Living-Donor Kidney Re-Transplantation: Risk Factors and Long-Term Follow-up | ||||
| Zagazig University Medical Journal | ||||
| Article 24, Volume 30, Issue 1.2, January and February 2024, Page 199-206 PDF (1.11 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/zumj.2022.147525.2595 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Nour Elsabah Mohamed Elbialy1; Amir Mohammed Elokely2; Ahmed Hasan Neamatallah3; Mohammed Ibrahim4; Ibrahim Salem  5
| ||||
| 1Urology and Nephrology Center ,Mansoura University, Mansoura , Egypt | ||||
| 2internal medicine department,faculty of medicine,zagazig university,zagazig,egypt | ||||
| 3Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University Mansoura ,Egypt | ||||
| 4Faculty of medicine ,Zagazig university | ||||
| 5Internal Medicine Department , Faculty of medicine ,Zagazig University | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Introduction: Transplanting young and healthy individuals with ESRD maximizes survival outcome and saves money. Also Transplanting patients with co-morbidities is cost-effective and leads to significant survival outcome in comparison to the dialysis alternative.Although kidney re-transplantation is often accepted as the best choice for most patients subsequent to kidney allograft loss, there is surprisingly few data to support it. Our aim is to assess the outcome of living kidney re-transplantation and whether patients experiencing primary allograft loss should be offered the second renal allograft.Methods: Comparative cross-section study included 267 recipients of kidney transplant who underwent kidney allo-transplantation from March, 1976 till December,2015. These recipients were divided into two groups. Group1: All Patients who received 2nd kidney transplantation (90 patients).Group 2: Matched group of patients who received first kidney transplantation.Results: Both groups were comparable in their demographic data but recipient consanguinity (p=0.000), donor age (p =0.004) and gender(p=0.000) were not comparable. As for maintenance therapy, while the total dose of steroid was comparable (p=0.28) , the percentage of use of different immunosuppression protocols was significantly different in both groups(p=0.000). Regarding Post-transplant complications, no statistical difference has been found between both groups with regard to infections, hepatic impairment and malignancy (p < 0.05) while acute tubular injury incidence was higher in the study group (p=0.04).Conclusions: our study is considered as a push for patients who lose their first graft to undergo second transplantation without fear of any further complication. Re-transplantation is safe and comparable with primary transplantation in all risk factors and outcomes. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| kidney; retransplant; risk; follow up | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 167 PDF Download: 38 |
||||
