Treatment of urological complications in more than 1,000 kidney transplantations: the role of interventional radiology

Update on the Management of Urological Problems Following Kidney Transplantation

Urological problems in kidney transplant recipients are not limited only to posttransplantation urological complications. These problems are a cause of significant patient mortality and morbidity that have wide-ranging effects on graft survival throughout the entire life of the graft. Ultimately, the transplant comprises a major portion of the urinary system; therefore, the transplant team should be prepared for foreseeable and unforeseeable urological problems in the short and long terms. These mainly include postoperative urological complications (urine leakage, ureteral stenosis, and vesicoureteral reflux), bladder outlet obstruction, and graft urolithiasis. In recent years, significant advances have been made in the management of urological complications, especially due to advances in endourologic interventions. The aim of this review is to summarize the management of urological problems after kidney transplantation in the context of the current literature.

Timely surgical intervention for ureteric complications ensures adequate graft function in renal transplantation: a 10-year review

BACKGROUND

Ureteric complications can cause significant morbidity in renal and simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplantation. This 10-year review identified transplant patients with ureteric complications necessitating surgical intervention in an Australian tertiary centre.

METHODS

The hospital records were scrutinized in detail to identify all patients who underwent renal or SPK transplantation from 1 June 2009 to 31 May 2019 with subsequent surgical management of ureteric complications. A case series of patients with ureteric complications was generated and findings were analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 893 renal and SPK transplants were performed over the 10-year period. Ten of these (1.12%; seven renal and three SPK) had ureteric complications. All were managed surgically. Five of the 10 had ureteric leaks (0.56%); three had ureteric strictures (0.34%), one had ureteric obstruction from extraluminal compression (0.11%) and one had both leak and stricture (0.11%). All 10 patients underwent ureteric reimplantation. Two patients required more than one operation for their ureteric complication. No graft loss or surgical mortality occurred. All 10 patients currently have functioning kidney transplants and none require maintenance dialysis.

CONCLUSION

We report a low rate (1.12%) of ureteric complications in our renal and SPK transplants. Our standard practice of definitive correction by ureteric reimplantation is proving successful. The authors confirm that appropriate surgery is a viable and durable option in renal transplant patients with excellent graft outcomes.

[Results of surgical revisions for ureteral complications after renal transplantation]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the results of surgical revision for ureteral complication (ureteric stenosis or urinary leakage) after renal transplantation over a period of 10 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study on 1313 consecutive kidney transplantations carried out in a University Hospital Center between 2005 and 2014. The data of the patients who developed a ureteral stenosis or a urinary leakage secondary to a renal transplantation were analyzed. Combined organ transplantations (kidney-liver and kidney-pancreas), as well as pediatric transplantations were excluded.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients (5.8%) had ureteric stenosis or urinary leakage after renal transplantation. Forty-six patients (3.5%) underwent surgical revision: 27 for ureteral stenosis, 19 for urinary leakage. Early success was achieved in 26 patients (56.5%), including 14 ureteric stenosis (51.9%) and 12 urinary leakage (63.2%) (P=0.45). After a complementary endoscopic or surgical treatment, the final success rate was increased to 73.1% (34 patients): 20 ureteric stenosis (74.1%) and 14 urinary leakage (73.7%) (P=0.98). There were 2 graft losses (4.3%) and one death (2.2%). The mean glomerular filtration rate estimated by the MDRD was 44.58mL/min/1.73m² (±14.7) before surgery and 45.37mL/min/1.73m² (±16.5) 6 months after surgery (P=0.92).

CONCLUSION

Although frequently challenging, surgical revisions for ureteral complications after renal transplantation give good results, with a low rate of graft loss and mortality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Perigraft fluid collections after kidney transplantation: Does the type of donor (uncontrolled donation after circulatory death vs. donation after brain death) have a role?

Introduction

Perigraft fluid collection (PFC) is a common complication after kidney transplant. Its etiology is not clear and not all the causes have been identified. The influence of the type of donor has never been evaluated. Our aim was to compare the incidence, severity and management of PFC in recipients of grafts from uncontrolled donors after circulatory death (DCD) with normothermic extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (NECMO) versus recipients of grafts from donors after brain death (DBD).

Material and methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 300 kidney transplants performed in our center between 2007 and 2012. Patients were divided in two groups: 150 recipients of Maastricht II DCD graft and 150 recipients of the DBD graft. Incidence, severity according to Clavien scale and management were analyzed in both groups, and comparison was carried out using Chi-square.

Results

Of the 300 kidney recipients analyzed, 93 (31.4%) suffered PFC, showing no difference between DBD (32.0%) and DCD (30.8%) groups (p = 0.9). Complicated PFC rate (defined as a PFC generating vascular compression, fever or urinary tract obstruction) was 22.9% in the DBD group versus 22.2% in the DCD group (p = 1); most complicated PFC were due to urinary tract obstruction (81%), with no difference between the groups (p = 1). Concerning Clavien scale, 78.5% of the PFC in our series were Clavien I, 19.4% Clavien IIIa and 2.2% Clavien IIIb, with no difference between both groups (p = 1).

Conclusions

PFC is a frequent complication that appears in a third of our patients, showing no difference in the incidence or severity between DBD and uncontrolled DCD graft recipients.

Outcomes of Kidney Transplant Recipients With Percutaneous Ureteral Interventions: A Single-Center Study

Background

Long-term outcomes of kidney transplantation recipients with percutaneous ureteral management of transplant ureteral complications are not well characterized.

Methods

Electronic records of 1753 recipients of kidney-alone transplant between January 2000 and December 2008 were reviewed. One hundred thirty-one patients were identified to have undergone percutaneous ureteral management, with placement of percutaneous nephrostomy tube or additional intervention (nephroureteral stenting and/or balloon dilation). Indications for intervention included transplant ureteral stricture or ureteral leak. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and multivariable regression modeling were performed to determine survival outcomes.

Results

Kaplan- Meier graft survival (P = 0.04) was lower in patients with percutaneous ureteral intervention for transplant ureteral complication. Graft survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 94.3% 78.3%, and 59.1% for no intervention and 97.2%, 72.1%, and 36.2% for intervention cohort. Patient survival (P = 0.69) was similar between cohorts. Multivariate analysis demonstrated no association with graft failure (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-2.19; P = 0.53) or patient death (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-1.41; P = 0.22) in intervention group. The major cause of graft failure was infection for percutaneous ureteral intervention group (20.4%) and chronic rejection for those without intervention (17.3%).

Conclusions

Kidney transplant recipients with percutaneous ureteral interventions for ureteral complications do not have a significant difference in graft and patient survival outcomes. Therefore, aggressive nonoperative management can be confidently pursued in the appropriate clinical setting.