活体亲属供肾肾移植(附11例报告)

目的：探讨活体亲属供肾移植的意义和围手术期处理。方法：回顾分析１１例亲属供肾移植临床资料。结果：１１名供者分别为受者的父母、兄弟和妹妹,取左侧肾脏１０例,右侧肾脏１例,取肾术历时２～３．５ｈ,热缺血时间１～３ｍｉｎ,所有供者术中、术后均未发生严重并发症,仅３例供者术后３周内出现一过性蛋白尿。１１例受者均为首次移植,肾脏植入顺利,肾功能恢复良好,术后早期发生急性排斥反应２例,经甲基强的松龙冲击治疗后逆转。受者１年人／肾存活率为１００％／１００％,１例于术后１．５年死于肝功能衰竭,死亡时移植肾功能正常。结论：选择供者的主要内容是确定组织相容性是否适合和供者双肾形态及功能是否正常。活体取肾手术难度较高,对大部分供者来说,切取左侧肾脏较好。活体供肾移植的存活率明显高于尸体肾移植,应提供活体亲属供肾。     

老龄亲属活体供肾移植疗效观察

目的:探讨老龄亲属活体供肾移植的疗效. 方法:我院自2006年1月至2006年12月共施行亲属活体肾移植74例,收集该74例活体供肾移植的临床资料,按供者年龄大小分为2组:老龄组(≥55岁)11例,低龄组(＜55岁)63例.分别对两组受体术后不同时间点临床资料和两组供体术前术后的临床资料进行分析比较,探讨老龄活体供肾移植的疗效. 结果:(1)受者情况:老龄组有1例术后发生移植肾功能延迟恢复,低龄组有7例,组间比较无差别(P>0.05),两组受者移植术后肾功能恢复情况比较无差异,1年人/肾存活率均为100%.供者情况:两组供者术后一周血肌酐均明显升高,老龄组术前血肌酐(85.6±13.7)μmol/L,术后1周升高至(106.4±15.6)μmol/L,而低龄供者术前血肌酐(73.7±6.8)μmol/L,术后1周升高至(101.8±13.1)μmol/L.但术后1年随访,两组供者血肌酐恢复术前水平. 结论:在严格供体筛查的前提下,老龄供肾(55～65岁)对供者是安全的;而对受者,接受老龄供肾术后近期肾功能恢复情况良好,远期效果有待进一步观察.华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院器官移植研究所,教育部/卫生部器官移植重点实验室 (武汉,430030)     

老年供肾亲属肾移植疗效和安全性分析

目的:探讨老年供肾亲属肾移植的疗效和安全性. 方法:对我院66例行活体肾移植的供受者资料进行回顾性分析.供者50岁以上24例,其中8例次供者术前检查存在轻度医学异常(包括镜下血尿4例,高血压2例,肥胖1例,结石1例),比较老年供者和非老年供者术前总肾小球滤过率(GFR),手术前后血清肌酐(SCr),留存肾GFR以及并发症等情况.同时对二组受者的手术前后SCr,内生肌酐清除率(Ccr)、并发症、人肾存活率进行比较. 结果:两组供者术后总体肾功能恢复良好,无显著性差异.但50岁以上组术后3月以上留存肾GFR显著低于50岁以下组(P<0.05).两组受者在术后1年内SCr、Ccr、DGF、急性排斥和并发症均无显著性差异. 结论:老年供者选择需十分谨慎.术前全面而彻底评估,严格控制纳入标准,其安全性和疗效良好.     

