstein SM, Posner L, Schechner RS, Tellis VA. Transplant nephrectomy in the cyclosporine era. J Am Soc Nephrol 1993;4:937.  Back to cited text no. 2    
3.Gallo CD, Grino JM, Seron D, Castelao AM, Franco E, Alsina J. Routine allograft nephrectomy in late renal failure. Trans­plantation 1990;44:1204.  Back to cited text no. 3    
4.Kiberd BA, Belitsky P. The fate of the failed renal transplant. Transplantation 1995; 59:645.  Back to cited text no. 4  [PUBMED]  
5.Jassal SV, Lok CE, Walele A, Bargman JM. Continued transplant immunosuppression may prolong survival after return to peritoneal dialysis: Results of a decision analysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2002;40:178-83.  Back to cited text no. 5  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]
6.O'Sullivan DC, Murphy DM, McLean P, Donovan MG. Transplant nephrectomy over 20 years: Factors involved in associated morbidity and mortality. J Urol 1994;151: 855-8.  Back to cited text no. 6  [PUBMED]  
7.Silberman H, Fitzgibbons TJ, Butler J, Berne TV. Renal allografts retained in situ after failure. Arch Surg 1980;115:42-3.  Back to cited text no. 7  [PUBMED]  
8.Secin FP, Rovegno AR, del Rosario Brunet M, Marrugat RE, Davalos Michel M, Fernandez H. Cumulative incidence, indications, morbidity and mortality of transplant nephrectomy and the most appropriate time for graft removal: Only nonfunctioning transplants that cause intrac­table complications should be excised. J Urol 2003;169:1242-6.  Back to cited text no. 8    
9.Schaubel DE, Jeffery JR, Mao Y, Semenciw R, Yeates K, Fenton SS. Trends in mortality and graft failure for renal transplant patients. CMAJ 2002;167:137-42  Back to cited text no. 9  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]
10.Smak Gregoor PJ, Zietse R, van Saase JL, et al. Immunosuppression should be stopped in patients with renal allograft failure. Clin Transplant 2001;15:397-401.  Back to cited text no. 10  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]
11.Madore F, Hebert MJ, Leblanc M, et al. Determinants of late allograft nephrectomy. Clin Nephrol 1995;44:284-9.  Back to cited text no. 11    
12.Hansen BL, Rohr N, Svendsen V, Birkeland SA. Graft failure and graft nephrectomy without severe complications. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1987;2:189-90.  Back to cited text no. 12  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]

Top
Correspondence Address:
Afsoon Emami Naini
Department of Nephrology, Khorshid Hospital, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Isfahan
Iran
Login to access the Email id


PMID: 18087124

Rights and Permissions



This article has been cited by
1 Early but not late allograft nephrectomy reduces allosensitization after transplant failure
Sener, A. and Khakhar, A.K. and Nguan, C.Y. and House, A.A. and Jevnikar, A.M. and Luke, P.P.
Journal of the Canadian Urological Association. 2011; 5(6): E142-E147
[Pubmed]
2 Peritoneal dialysis after renal graft loss: Against maintenance of immunosuppression [Diálisis peritoneal tras pérdida del injerto renal: En contra de mantener la inmunosupresión]
PĂ©rez Contreras, J.
Nefrologia. 2008; 28(SUPPL. 6): 87-96
[Pubmed]



 

Top
 
 
    Similar in PUBMED
    Search Pubmed for
    Search in Google Scholar for
  Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  
 


 
    Abstract
    Introduction
    Method and Materials
    Results
    Discussion
    References
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2177    
    Printed70    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded342    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal