4.6 Article

ABO Incompatible Living Renal Transplantation With a Steroid Sparing Protocol

Journal

TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 86, Issue 7, Pages 901-906

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181880c0f

Keywords

Steroid sparing; ABO incompatible; Renal transplantation

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [G0401591] Funding Source: Medline
  2. MRC [G0401591] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [G0401591] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. ABO incompatible (ABOi) live-donor renal transplantation is a successful and accepted form of treatment for patients with renal failure. Although there is significant controversy as to how antiblood group antibodies should be removed and their resynthesis prevented, subsequent immunosuppressive regimes have all involved steroids. We and other groups have successfully used steroid sparing regimes for conventional ABO compatible transplantation and this study describes the use of our steroid sparing protocol in ABO transplantation. Methods. We have transplanted 10 ABOi patients using 1 week of steroids (prednisolone 1 mg/kg for 4 days, 0.5 mg/kg for 3 days and then stopped), tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil. Steroids were reintroduced in the event of rejection. Results. Patient- and allograft-survival I year posttransplantation is 100%. Three patients experienced antibody-mediated rejection within 2 weeks of transplantation, which was successfully reversed. There has been no late rejection. Allograft function was similar to our live-donor ABO compatible transplant patients receiving a similar steroid sparing regime (12-month mean creatinine 131 +/- 15 mu mol/l, vs. 138 +/- 48 mu mol/L; mean CrCl 63.2 +/- 22 mL/min vs. 56.7 +/- 20 mL/min). Conclusions. This study shows that ABOi live-donor transplantation can be successfully accomplished using a steroid-sparing protocol.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available