短血管活体亲属供肾肾移植术22例报告

目的探讨提高短血管活体亲属供肾肾移植术成功率的方法。方法取活体亲属供肾移植患者22例,左侧供肾16例,右侧6例。取供肾时仅获取肾动、静脉约2cm。肾移植术中充分游离受体髂外动脉、静脉,将供肾动、静脉与髂外动、静脉端侧吻合;操作空间仍狭小影响血管吻合除去带碎冰的肾袋,应用冰盐水持续冲洗移植肾保持低温。结果取肾术手术时间（180±30）min,供者术后血肌酐均较术前增高,6～10d降至正常范围,平均住院（7±3）d。。肾移植术手术时间（160±25）min。移植肾功能恢复正常时间3～15d,平均住院（17±4）d。复查血管超声,未出现肾动、静脉血栓或髂、股静脉血栓等并发症。无急性肾小管坏死出现。结论短血管供肾行肾移植术时充分游离受体髂血管和去除’肾袋应用冰盐水持续冲洗移植。肾保持低温方法可提高肾移植术的成功率,且较为安伞。     

亲属活体肾移植 57例报告

对57例终末期肾病患者行亲属活体肾移植术.其血缘亲属供肾53例,非血缘关系供肾4例; HLA 全配6例,HLA 单倍体相同39例,HLA 单倍体半配10例,HLA 有 5 个抗原错配2例.57例均经腰切口开放手术取肾.术后受者减量应用免疫抑制剂预防排斥反应.结果供者7～10 d出院,随访3个月～13 a,肾功能正常.54例受者存活(最长者达 13 a),3例死亡.认为亲属活体肾移植组织配型好,供肾缺血时间短,排斥反应发生少,免疫抑制剂用量小,移植肾长期存活率高.     

肾移植活体供肾的现状

自1954年Merrill等实施人类首例同卵双生兄弟间活体亲属供肾移植以来，肾移植技术，现已成为救治终末期肾脏病（ESRD）的最有效手段。特别在西方国家，活体供肾已被广泛应用。美国从2001年以来，活体供肾年移植量显然超过尸肾移植。在伊朗，自从1984年以来已做肾脏移植16000例，约95％以上的肾脏移植来源于活体供肾。与尸肾移植比较，活体供肾移植可获得更好的人／肾存活率，特别在一开始透析时就做活体肾移植的效果更好。透析时间0～6个月移植肾5年存活率78％，透析时间〉24个月者为58％；10年存活率分别为63％和29％。本文主要综述活体供肾移植的现状。     

不同性别、年龄活体供肾代偿能力的比较

目的:检测不同性别、年龄组活体供肾肾移植前后肾小球滤过率(GFR)的变化,比较各组供肾代偿能力。方法:共84例活体肾移植供者,按其年龄分为A组(>50岁)和B组(19～50岁);按供者性别分为女性组和男性组。各组术前用MDRD公式计算总体肾小球滤过率(eGFR),核素分别测定两侧GFR,按比例估算供肾术前的eGFR。计算受者移植后半年内最高eGFR,比较各组供肾eGFR移植前后变化情况。结果:总体供肾手术前后eGFR[(54.78±13.50)ml/(min·1.73m2)vs(76.68±32.23)ml/(min·1.73m2)]差异显著,代偿率32.30%(10.92%～63.89%)。A组术后eGFR明显增加[(47.16±10.43)ml/(min·1.73m2)vs(66.15±17.89)ml/(min·1.73m2)],代偿率44.35%(18.16%～63.22%);B组后eGFR代偿率30.52%(8.96%～63.01%);男性组术后eGFR代偿率33.61%(14.77%～66.96%);女性组术后eGFR代偿率25.66%(1.24%～62.45%);供肾eGFR代偿率与其术前eGFR水平及受体年龄负相关。结论:移植后各组活体供肾eGFR均明显代偿性升高,但个体差异较大。虽然A组eGFR水平在肾移植前后均低于B组,但其总体代偿能力良好。女性活体供肾与男性供体肾移植前后表现相近。术前评估活体供肾代偿能力要考虑其基础eGFR及受者需求。     

后腹腔镜技术活体供肾切取术临床效果观察

目的探讨利用后腹腔镜技术行活体供肾切取术的安全性和可靠性。方法采用后腹腔镜技术对14例活体（受者亲属）行供肾切取术,按常规方法移植给受者。结果14例均成功切取左肾并移植给受者,手术时间（120±30）min,术中出血量（30．0±8．8）ml,热缺血时间（151．8±72．1）s,受体血管开放后供肾均泌尿,术后无排斥反应及其他与操作技术有关的并发症发生。结论利用后腹腔镜技术行活体供肾切取术,对供肾功能元明显影响,安全可靠。     

