Borroto DG, Guerrero DC

Language: Spanish
References: 19
Page: 88-98
PDF size: 155.85 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: immunosuppression induction is essential in successful kidney transplant. It is aimed at preventing acute rejection and delayed graft function and is designed as a strategy for the beginning of the transplant in which complications are much more common.
Objective: to present the different protocols of immunosuppression induction used by the transplant staff of "Hermanos Ameijeiras" Hospital, according to the type of donor (alive or dead), and the frequency of clinical complications.
Methods: a descriptive retrospective study was carried out which covered all the kidney transplant done since this activity began in March 1984 until it continued to November 2012. Four stages were distinguished: 1984-1990, 1991-1996, 1997-2004 and 2005-2012. The treatment with Prednisone and Azatioprine in the dead donor predominated in the two first stages. The combination of three drugs: Cyclosporin A (Sandimmune), Prednisone and Azatioprine was only used in transplants in which dead donors were considered high risk. Both protocols were accompanied by high rejection frequencies and acute tubular necrosis in the period 1997-2004.
Conclusions: the triple therapy with Cyclosporin A (Neoral), Prednisone and Mycophenolate Mophetil provided low rejection rates and acute tubular necrosis even when the graft came from both an alive donor or a dead one. The quadruple sequential therapies constituted an accepted treatment to diminish rejection in risk patients. The treatment with Prednisone and Azatioprine and Cyclosporin in Sandimmune formulation, with Prednisone and Azatioprine, or with Prednisone, according to the results obtained, do not constitute satisfactory protocols for immunosuppression in kidney transplant at present.

REFERENCES

1. Curtis J. Corticosteroids and kidney transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;1:907-8.

2. Porta B, Pérez RJ, Jiménez NV, Crespo J. Estrategias para la individualización posológica de la ciclosporina en pacientes con trasplante renal. Nefrología. 2004;24(5):395-409.

3. Bestard O, Campistol JM, Morales JM, Sánchez FA, Cabello M, Cabello V, et al. Avances en la inmunosupresión para el trasplante renal. Nuevas estrategias para preservar la función y reducir el riesgo cardiovascular. Nefrología. 2012;32(3):374-84.

4. Oppenheimer F, Arias M. Individualización de la inmunosupresión en el rechazo agudo. Nefrología. 2009;29(Sup Ext 2):49.

5. Pascual J, Pérez-Saiz MJ, Mir M, Crespo M. Chronic renal allograft injury: early detection, accurate diagnosis and management. Transplantation Rev. 2012;26:280-90.

6. Borroto DG, Tsuno LH, Mérida AO, Guerrero DC, Barceló AM. Frecuencia y factores de riesgo de la hipertrofia ventricular izquierda como marcador de daño cardiovascular en el trasplante renal. Rev Cubana Med. 2012;51(2). [citado 20 Ene. 2012] Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034- 75232012000200004&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es

7. Pascual SJ, Hernández MD. Inmunosupresión del receptor de donante vivo. Nefrología. 2010;30(Suppl 2):804.

8. Oppenheimer F. Seguimiento del donante vivo a corto, medio y largo plazo. Nefrología. 2010;30(Suppl 2):1004.

9. Klein IH, Abrahams A, Van E de T, Hene RJ, Koomans HA, Ligtenberg G. Different effects of tacrolimus and cyclosporine on renal hemodynamics and blood pressure in healthy subjects. Transplantation. 2002;73:732-6.

10. Mourad G, Vela C, Ribstein J, Mimran A. Long term improvement in renal function after cyclosporine reduction in renal transplant recipient with histologically proven chronic cyclosporine nephropathy. Transplantation. 1998;65:661-7.

11. Tsang WK, Ho YW, Tong Chan WH, Chan A. Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of Sandimmun Neoral: conversion study in stable renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc. 1996;28:1330-2.

12. Borroto DG, Guerra BG, Guerrero DC, Infante SA, González ÁM. Trasplante renal como opción terapéutica para enfermos con insuficiencia renal crónica de 60 años o más. Rev Cubana Med. 2008;47(3). [citado 20 En. 2012] Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034- 75232008000300006&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es

13. Borroto DG, Guerrero DC. Uso de riñones provenientes de donantes de 55 años o más para trasplante renal. Rev Cubana Med. 2011;50(2):167-78. citado 20 Ene. 2012] Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034- 75232011000200007&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es

14. International Neoral Renal Transplantation Study Group. Cyclosporine microemulsion (Neoral®) absorption profiling and sparse-sample predictors during the first 3 months after renal transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2002;2:148-56.

15. Meier-Kriesche HU, Schold JD, Srinivas TR, Kaplan B. Lack of improvement in renal allograft survival despite a marked decrease in acute rejection rates over the most recent era. Am J Transplant. 2004;4:378-83.

16. Albrechtsen D, Leivestad T, Brekke I, Fauchald P, Pfeffer P, Thorsby E, Oslo Kidney Transplant Group. Experience with cyclosporine in 1519 kidney transplantations from living donors in a national transplant programme, 1983-2002. Transplant Proc. 2004;36(2S):89S-93S.

17. Gonwa TA, Mai ML, Smith LB, Levy MF, Goldstein RM, Klintmalm GB. Immunosuppression for delayed or slow graft function in primary cadaveric renal transplantation: use of low dose tacrolimus therapy with post-operative administration of anti-CD25 monoclonal antibody. Clin Transplant. 2002;16:144-9.

18. Brennan DC, Daller JA, Lake KD, Cibrik D, Del Castillo D. Thymoglobulin Induction Study Group. Rabbit antithymocyte globulin versus basiliximab in renal transplantation. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(19):1967-77.

19. Cravedi P, Codreanu I, Satta A, Turturro M, Sghirlanzoni M, Remuzzi G, et al. Cyclosporine prolongs delayed graft function in kidney transplantation: are rabbit anti-human thymocyte globulins the answer? Nephron Clin Pract. 2005;101:65-71.