Strategies to improve outcome after pancreas and islet transplantation

Currently, the only curative treatment option for patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 is the transplantation of beta cells, by either whole pancreas transplant or transplantation of the isolated islets of Langerhans. Despite the worldwide increase of DM1 patients, there is a decrease in the number of pancreas and islet transplantations. This might be related to the decrease of the number of ‘ideal pancreatic donors’: a brain dead donor, ≤45 years old with a BMI of ≤ 30 kg/m2. In addition, there is reluctance to accept a donor pancreas from donors after circulatory death (DCD), because of the alleged higher risks associated with these organs. This thesis describes the safe utility of these organs when other unfavorable donor characteristics are minimized. Previous studies have shown that the quality of especially marginal donor kidneys and livers can be improved by hypothermic machine perfusion. This thesis describes the development of a prototype perfusion system for the human pancreas. In a feasibility study, the viability of the pancreatic tissue after hypothermic machine perfusion was found to be significantly higher compared to static cold storage, the current preservation method. After six hours of machine perfusion, viable and well-functioning islets of Langerhans could be isolated and successfully transplanted in diabetic mice. By changing the acceptance criteria and the use of hypothermic machine perfusion, the number of pancreas and islet transplantation might be expanded within the current donor pool

The impact of donor pancreas extraction time on graft survival and postoperative complications in pancreas transplant recipients

Background: Simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation (SPK) is the best therapeutic option for patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 and end-stage renal disease. Recently, donor organ extraction time has been shown to affect kidney and liver graft survival. This study aimed to assess the effect of pancreas donor extraction time on graft survival and postoperative complications. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all pancreas transplants performed in two Eurotransplant centers. The association of pancreas extraction time with pancreas graft survival was analyzed by a Cox proportional hazards regression analysis after 3 months, 1 and 5 year. Besides, the effect of pancreas extraction time on the incidence of severe postoperative complications was analyzed. Results: A total of 317 pancreas transplants were included in this study. Death-censored pancreas graft survival was 85.7% after one year and 76.7% after five years. Median pancreas donor extraction time was 64 min [IQR: 52-79 min]. After adjustment for potential confounders, death censored graft survival after 30 days (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.9-1.03 (p = 0.23), 1 year (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.03 (p = 0.22) and 5 years (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.02 (p = 0.57) was not associated with pancreas donor extraction time. However, extraction time was significantly associated with a higher incidence of Clavien-Dindo >3 complications compared to Clavien-Dindo 1 + 2 complications: OR 1.012, 95% CI 1.00-1.02 (p = 0.039). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that although no effect on graft survival was found, limiting pancreas extraction time can have a significant impact on lowering postoperative complications

Recipient age and outcome after pancreas transplantation:a retrospective dual-center analysis

With a later onset of diabetes complications and thus increasing age of transplant candidates, many centers have extended upper age limits for pancreas transplantation. This study investigates the effect of recipient and donor age on outcomes after pancreas transplantation.We retrospectively analyzed 565 pancreas transplants performed at two Eurotransplant centers. The cohort was split at a recipient and donor age of 50 and 40 years, respectively. Median recipient age in old patients (≥50 years; 27.2%) was 54 years and 40 years in young patients (<50 years). Compared to young recipients, old recipients had an inferior patient survival rate (≥50: 5yr, 82.8%; 10yr, 65.6%; <50: 5yr, 93.3%; 10yr, 82.0%; P < 0.0001). Old recipients demonstrated comparable death-censored pancreas (≥50: 1yr, 80.6%; 5yr, 70.2%; <50: 1yr, 87.3%; 5yr, 77.8%; P = 0.35) and kidney graft survival (≥50: 1yr, 97.4%; 5yr, 90.6%; <50: 1yr, 97.8%; 5yr, 90.2%; P = 0.53) compared to young recipients. Besides a lower rate of kidney rejection, similar relative risks for postoperative complications were detected in old and young patients. This study shows that despite an increased mortality in old recipients, excellent graft survival can be achieved similar to that of young patients. Age alone should not exclude patients from receiving a pancreas transplant

A steady decline in pancreas transplantation rates.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: After years of growth in many pancreas transplant programs, UNOS has reported declining transplant numbers in the USA. This precipitating trend urges for an evaluation of the transplant numbers and scientific productivity in the Eurotransplant region and the UK. METHODS: We performed a trend analysis of pancreas transplantation rates, between 1997 and 2016, adjusting for changes in population size, and an analysis of scientific publications in this field. We used information from the UNOS, Eurotransplant, and UK transplant registry and bibliometric information from the Web of Science database. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2016 there was an average annual decline in pancreas transplantation rates per million inhabitants of 3.3% in the USA and 2.5% in the Eurotransplant region. In the UK, transplant numbers showed an average annual decline of 1.0% from 2009 to 2016. Publications in Q1 journals showed an annual change of -2.1% and +20.1%, before 2004, and a change of -3.8% and -5.5%, between 2004 and 2016, for USA and Eurotransplant publications, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjusting pancreas transplantation rates for changes in population size showed a clear decline in transplant numbers in both the USA and Eurotransplant region, with first signs of decline in the UK. Following this trend, the number of scientific publications in this field have declined worldwide