活体亲属供肾肾移植25例分析

行活体亲属供肾肾移植25例。结果本组供者供肾后未出现严重的并发症，术后7—10d出院。受者首次肾移植23例，二次。肾移植2例。术后随访2-37个月，肾功能恢复良好，仅1例出现急性排斥反应，2例出现慢性排斥反应，经激素冲击治疗后逆转，人／肾存活率为100％。认为活体亲属供肾肾移植供者切除一侧肾脏恢复良好，受者人／。肾存活率高，是扩大供肾来源的较好途径。     

66例亲属活体肾移植的临床观察

目的：探讨人类白细胞抗原（HLA）配型和抗HLA抗体检测在亲属活体肾移植的应用，及其与移植效果的关系。方法：移植受者及其亲属供体采用PCR—SSP进行HLA配型，移植术前行补体依赖微量细胞毒性试验（CDC）交叉配型，同时采用酶联免疫吸附（ELISA）方法筛查和监测受者的群体反应性抗体（PRA）。分析亲属活体供肾移植的临床效果。结果：够例受者接受了亲属活体供肾移植手术。63例术前抗HLA抗体检测为阴性，其中供受者HLA配型错配（MM）者0-3MM受者57例，3例（5．26％）发生肾功能延迟恢复（DGF），2例（3．51％）发生急性排斥（AR）；HLA4～6MM受者6例中分别有1例（16．67％）和2例（33．33％）发生DGF和AR。HLA0～3MM组AR发生率显著性低于4～6MM组（P〈0．05）。而不同临床免疫抑制方案组之间AR发生率无显著性统计学差异（P〉0．05）。甲基泼尼松龙（MP）和抗人胸腺细胞球蛋白（ATG）冲击等治疗措施后，所有AR得以逆转。3例术前预致敏（PRA35％～87．5％）的受者，HLA2～3MM。1例致敏受者肾功能顺利恢复，PRA维持不变。另2例致敏受者术前自然或经血浆置换后PRA转阴，术后发生AR，ATG冲击治疗后肾功能也恢复正常，抗体有轻度反弹。结论：亲属活体供肾移植的组织配型良好，配合抗HLA抗体监测，使得受者移植的机会增加，排斥反应发生率低，但错配者多，术前致敏受者排斥反应发生率高，应加强围手术期处理。     

Outcomes of kidney transplantation in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a single-center study

INTRODUCTION. This study aimed to compare outcomes of kidney transplantation in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and a matched control group of non-SLE kidney recipients. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In a case-control study, 33 patients with kidney transplantation due to end-stage renal disease caused by SLE were matched to a control group consisted of 33 non-SLE patients who had been transplanted during the same period of time in our center. The clinical characteristics, complications, and patient and graft survival were compared between the two groups. RESULTS. In each group, 12 patients (36.4%) received a kidney from a deceased donor, 15 (45.4%) from a living unrelated donor, and 6 (18.2%) from a living related donor. There was no significant difference between the outcome in SLE patients and duration of dialysis before transplantation. The mean duration of hospital stay was 23.4 ± 18.1 days in the SLE group, while it was 13.0 ± 7.3 days in the controls (P = .006). One-year graft survival was 79.0% in patients with SLE and 90.9% in non-SLE patients (P = .17). One-year patient survival was 93.9% in patients with SLE versus 81.8% in the controls (P = .26). Nine patients in the SLE group versus 11 patients in the control group developed posttransplant complications (P = .59). CONCLUSIONS. Although hospital stay after transplantation was longer in the SLE kidney recipients than controls, safety of kidney transplantation was comparable. Graft failure in the SLE patients was not significantly different between patients with different sources of kidneys.     

