Aguirre MFM, González GAF, Paz SP, Bazán BAF, Portilla FVH, Ramírez SF

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 183-189
PDF size: 212.73 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. The inmunosuppression takes part of management of all the kidney transplants; at present time the induction of inmunosuppression therapy is a common treatment in this population; however there is not enough information about this issue. Hypothesis. The use of induction of inmunosuppression with Daclizumab improves the survival of the graft and decreased the incidence of acute rejection in the first three months, however is possible that incidences of complications are higher. Material and methods. The files of the transplant patients were reviewed between January 2004 and August 2007 in the Transplant Service of the Hospital Juarez of Mexico. The next variables were included: age, sex, induction of inmunosuppression with monoclonal antibodies (Daclizumab), incidence of acute rejection and complications during the first three months. Results. Fifty transplanted patients were included, one of them was eliminated by lost of the follow up: 15 were female sex (30.6%), and 34 were male sex (69.38%), 12 (24.48%) received induction of inmunosuppression therapy with monoclonal antibodies (Daclizumab) and 37 (75.5%) did not received it; both groups received the same therapy of maintenance. In the group of Daclizumab not acute rejection were presented. There was one (8.3%) with lost of the graft. There were three (25%) complications. In the group without induction, they were presented four (10.8%) P › 0.05 acute rejection. There were nine (24.32%) lost of the graft in the first three months P › 0.05. The whole 15 (40.5%) patients had complications. Conclusions. There were not significant statistical differences between non induction group and induction group. The complications were lower in the induction group than not induction group.

REFERENCES

1. Pon FK, Dyksera DM, Merib RM, Wolfe RA. Trends and results for organ donation and transplantation in the United States. Am J Transplant 2004; 5: 843.

2. Kasiske BL, Chakkera HA, Louis TA, Ma JZ. A meta-analysis of inmunosuppression withdrawal trials in renal transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2000; 11: 1910-7.

3. Vella J, Brennan DE. Induction inmunosuppressive therapy in renal transplantation. Up To Date 2006.

4. Knight RJ, Kerman RH, Schoenberg L, et al. The selective use of basiliximab versus thyrnoglobulin in combination with sirolimus for cadaveric renal transplant recipients at low risk versus high risk for delayed graft function. Transplantation 2004; 78: 904.

5. Brennan D, et al. Thyrnoglobulin versus basiliximab for prevention of acute rejection. N Engl J Med 2006.

6. Mourad G, Rostaing L, Legendre C, et al. Sequential protocols using basiliximab versus antithymocyte globulins in renal transplant patients receiving mycophenolate mofetil and steroids. Transplantation 2004; 78: 584.

7. Webster AC, Playford EG, Higgins G, et al. Interleukin w receptor antagonists for renal transplant recipients: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Transplantation 2004; 77: 166.

8. Kaufrnan DB, Shapiro R, Lucey MR, Cherikh WS, Bustami RM, Dyke DB. Inmunosuppression: practice and trend. Am J Transplant 2004; 4(Suppl. 9): 38-53.

9. Vícenti F, Monaco A, Grinyó J, Kinkhabwala M, Roza A. Multicenter randomized prospective trial of steroid withdrawal in renal transplant recipients receiving basiliximab, cyclosporine microemulsion and mycophenolate mofetil. Am J Transplant 2003; e: 306-11.

10. Vanrenterghern Y, Van Hooff JP, Squiffiet, Salmela K, Rigotti P, Jindal RM, et al. Minimization of inmunosuppression therapy after renal transplantation: results of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 87-95.