Pushing the envelope

Living donor pancreas transplantation

David E R Sutherland, David Radosevich, Rainer W G Gruessner, Angelika C Gruessner, Raja Kandaswamy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose of review: More than 160 living donor segmental pancreas/islet transplants have been done since the first in 1977, more than three-quarters at one institution. We review this three-decade experience to project future application. Initially, living donor pancreas transplants were done because the results with deceased donors were poor. As the results with deceased donors improved, the incentive to do living donor transplants declined but never disappeared. A living donor simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant in a uremic diabetic can correct diabetes and pre-empt dialysis with one operation, obviating the high mortality rate of waiting for a deceased donor. Solitary pancreas transplant candidates with preformed human leukocyte antigen antibodies but a negative cross match to a living donor volunteer also benefit. Recent findings: The technical failure rate of living donor pancreas transplants was high in the initial cases (>1/3), nearly double that for deceased donors, but has since declined to nearly zero. Living donor segmental pancreatectomy has little surgical morbidity (currently done laparoscopically) with only a small risk for diabetes by strict selection criteria. living donor and deceased donor graft survival rates are equivalent. Islet allografts have been done from three living donors, the last one successfully, showing the potential for further application. Summary: The incentives for living donor transplants are to eliminate long-wait times for a deceased donor organ and to improve outcomes. With both the incentive is high, but either by itself is sufficient. As the number of pancreas transplant candidates increase, so will wait times for a deceased donor organ. For this reason, living donor pancreas/islet transplant volume will likely increase in the years to come.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)106-115
Number of pages10
JournalCurrent Opinion in Organ Transplantation
Volume17
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2012

Fingerprint

Pancreas Transplantation
Living Donors
Pancreas
Transplants
Tissue Donors
Motivation
Pancreatectomy
Graft Survival
HLA Antigens
Patient Selection
Allografts
Dialysis
Volunteers
Survival Rate

Keywords

  • islet
  • living donor
  • pancreas
  • transplantation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Transplantation

Cite this

Pushing the envelope : Living donor pancreas transplantation. / Sutherland, David E R; Radosevich, David; Gruessner, Rainer W G; Gruessner, Angelika C; Kandaswamy, Raja.

In: Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation, Vol. 17, No. 1, 02.2012, p. 106-115.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sutherland, David E R ; Radosevich, David ; Gruessner, Rainer W G ; Gruessner, Angelika C ; Kandaswamy, Raja. / Pushing the envelope : Living donor pancreas transplantation. In: Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation. 2012 ; Vol. 17, No. 1. pp. 106-115.
@article{258c3fedba0b4c69940691cd932c5ef0,
title = "Pushing the envelope: Living donor pancreas transplantation",
abstract = "Purpose of review: More than 160 living donor segmental pancreas/islet transplants have been done since the first in 1977, more than three-quarters at one institution. We review this three-decade experience to project future application. Initially, living donor pancreas transplants were done because the results with deceased donors were poor. As the results with deceased donors improved, the incentive to do living donor transplants declined but never disappeared. A living donor simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant in a uremic diabetic can correct diabetes and pre-empt dialysis with one operation, obviating the high mortality rate of waiting for a deceased donor. Solitary pancreas transplant candidates with preformed human leukocyte antigen antibodies but a negative cross match to a living donor volunteer also benefit. Recent findings: The technical failure rate of living donor pancreas transplants was high in the initial cases (>1/3), nearly double that for deceased donors, but has since declined to nearly zero. Living donor segmental pancreatectomy has little surgical morbidity (currently done laparoscopically) with only a small risk for diabetes by strict selection criteria. living donor and deceased donor graft survival rates are equivalent. Islet allografts have been done from three living donors, the last one successfully, showing the potential for further application. Summary: The incentives for living donor transplants are to eliminate long-wait times for a deceased donor organ and to improve outcomes. With both the incentive is high, but either by itself is sufficient. As the number of pancreas transplant candidates increase, so will wait times for a deceased donor organ. For this reason, living donor pancreas/islet transplant volume will likely increase in the years to come.",
keywords = "islet, living donor, pancreas, transplantation",
author = "Sutherland, {David E R} and David Radosevich and Gruessner, {Rainer W G} and Gruessner, {Angelika C} and Raja Kandaswamy",
year = "2012",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1097/MOT.0b013e32834ee6e5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "106--115",
journal = "Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation",
issn = "1087-2418",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pushing the envelope

T2 - Living donor pancreas transplantation

AU - Sutherland, David E R

AU - Radosevich, David

AU - Gruessner, Rainer W G

AU - Gruessner, Angelika C

AU - Kandaswamy, Raja

PY - 2012/2

Y1 - 2012/2

N2 - Purpose of review: More than 160 living donor segmental pancreas/islet transplants have been done since the first in 1977, more than three-quarters at one institution. We review this three-decade experience to project future application. Initially, living donor pancreas transplants were done because the results with deceased donors were poor. As the results with deceased donors improved, the incentive to do living donor transplants declined but never disappeared. A living donor simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant in a uremic diabetic can correct diabetes and pre-empt dialysis with one operation, obviating the high mortality rate of waiting for a deceased donor. Solitary pancreas transplant candidates with preformed human leukocyte antigen antibodies but a negative cross match to a living donor volunteer also benefit. Recent findings: The technical failure rate of living donor pancreas transplants was high in the initial cases (>1/3), nearly double that for deceased donors, but has since declined to nearly zero. Living donor segmental pancreatectomy has little surgical morbidity (currently done laparoscopically) with only a small risk for diabetes by strict selection criteria. living donor and deceased donor graft survival rates are equivalent. Islet allografts have been done from three living donors, the last one successfully, showing the potential for further application. Summary: The incentives for living donor transplants are to eliminate long-wait times for a deceased donor organ and to improve outcomes. With both the incentive is high, but either by itself is sufficient. As the number of pancreas transplant candidates increase, so will wait times for a deceased donor organ. For this reason, living donor pancreas/islet transplant volume will likely increase in the years to come.

AB - Purpose of review: More than 160 living donor segmental pancreas/islet transplants have been done since the first in 1977, more than three-quarters at one institution. We review this three-decade experience to project future application. Initially, living donor pancreas transplants were done because the results with deceased donors were poor. As the results with deceased donors improved, the incentive to do living donor transplants declined but never disappeared. A living donor simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant in a uremic diabetic can correct diabetes and pre-empt dialysis with one operation, obviating the high mortality rate of waiting for a deceased donor. Solitary pancreas transplant candidates with preformed human leukocyte antigen antibodies but a negative cross match to a living donor volunteer also benefit. Recent findings: The technical failure rate of living donor pancreas transplants was high in the initial cases (>1/3), nearly double that for deceased donors, but has since declined to nearly zero. Living donor segmental pancreatectomy has little surgical morbidity (currently done laparoscopically) with only a small risk for diabetes by strict selection criteria. living donor and deceased donor graft survival rates are equivalent. Islet allografts have been done from three living donors, the last one successfully, showing the potential for further application. Summary: The incentives for living donor transplants are to eliminate long-wait times for a deceased donor organ and to improve outcomes. With both the incentive is high, but either by itself is sufficient. As the number of pancreas transplant candidates increase, so will wait times for a deceased donor organ. For this reason, living donor pancreas/islet transplant volume will likely increase in the years to come.

KW - islet

KW - living donor

KW - pancreas

KW - transplantation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84856113126&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84856113126&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/MOT.0b013e32834ee6e5

DO - 10.1097/MOT.0b013e32834ee6e5

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 106

EP - 115

JO - Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation

JF - Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation

SN - 1087-2418

IS - 1

ER -