Fung, J

Gordon, R

Griffin, M

Klintmalm, G

Makowka, L

Starzl, TE

Todo, S

Tzakis, A

Name not available

Combined liver and kidney transplantation with particular reference to positive cytotoxic crossmatches

D-Scholarship@Pitt

T.E. Starzl. A. Tzakis. L. Makowka. J. Fung. G. Klintmalm. S. Todo. R. Gordon. and M. Griffin 40 Combined Liver and Kidney Transplantation with Particular Reference to Positive Cytotoxic Crossmatches SUMMARY Nine patients were provided with 10 livers and 10 kidneys. Nine of the paired allografts were from the same donors. Seven of the 9 recipients are alive after 6 to 26 months. At least 3 and possibly as many as 5 of the paired transplantations were to patients whose sera possessed preformed antigraft cytotoxic antibodies. Only one of the livers seemed harmed by the antibodies, and the kidneys that were transplanted after the livers were in place were thereby seemingly protected from antibody injury in 2 of the 3 unequiv-ocal cases. These observations may provide a clue for the development of new methods to prevent hy-peracute renal rejection. INTRODUCTION In a recent inquiry by an Italian journalist, the question was posed, "Do you think that in the next decade a 'puzzle man' with heart, liver, and pancreas taken from other human beings might be feasible?" The answer is that there are already examples of puz-zle men who have received a heart and kidney, a pan-creas and kidney, a heart and lungs, and even a heart and liver taken from other human beings. The in-creasing boldness with which transplantation is being developed makes it certain that other and more com-From the Department of Surgery, University of Pitts-burgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 24 plicated combinations will be forthcoming in the near future. The extent to which multiple organ transplan-tation has entered our clinical consciousness could be illustrated by any of the foregoing multiple organ procedures, particularly by hundreds of cases of combined renal and pancreas transplantation. How-ever, in this communication we will describe the less well known combination of hepatic and renal trans-plantation from common or different donors. The subject holds a special fascination, since the liver ap-parently can protect a subsequently transplanted kid-ney from the hyperacute rejection that is caused by recipient anti-donor cytotoxic antibodies. METHODS Nine patients aged 12 to 65 years with a variety of hepatic and renal diseases were studied. One pa-tient had a liver plus kidney transplant on two oc-casions. In each case but one, the primary reason for proceeding was end-stage liver disease in which the expectation of survival was limited to a few weeks or months (Table 1). In the exceptional patient, the diagnosis was polycystic liver and renal disease. Hepatic function in this patient was normal, but she was dying of respiratory insufficiency caused by ex-pansion of her enormously enlarged liver, which at the time of its removal weighed 13 kg (28.6 pounds) (Fig. 1). The serum creatinine level in this excep-tional patient was 2.1 mg%, but her creatinine clear-ance was estimated at 20 to 25 mL/minute. r- <' ~ III ::l Q. Table 1. Clinical Factors in 9 Patients who had Liver and Kidney Transplants ,.. c: ::l OT Preop CD < Num-Date of Liver Date Kidney Liver Kidney Preop Cr CCr Cause of -t iil ber Age/Sex Transplant Transplant Disease Disease (mg%) (ml/min) Outcome Death ::l V> 44/F 7/22/84 Polycystic ~ 419 Same Polycystic 2 20-25 Alive III ::l 464 15/F 11/18/84 Same Polycystic with Polycystic and On 0 Alive ... V> cirrhosis glomerulo-Dialysis :E nephritis g: " 495 43/F 2/12/85 Same Primary biliary Glomerulo-4 20 Alive 0 V> cirrhosis nephritis ;:0: <' 164 39/F 6/16/85 Same Rejection of Indeterminate 6 10 Died Fungal CD (") previous 7/7/85 infection 0 graft V> V> after 6 years 3 a 6/28/85 Same Dearterialized n ~ graft CD V> 584 38/M 8/15/85 Same Postnecrotic Glomerulo-4 10 Alive cirrhosis nephritis 680 50/M 12/19/85 3/25/86 Postnecrotic Did not recover On 0 Alive cirrhosis from Dialysis hepatorenal syndrome 708 34/M 1/28/86 Same Micronodular Glomerulo-2.1 30 Alive cirrhosis nephritis 725 65/M 2/22/86 Same Alcoholic Glomerulo-2.5 Not done Died Pneumocystis cirrhosis nephritis 6/28/86 pneumonia 736 12/M 3/4/86 Same Cysteamine Cystinosis 6 5 Alive toxicity but on dialysis Abbreviations: OT = orthotopic transplant; Cr. = Creatinine; CCr = CCr = creatinine clearance. N U1 26 Fig. 1. Thirteen Kg polycystic liver replaced in pa-tient OT 464. The other 8 patients had various degrees of renal insufficiency, ranging from total renal failure (cases OT 464 and OT 680) to early renal failure, which under ordinary circumstances would not have called for immediate treatment by either renal transplanta-tion or diaJysis (Table 1). Eight of the 9 patients had transplantations of both organs from a common do-nor. The ninth patient (OT 680) had a liver replace-ment on December 19, 1985. When the preexisting renal failure showed no sign of recovery 3 months later, an immediately functioning renaJ transplant was placed from another donor. Tissue matching was random in all cases, and the tissue