• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Thu, 05.11.26

Search results


September 2003
A.B. Chkhotua, T. Klein, E. Shabtai, A. Yussim, N. Bar-Nathan, E. Shaharabani, S. Lustig and E. Mor

Background: Recent advances in immunosuppressive therapy have led to a substantial improvement in the outcome of kidney transplantation. Living unrelated donors may become a source of additional organs for patients on the kidney waiting list.

Objectives: To study the impact of combination of calcineurin inhibitors and mycophenolate-mofetile, together with steroids, on outcomes of living related and unrelated transplants. 

Methods: Between September 1997 and January 2000, 129 patients underwent living related (n=80) or unrelated (n=49) kidney transplant. The mean follow-up was 28.2 months. Immunosuppressive protocols consisted of MMF[1] with cyclosporine (41%) or tacrolimus (59%), plus steroids. Patient and graft survival data, rejection rate, and graft functional parameters were compared between the groups.

Results: LUD[2] recipients were older (47.8 vs. 33.6 years) with higher number of re-transplants (24.5% vs. 11.2% in LRD[3] recipients, P < 0.05). Human leukocyte antigen matching was higher in LRD recipients (P < 0.001). Acute rejection developed in 28.6% of LUD and 27.5% of LRD transplants (P = NS). Creatinine levels at 1, 2 and 3 years post-transplant were 1.6, 1.7 and 1.7 mg/dl for LRD patients and 1.5, 1.5 and 1.3 mg/dl for LUD recipients (P = NS). There was no difference in patient survival rates between the groups. One, 2 and 3 year graft survival rates were similar in LRD (91.3%, 90% and 87.5%) and LUD (89.8%, 87.8% and 87.8%) recipients.

Conclusions: Despite HLA[4] disparity, rejection and survival rates of living unrelated transplants under current immunosuppressive protocols are comparable to those of living related transplants.






[1] MMF = mycophenolate-mofetile



[2] LUD = living unrelated donor



[3] LRD = living related donor



[4] HLA = human leukocyte antigen


July 2003
December 2002
August 2002
Bella Bielorai, MD, Hana Golan, MD, Gideon Rechavi, MD, PhD and Amos Toren, MD
June 2002
Gabriel Izbicki, MD, David Shitrit, MD, Dan Aravot MD, Gershon Fink, MD, Milton Saute, MD, Leonid Idelman, MD, Ilana Bakal, BA, Jaqueline Sulkes, PhD and Mordechai R. Kramer, MD

Background: Historically, donor age above 55 years has been considered to be a relative contraindication for organ transplantation. The shortage of organs for transplantation has led to the expansion of the donor pool by accepting older donors. 

Objectives: To compare the 1 year follow-up in patients after lung transplantation from older donors (>50 years old) and in patients after transplantation from younger donors (± 50 years).

Methods: The study group comprised all adult patients who underwent lung transplantation at the Rabin Medical Center between May 1997 and August 2001. Donors were classified into two groups according to their age: ≤ 50 years (n=20) and > 50 years (n=9). Survival, number and total days of hospitalization, development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, and pulmonary function tests, were examined 1 year after transplantation.     

Results: We performed 29 lung transplantations in our center during the observed period. Donor age had no statistically significant impact on 1 year survival after lung transplantation. There was no statistically significant effect on lung function parameters, the incidence of hospitalization or the incidence of bronchiolitis obliterans between both donor age groups at 1 year after transplantation.

Conclusions: Donor age did not influence survival or important secondary end-points 1 year after lung transplantation. By liberalizing donor criteria of age up to 65 years, we can expand the donor pool, while assessing other possible mechanisms to increase donor availability. 

April 2002
Tomas Kozak, MD and Ivan Rychlik, MD

Intractable forms of autoimmune diseases follow a rapid course, with a significantly shortened life expectancy sometimes comparable to that of malignant diseases. Immunoablative therapy, including high dose cytotoxic agents and hematopoietic autologous stem cell rescue, was recently introduced as an aggressive approach to treat autoimmune diseases that have a rapid course and are resistant to conventional therapy. The most frequent indication for this type of treatment is multiple sclerosis, seconded by systemic sclerosis. The results of immunoablative treatment with documented responses in both diseases are encouraging. The data are mature enough to begin comparative randomized studies of immunoablative versus conventional treatment to validate the benefit of the aggressive approach. A randomized trial involving SSc[1] was recently launched (ASTIS) and a trial involving MS[2] is under preparation. Considerably less experience with immunoablative treatment has been gained in systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, and other disorders with an autoimmune pathophysiology. Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in humans offers more long-lasting immunosuppression than reeducation of lymphocytes. In fact, allogeneic transplantation may replace the whole immune system. However, this attractive approach is still associated with considerable morbidity and mortality and is not yet justified for treatment of automimmune diseases. Non-myeloablative allogeneic transplantation and sub-myeloblative high dose cyclophosphamide without stem cell support are alternative approaches that could be explored in pilot studies.

_______________________________


[1] SSc = systemic sclerosis


[2] MS = multiple sclerosis


Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel