4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

Successful islet transplantation from a single pancreas harvested from a young, low-BMI, non-heart-beating cadaver

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS
卷 37, 期 8, 页码 3430-3432

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2005.09.041

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Young donors, donors with low body mass index (BMI), and non-heart-beating (NHB) donors are considered nonideal for islet transplantation. In this report, we successfully used a pancreas from a young, low-BMI, NHB donor for islet transplantation. Methods. The donor was a 15-year-old adolescent boy whose cause of death was rupture of a primary brain tumor. According to Japanese regulations, his pancreas was procured after cardiac arrest. Warm ischemic time was 3 minutes and cold ischemic time was 300 minutes. The pancreas was digested by the automated method of Ricordi, followed by purification using continuous Euro-Ficoll gradients on a Cobe 2991 device. The recipient was a 35-year-old woman with unstable type 1 diabetes mellitus. Her pretransplant C-peptide level was null. She suffered frequent hypoglycemic unawareness. Her pretransplant M value, which is a good marker for glucose instability, was 125. Islet yield was 252,816 IEQ. There were no signs of contamination. Viability of islets assessed by FDA/PI staining was 83%. Stimulation index was 2.7. Results. The patient received 5160 IEQ/kg of islets via the portal vein under local anesthesia. There were no transplant-related complications. Although she required minimal exogenous insulin, her C-peptide level increased to 0.7 ng/mL at postoperative day (POD) 14. Her M value at POD 15 to 19 decreased dramatically to 23.6, indicating good glycemic control. At 3 months posttransplant, episodes of hypoglycemia disappeared. Conclusions. Although an additional transplant is mandatory to wean patients from insulin, this case shows the possibility of using marginal donors, such as a young, low-BMI, NHB donor, for pancreas islet transplantation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据