matches at the A , B , and Dr loci were poor (Table 2). In 3 of the 10 transplants that were per-formed in 9 patients, there were unequivocally pos-itive cytotoxic crossmatches of the kind which, under ordinary circumstances, would have precluded renal transplantation (Table 2) . In these 3 instances and in 2 other patients with doubtfully positive cross-matches, the liver grafts were placed first, and after Starzl, et al. a few hours , the kidneys from the same donors were inserted. Immunosuppressive therapy consisted of cyclo-sporine (CsA) and prednisone, to which monoclonal antibody therapy (OKT3) was added early in the postoperative period in 2 patients. The Iymphocyto-toxic crossmatches were perfomled with conven-tional techniques as described in detail elsewhere. I In the patients who possessed preformed cytotoxic antibodies against their donors, the reactivity and specificity of the antibodies were assessed with ab-sorption techniques. I The amount of blood lost in the various cases is listed in Table 2. The blood loss data was considered important because of the possibility of dilution of the recipient antibodies by transfusion . RESULTS Mortality One of the 9 recipients died 25 days after an initial double organ transplantation and 10 days after a second similar attempt. This recipient had been treated with liver transplantation in 1979 (6 years previously) using azathioprine-steroid maintenance therapy. The liver had slowly failed over a period of many months during which efforts at salvage were made by the late institution of CsA . Renal failure which was already present was made worse. The first attempt at retransplantation on June 16, 1985 failed because of thrombosis of the hepatic artery with sec-ondary failure of the concomitantly placed kidney. The defective liver was removed at another operation on June 28 , 1985, leaving in place the kidney graft which had not functioned. Although both the liver and kidney placed on June 28 functioned, the patient died of fungemia 10 days later. Patient OT 725 , a 65 year old man , died of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonitis 4 months after he-patic and renal transplantation . He had been treated with heavy immunosuppression because of persistent and recurrent rejection of both organs . Graft Function The other 7 patients are well from 6 to 26 months postoperatively. All 7 have essentially normal he-patic function and 6 have weB-functioning renal grafts. [n those patients whose pre-existing renal failure was not yet poor enough to justify transplantation on such grounds alone, radionuclide scans have shown that the renal allograft has become the dominant organ (Fig. 2) . Liver and Kidney Transplants with Positive Crossmatches 27 Table 2. Typing and Serologic Data. aT Donor- HLA Panel Num- Recipient Antigens Reactive ber ABO Matched Antibody 419 B-8 A29 0% 464 B-8 0% 495 A-A 0 94% 164a 0-0 0 0% 164b AI, B8 0% 584 B-8 A2 0% 680 0-0 Liver AI, 0% DR3 Kidney 0 708 A-A A2 0% 725 0-0 0 21% 736 0-0 A2 91% One patient with cystinosis, whose liver had been destroyed by an idiosyncratic reaction to experimen-tal therapy with cysteamine, went through a very stonny and protracted postoperative course but even-tually attained completely nonnal hepatic function. Although the renal graft from the same donor has blood flow, it has not yet functioned satisfactorily after 6 months. The Influence of Preformed Antigraft Antibodies Hyperacute rejection of the 3 hepatic grafts that were confronted with cytotoxic antidonor antibodies did not occur. However, one of the recipients ex-perienced massive fibrinolysis, which necessitated intensive phannacologic and surgical care in an op-eration that lasted nearly 24 hours. It was suspected that the liver had undergone an abortive attack by antibodies. Although 50 units of blood were required in this small 12-year-old child, the crossmatch with the donor remained positive. Two of the renal grafts that were put in place after the liver had been revascularized functioned promptly and permanently. The cytotoxic antibodies in these 2 recipients were reduced or had disappeared after the liver was in place (Table 2). However, the kidney placed in patient OT 736 against a persistent cytotoxic crossmatch did not function at the time and has not functioned properly in the subsequent 6 Preop Blood Cytotoxic Loss Crossmatch Crossmatch Crossmatch (ml) After LTX Later Negative 2400 Doubtful 8000 positive Strongly 3000 Negative Negative positive Negative 2400 Negative Negative 1600 Negative Negative 2400 Negative Negative Negative Doubtful 6000 positive Strongly 8000 Doubtful positive positive Strongly 20,000 Strongly positive positive months. Although the renal allograft had fair blood flow on a radionuclide scan, it undoubtedly sustained a severe and possibly irreversible insult from the an-tibody attack. DISCUSSION Patients being considered for liver transplanta-tion have presented to us with a high incidence of secondary renal failure from the hepatorenal syn-drome, drug toxicity, shock, and other causes. 