Present situaltion of living-donor kidney transplantation in Spain and other countries: past, present and future of an excellent therapeutic option

Kidney transplantation from living donor is an established treatment in Spain since the 60s but has maintained a low level of activity until 2000, when the number of procedures and hospitals that perform this therapy experienced a gradual increase, reaching the highest figure in our history in 2009, with 235 living donor kidney transplants (which represents 10% of renal transplant activity). The reasons why living donor kidney transplantation is emerging in our country are diverse and can be focused in four main areas. 1) Better outcomes obtained when using living donors for kidney transplantation than those obtained with kidneys from deceased donors. Younger recipients with better HLA matching, the good health of the donor, the absence of any damages that occur in the kidney secondary to brain death, the small ischemic time and the possibility of preemptive transplantation can explain the best graft and patient survival. 2) The scarcity of sources: the relaxation of entry criteria on the waiting list implies an increasing challenge of the demand for transplant without the contribution of living donor kidney transplantation, especially in young recipients where the chances of obtaining an age-appropriate deceased donor are lower, due to the change in the profile of the deceased donor (increasingly older). 3) Improvement in the safety of the donor: the excellent evaluation and monitoring of donors (based on international standards) plus the use of less invasive surgical techniques are related to a low complication rate and to survival expectancies of living donors being similar to those of the general population. 4) Barriers overcome: The training effort by the transplant teams, hospital and regional coordinations, and the National Transplant Organization is giving excellent results, visible in the gradual increase in the number of hospitals with a program of living donor kidney transplantation and its activity. In addition, desensitization programs and the national cross-over kidney transplantation program have removed barriers to transplantation in cases of ABO incompatibility or positive crossmatch.     

Marginal donor liver versus standard donor liver: A single-center observational study

Background: The effectiveness and safety of marginal donor livers remain controversial. This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy of marginal donor livers in patients with liver transplantation (LT). Methods: This study included 199 liver donors (including 16 split donors) and 206 liver recipients from January 1, 2018 to January 27, 2020, with case follow-up until July 31, 2021. Clinical data of donors and recipients were retrospectively analyzed and were divided into the marginal donor and standard donor groups according to the criteria of marginal donor livers. Indices of liver and kidney functions, complications, and survival curves of the two groups were compared. Results: Compared with the standard donor group, the blood creatinine levels were significantly higher in the marginal donor group in the first week after operation ( P < 0.05); there were no significant differences in alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and total bilirubin levels after LT (all P > 0.05); there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications after LT ( P > 0.05); there was also no significant difference in the survival curve ( P = 0.335). Conclusions: There were no significant differences in liver and kidney function and survival curve between the standard donor and marginal donor groups. The marginal donor liver appears safe and reliable for LT and may be an important strategy to expand the donor pool and solve the shortage of organs.     

The 10 years single center experience of using elderly donors for living related kidney transplantation

The use of elderly donors has been advocated to expand the organ donor pool because of increased needs and organ shortage. The aim of the study was to analyse whether old age of donors affects the outcome of renal transplantation and the long term safety of retrieval for the donors. We present data of 335 consecutive living related kidney transplants, performed in our centre the last 10 years, where in 174 patients the donor was less than 60 years of age, while in the rest 161 patients the donor was more than 60 years of age. No statistical difference was noted in either group at the incidence of irreversible acute rejections, early acute tubular necrosis, vascular complications and patient deaths. The graft survival was 86.7%, 80.4% and 78.1% for the 3^rd, the 5^th and the 8^th year for the younger group of donors, while it was 83.6%, 78.2% and 67.8% for the older group (p = 0.13). Patient survival of the younger group was 95.9%, 94.7% and 94.7%, while for the older was 94.4%, 92.0% and 89.2% for the 3^rd, the 5^th, and the 8^th year post transplantation (p = 0.24). Functional rehabilitation and quality of life were good in donors and recipients of both groups. These results suggest that renal transplantation from elderly donors offers comparable results from those obtained from younger donors.     

