• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sun, 16.06.24

Search results


August 2004
N. Lubezky, R. Nakache, M. Carmiel, R. Oren, P. Sorkin, J. Klausner and M. Ben-Haim

Background: The prognosis of patients with fulminant hepatic failure without timely liver transplantation is dismal. Given the limited availability of cadaveric organs for urgent transplantation in Israel, adult-to-adult living-donor segmental liver transplantation may be the only alternative.

Objectives: To report our initial experience with urgent lifesaving LDLT[1] in this unique scenario.

Methods: Three adult patients with FHF[2] (two of unknown etiology, one with paracetamol intoxication) were transferred from other institutions and admitted to our intensive care unit. Initial treatment and monitoring included intracranial pressure monitoring and hepatic dialysis using the Molecular Adsorbent Recirculating System. Expeditious potential donor selection included medical, psychosocial and surgical evaluation. Liver volume and vascular anatomic compatibility were assessed with computed tomography angiography.

Results: Between July and October 2003 we performed three procedures of urgent adult-to-adult LDLT. The donors (two uncles, one sister) underwent hepatic resection (two right lobes, one left lateral segment) and recovered well. The recipients underwent total hepatectomy with caval preservation, followed by lobar grafting. All recipients recovered and are alive with good liver function and without any neurologic complications.

Conclusions: Urgent adult-to-adult living-donor segmental liver transplantation can be performed safely and timely as a lifesaving procedure in the setting of comatose patients with FHF.






[1] LDLT = living-donor liver transplantation

[2] FHF = fulminant hepatic failure


February 2003
D. Lev-Chelouche, B. Sagie, A. Keidar, J. M. Klausner and A. Szold

Background: Developments in laparoscopic surgery have rendered it an efficient tool for many complex surgical procedures. In the last few years, laparoscopic adrenalectomy has become a more viable option for removal of adrenal pathology, with many surgeons preferring it to the conventional open technique.

Objectives: To describe the indications, technique, complications and follow-up of patients undergoing laparoscopic adrenalectomy in our department.

Methods: The hospital files of 30 patients who underwent the procedure were reviewed. There were 19 females and 11 males with a mean age of 45 years. Indications for surgery differed and included hypersecreting adenoma, pheochromocytoma, suspected malignancy, and incidentaloma.

Results: Of the 31 laparoscopic adrenalectomies performed, 11 were right, 18 were left, and 1 was bilateral. The conversion rate to an open procedure was 3%. The mean duration of procedure was 120 minutes. Only one patient required blood transfusion. Complications occurred in 20% of patients, all reversible. There was no mortality. Mean hospitalization duration was 3.4 days, and median follow-up 17 months. There were no late complications. All patients operated on for benign diseases are alive.

Conclusions: Laparoscopic adrenalectomy appears to be a useful tool for the treatment of a range of adrenal pathologies.

July 2000
Richard Nakache MD, Avi Weinbroum MD, Hadar Merhav MD, Eli Kaplan MD, Yehuda Kariv MD, Wessam Khoury MD, Mordechai Gutman MD and Joseph M. lausner MD

Background: In simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation, with both organs coming from the same donor, the addition of a pancreas to the kidney transplant does not jeopardize the kidney allograft outcome despite higher postoperative SPK morbidity. Pancreas allograft outcome has recently improved due to better organ selection and more accurate surgical techniques.

Objective: To demonstrate the positive impact of SPK on kidney allograft outcome versus kidney transplantation alone in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus patients with end-stage renal failure.

Methods: We performed 39 consecutive SPKs in 14 female and 25 male IDDM patients with renal failure after an average waiting time of 9 months. Multi-organ donor age was 30 years (range 12-53). The kidneys were transplanted in the left retroperitoneal iliac fossa following completion of the pancreas transplantation; kidney cold ischemia time was 16±4 hours. Induction anti-rejection therapy was achieved with polyclonal antithymocytic globulin and methylprednisolone, and maintenance immunosuppression by triple drug therapy (prednisone, cyclosporine or tacrolimus, and azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil). Infection and rejection were closely monitored.

Results: All kidney allografts produced immediate urinary output following SPK. Two renal grafts had mild function impairment due to acute tubular damage but recovered after a short delay. Three patients died from myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular event and abdominal sepsis on days 1, 32 and 45 respectively (1 year patient survival 92%). An additional kidney allograft was lost due to a renal artery pseudo-aneurysm requiring nephrectomy on day 26. Nineteen patients (49%) had an early rejection of the kidney that was resistant to pulse-steroid therapy in 6. No kidney graft was lost due to rejection. Patients with acute kidney-pancreas rejection episodes suffered from severe infection, which was the main cause of morbidity with a 55% re-admission rate. Complications of the pancreas allograft included graft pancreatitis and sepsis, leading to a poor kidney outcome with sub-optimal kidney function at 1 year. Kidney graft survival at one year was 89% or 95% after censoring the data for patients who died with functioning grafts.

Conclusions: Eligible IDDM patients with advanced diabetic nephropathy should choose SPK over kidney transplantation alone from either a cadaver or a living source.

__________________________________

 

SPK= simutaneous pancreas-kidney transplatation

IDDM= insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

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