2.3 Renal transplantation in conjunction with hepatic replace-ment under such circumstances is not usually a se-rious consideration, since provision of good liver function usually corrects the renal pathophysiology; complete recovery of the kidneys is expected. Im-aging techniques such as ultrasound or CT scan are invaluable in assessing potential reversibility. If the kidneys are small and shrunken, the diagnosis of sig-nificant chronic renal disease can be considered es-tablished. If chronic renal disease is documented, concom-itant renal transplantation may be indicated. Com-bined hepatic and renal transplantation is apt to be-come more common in the years ahead. Chronic renal disease is often seen in patients with end-stage liver disease, especially in those in whom the diagnosis is chronic active hepatitis, a disease that is frequently associated with glomerulonephritis. Other examples 28 Starzl, et al. B Fig. 2. Radionuclide can in patient OT 495. Note the dominance of the transplant compared with the di eased native kidneys . The upper scan dem-onstrates flow to the transplant kidney. the lower, secretion. The transplant was in the right iliac fossa . in our serie were patients with polycystic disease of both liver and kidney . In such liver recipients, it would be futile to attempt hepatic transplantation without providing a kidney as well. . ill 7 of our 9 patients, renal transplantation was carried out at a stage of chronic renal disease that ordinarily would not have been considered appropri-ate for renal transplantation . There were two reasons for proceeding early . First, it was impossible to en-vision going forward with liver transplantation using the nephrotoxic immuno uppressive drug esA, with-out ensuring good renal fu nction. Otherwise, the op-timal immunosuppression for the liver would have been jeopardized . Second , the sera of a significant number of patients contained T-warm cytotoxic an-tibodies of the kind which preclude renal tran plan-tation in the event of anti-donor specificity. In the event of a positive crossmatch, it was expected that the liver would provide protection for the kidney from the same donor. thus providing a unique and one time Liver and Kidney Transplants with Positive Crossmatches 29 only opportunity for patients whose cytotoxic anti-bodies were widely reactive. The basis for the spec-ulation was the well known resistance of the liver to hyperacute rejection caused by such antibodies. 4- 6 This hypothesis was supported not only by the clinical observations reported here but also by special serologic tests. In patients OT 495 and 725, strongly positive crossmatches before the liver was revascu-larized becan1e negative or doubtfully positive in the subsequent hours, allowing the kidneys to be trans-planted in an antibody depleted milieu. The specific-ity with which the antibodies were deleted was well demonstrated in patient OT 495, whose sera retained widely reactive antibodies at the same time as the antibodies against the donor lymphocytes were lost. This case and others have been reported in detail elsewhere.· It is noteworthy that good kidney func-tion was not obtained in a third patient whose anti-bodies did not disappear after transplantation of the liver. Although there was good evidence of immuno-logic advantage endowed by the liver upon the kid-ney in the foregoing examples, the long-term effect of multiple organ transplantation on the outcome of individual organs is not known. Although evidence can be cited from numerous publications that multi-ple organs protect each other, 7 an almost equal num-ber of citations to the contrary could be found by the reader with the converse bias. For the moment, we have concluded that neither a clear advantage nor dis-advantage is demonstrable with multiple organs. REFERENCES 1. Fung JJ, Griffin M, Duquesnoy RJ. Shaw BW Jr, and Starzl TE: Successful sequential liver-kidney trans-plantation in a patient with preformed lymphocytotoxic antibodies Transplant Proc 19: 767-768, 1987 2. Iwatsuki S, Popovtzer M, Corman J, Ishikawa M, Put-nam CW, Katz FH, and Starzl TE: Recovery from "hepatorenal syndrome" after orthotopic liver trans-plantation N Eng J Med 289: 1155, 1973 3. Ellis D, Avner ED, and Starzl TE: Renal failure in children with hepatic failure undergoing liver trans-plantation J Pediatr 111: 393. 1986 4. Starzl TE, Koep LJ, Halgrimson CG, Hood J, Schroter GPJ, Porter KA, and Weil R III: Fifteen years of clin-icalliver transplantation Gastroenterol 77: 375, 1979 5. Iwatsuki S, Iwaki Y, Kano T, Klintmalm G. Koep LJ, Wei I R III, and Starzl TE: Successful liver transplan-tation from crossmatch positive donors Transplant Proc 13: 286, 1981 6. Gordon RD, Fung JJ, Markus B, Fox I, Iwatsuki S, Esquivel CO, Tzakis A, Todo S, and Starzl TE: The antibody crossmatch in liver transplantation Surgery 100: 705-715,1986 7. Starzl TE: Experience in hepatic transplantation Phil-adelphia: Saunders, 1969, p 187 

http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/4307/1/31735062130715.pdf

Combined liver and kidney transplantation with particular reference to positive cytotoxic crossmatches

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Name not available

Name not available

D-Scholarship@Pitt