慢性肾脏病并发急性肾损伤和无慢性肾脏病基础急性肾损伤的预后比较分析

目的 分析不同分期慢性肾脏病（CKD）并发急性肾损伤患者的预后,了解急性肾损伤与CKD短期预后的关系.方法 回顾性分析2010年1月～2013年6月我院临床和病理确诊为CKD并发急性肾损伤住院患者的临床和病理资料,并比较其与无CKD基础急性肾损伤患者在短期（6个月）预后上的差异.按基础肾功能情况将CKD并发急性肾损伤患者分为4组,即CKD1期组、CKD2期组、CKD3期组和CKD4期组;按照危险、损伤、衰竭、肾功能丧失和终期肾脏病（RIFLE）标准将CKD并发急性肾损伤和无CKD基础急性肾损伤分别分级.结果 57例CKD并发急性肾损伤患者水肿、高血压、肾病范围蛋白尿、肾病综合征和血尿的发生率高于无CKD基础急性肾损伤患者,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;前者的血红蛋白值高于后者（P＜0.05）,血清白蛋白值低于后者（P＜0.05）,肉眼血尿发生率比较,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;两组患者肾功能各有不同程度的恢复,无CKD基础急性肾损伤患者肾功能恢复比例相对高,但两者比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;两组患者恢复时间比较,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.01）,无CKD基础急性肾损伤肾功能恢复时间相对短.结论 急性肾损伤影响CKD的预后,加速CKD的病情进展;无论有无CKD基础,急性肾损伤均是CKD和终末期肾病（ESRD）的危险因素.     

T细胞比例对大鼠移植物抗宿主反应的影响

目的：研究移植物和受体的T细胞比例与移植物抗宿主反应（GVHD）的关系。方法：受体SD大鼠和供体Wistar大鼠共40对．按移植物与受体的T细胞比例1：1、2：1、4：1和对照组分为4组进行移植，并观察移植后GVHD的发生及其程度。结果：4组大鼠中1：1和2：1组的GVHD最轻，与对照组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01），而4：1组的GVHD与对照组比较差异则无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论：移植物内T细胞与受体循环血内的T细胞绝对值之比介于1：1与2：1之间较为合适；按此比例进行的大鼠移植，GVHD较轻。     

老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病早期肾损伤相关因素

目的：探讨影响老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病（COPD）患者早期肾损伤的临床指标。方法收集入住于宁夏人民医院呼吸内科的60例COPD患者作为研究对象（COPD组）;选择该院体检中心的30例健康体检者（对照亚组）。亚组：60例COPD组依据患病时间分为病程≤10年亚组和病程＞10年亚组;依据营养状况分为营养欠佳亚组和营养正常亚组。营养状况主要测定COPD患者白蛋白（ALB）、血红蛋白（Hb）、总胆固醇（TC）水平。评估COPD组及对照组的血清肌酐（SCr）、尿素氮（BUN）、β2微球蛋白（β2-MG）、白细胞（WBC）、中性粒细胞百分比（NE%）、血清胱抑素C（CysC）及估算肾小球滤过率（eGFR）等指标。结果与对照组比较,COPD组SCr、BUN、WBC、NE%差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）,eGFR, ALB,Hb,TC均明显降低,CysC 及β2-MG明显升高,差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;亚组分析,与病程≤10年亚组和营养状况正常亚组比较,血清CysC及β2-MG浓度在病程＞10年亚组及营养状况欠佳亚组均明显升高（P＜0.05）;eGFR在病程＞10年亚组明显低于病程≤10年亚组（P＜0.05）;SCr在各亚组间比较差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;Pearson线性相关性分析：eGFR与ALB和Hb呈正相关,与患病时间呈负相关;CysC和β2-MG与eGFR呈负相关。结论老年COPD患者存在早期肾损伤,随COPD病程延长及ALB,Hb,TC降低,早期肾损伤加重;患病时间、血清ALB和Hb水平影响老年COPD患者慢性缺氧早期肾损伤,与早期肾损伤呈线性相关。     

两种途径移植自体骨髓干细胞治疗肝硬化患者的疗效比较

目的比较经肝动脉和门静脉移植自体骨髓干细胞治疗失代偿期肝硬化患者的疗效和安全性。方法回顾性分析2006年12月至2012年5月50例住院患者资料,门静脉治疗组失代偿期肝硬化患者25例和肝动脉治疗组25例,两组基线特征差异无统计学意义。门静脉治疗组在基础治疗基础上在超声介入下经皮经肝穿刺至门静脉,注入自体骨髓干细胞治疗;肝动脉治疗组在基础治疗基础上在放射介入下经股动脉插管至肝固有动脉注入自体骨髓干细胞治疗。治疗后第2、4、8周检测两组患者Au、AST、TBil、凝血酶原活动度（VIA）和白蛋白（Alb）水平变化。同时观察临床症状的改善情况及术后的不良反应。组间比较采用成组t检验,治疗前后比较采用配对t检验,计数资料采用卡方检验。结果门静脉组有22例（88．0％）患者乏力、纳差症状有明显改善,肝动脉组有21例（84．0％）,两组间比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;治疗后8周,门静脉和肝动脉组患者血清Alb水平分别为（34．4±7．8）g/L和（33．8±8．0）g／L,较治疗前[分别为（27．1±8．9）g/L和（26．8±9．6）g／L]有显著提升（P均〈0．05）,但两组间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;两组VFA分别为（58．0±13．1）％和（56．9±12．8）％,较治疗前[分别为（45．5±12．3）％和（47．0±11．6）％]有显著提升（P均〈0．05）,但两组间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;血清ALT、AST、TBil在两组间变化差异无统计学意义;两组甲胎蛋白（AFP）分别为（10．3±5．9）ng／ml和（8．9±4．3）ng／ml,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）,未发现严重的不良反应及并发症。结论经门静脉和肝动脉移植自体骨髓干细胞治疗失代偿期肝硬化是一种较安全、有效的方法．两组间疗效相比差异无统计学意义。     

肾移植患者接受 HBcAb 阳性供体时应用 HBIg预防乙肝的安全性和有效性

目的：探讨肾移植（KT）患者接受HBcAb阳性供体时应用乙肝免疫球蛋白（HBIg）预防乙肝的安全性和有效性。方法选择行同种异体KT患者69例,受体术前均无乙肝,供体均为HBsAg阴性、HBcAb-IgM阳性。将其随机分为观察组39例,KT前后应用小剂量HBIg;对照组30例不用HBIg。比较两组术后不同时间的肝肾功能及术后12、36个月乙肝发生率。结果观察组术后发生急性排斥1例。随访3～36个月,观察组术后8、12个月死于肺部感染2例,对照组术后6、24个月死于肺部感染、暴发性肝炎各1例。观察组术后12、36个月乙肝发生率分别为0、2．6％,对照组分别为10．3％、17．9％,两组比较P均＜0．05。两组术后12、24、36个月的血肌酐、总胆红素水平及24个月的肝功能异常率比较,P均＜0．05。结论 KT患者接受HBcAb-IgM阳性者的供肾时,预防性应用HBIg进行被动免疫,可有效降低乙肝发生率,改善其术后肝肾功能,延长生存时间。     

The Evolution of Living Kidney Donation and Transplantation in Older Adults

Kidney transplantation is a good option for adults aged 65 and older with end‐stage renal disease because it has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality, improve quality of life, and is more cost‐effective than other renal replacement options. However, older age has been a deterrent to access to the deceased donor waiting list, and individuals aged 65 and older have a lower probability of being referred to and listed for transplantation compared to younger adults. Because the deceased organ supply is limited, living donor kidney transplantation offers an effective alternative for older adults facing long waiting times for cadaveric organs. This article describes the evolution of living kidney donation and transplantation in older adults over 15 years using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. Between 1997 and 2011, 28,034 kidney transplantations were performed in adults aged 65 and older. Living‐donor and cadaveric kidney transplantation increased in older adults over the 15‐year period. Offspring are the most common living donors in this age group, followed by unrelated donors (e.g., friends), whereas the most common donors in younger transplant recipients are spouses, siblings, and parents. The number of living kidney donors aged 65 and older is slowly increasing, although the total number of transplants in this age group remains low. The expansion of living‐donor kidney transplantation in the aging population may offer a solution for organ shortage and thereby improve the quality of life of older adults. More research is needed to understand the older donor–recipient relationship and barriers to transplantation in this population.