Treatment of the Lymphocele After Kidney Transplantation: A Single-center Experience

Intranodal Glue Embolization for Postoperative Lymphatic Leaks in the Groin and Pelvis: Comparison with Sclerotherapy

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness of and adverse events related to intranodal glue embolization (IGE) with those of intracavitary sclerotherapy for the treatment of postoperative groin and pelvic lymphatic leaks.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From November 2015 to July 2021, IGE for postoperative pelvic or groin lymphocele or lymphorrhea was performed in 33 patients. From January 2010 to July 2021, 28 patients with postoperative pelvic or groin lymphocele were treated with sclerosis alone. Clinical success was defined as resolution of drainage within 3 weeks of the last intervention performed without recurrence. Patients presenting >1 year after surgery or with <30 days of follow-up were excluded. Patients with lymphorrhea treated with IGE were not statistically compared with those in the sclerosis group because they were not eligible for sclerosis.

RESULTS

Clinical success was similar between the groups (lymphocele IGE, 15/18, 83.3%, vs sclerosis, 15/23, 65.2% [P = .29]; lymphorrhea IGE, 8/9, 88.9%). The mean number of interventions performed to successfully treat a lymphocele was significantly higher in the sclerosis group (2.5 for sclerosis vs 1.3 for IGE; P = .003; lymphorrhea IGE, 1.0). The mean time to resolution was significantly longer for sclerosis than for IGE (27 vs 7 days; P = .002; 4 days for lymphorrhea IGE). There were no sclerosis-related adverse events and 2 IGE-related adverse events: (a) 1 case of mild lymphedema and (b) 1 case of nontarget embolization resulting in deep vein thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

For treatment of postoperative pelvic and groin lymphoceles, IGE results in faster resolution with fewer interventions compared with sclerosis. IGE is also an effective treatment for postoperative groin lymphorrhea.

Lymphocele in Kidney Transplantation: A Comparison of Ligation and Non-ligation Technique of Iliac Lymphatic Dissection

BACKGROUND

To compare the incidence of lymphocele in kidney recipients following 2 lymphatic vessel division techniques: ligation and non-ligation.

METHODS

Retrospective reviews of the records of 402 patients with end-stage renal disease who underwent kidney transplantation from April 2015 to December 2019 at Siriraj Hospital.

RESULTS

Four hundred two patients were included in the study: 54.9% of the patients were male, and the patient's mean age was 41 years. There were 25.1% and 74.9% that received kidney grafts from living and deceased donors, respectively. The preoperative renal replacement therapies were 83.3% hemodialysis, 12.9% peritoneal dialysis, and 3.7% preemptive transplantation. Two hundred forty-nine patients received lymphatic division with the ligation technique and 153 patients received the non-ligation. Lymphoceles were found in 31 cases (7.7%). Lymphocele occurrence in the ligation group was lower than in the non-ligation group: 5.2% compared to 11.8% (P value = .017). There were 22.6% of lymphoceles that had a spontaneous resolution with no treatment.

DISCUSSION

The ligation of iliac lymphatic vessels during division reduced the incidence of lymphoceles non-ligation.

Giant Idiopathic Lymphocele 18 Years After Kidney Transplantation, Treated Using Lymphatic Embolization With Lipiodol: Report of a Rare Case

Kidney transplant is the best therapeutic option for patients with end-stage kidney disease. However, kidney transplant is not exempt from postoperative complications. One of the most frequent urological complications is lymphocele, which can appearin up to 20% of patients. Lymphocele most often appears during the first month after surgery. However, its appearance after the first yearis completely infrequent. Here, we report a case of a giant idiopathic lymphocele 18 years after kidney transplant and its resolution with lymphatic embolization.The patient, a 34-year-old man who received a deceased-donor kidney transplant in 2002, had presented with no complications until the lymphocele was diagnosed. The lymphocele presented as a voluminous organ-compressing mass. A percutaneous drainage was placed, and 3600 cm3 of lymphatic fluidwere drained.Afterthat, 800 cm3 continued to leak every day. An intranodal lymphography and lymphatic embolization with Lipiodol Ultra-Fluide (Guerbet Australia) were performed, owing to the high amount of leakage. At 50 days after embolization, an ultrasonograph showed no fluid collections, so the percutaneous catheter was removed. In most patients, the treatment ofthe lymphocele after kidney transplant is frequently conservative. However,for patients whose situation cannot be resolved spontaneously, there are few therapeutic choices. As described here, intranodal lymphatic embolization is a mini-invasive option, with a success rate of up to 80%, and should be offered as the first approach.

Predictors of Lymphatic Complications Following Renal Transplant: A Prospective Study Involving Predominantly Living Donor Transplants From India

Introduction Lymphatic complications (LC) are common (up to 33%) and troublesome after renal transplantation. Different studies have established varying medical and surgical risk factors, mostly by retrospective analysis on deceased donor renal transplants (DDRTs). The end-point is mostly lymphocele, with few reports documenting the equally important lymphorrhea. Methods In our prospective analytical study done over three years, most were living donor renal transplant (LDRT) pairs by a single team. The primary outcome measure was lymphocele and/or prolonged drainage for more than 15 days, with a six-month follow-up. The variables recorded were age, gender, hemodialysis duration, etiology, relationship, human leucocyte antigen (HLA) mismatch, induction regimen, acute rejection, warm ischemia time (WIT), and delayed graft function (DGF). Univariate analysis was by chi-square and t-tests as applicable, while logistic regression (both simultaneous and forward stepwise) was used for risk factor prediction. Results Eligible cases were 150, with 145 (97%) LDRT pairs. Donors were mostly female (122/150; 81%) with mean age (~43 years) higher than recipient age (~33 years). The common etiologies were diabetes (31%), hypertension (23%), and IgA nephropathy (11%). Most donors were mothers (37%) and wives (31%), and 28% of LDRT pairs had HLA mismatch >3. Mean duration of hemodialysis was about 18 months, and mean WIT was 52 minutes. Both DGF (B coefficient= -1.69, p<0.000) and WIT (B=-0.038, p=0.024) were significant predictors of the primary outcome, while drain removal before 15 days predicted lymphocele significantly (B=-2.4, p<0.000).  Conclusions LDRT has specific risk factors for lymphatic complications, which may be related to extent of recipient vascular dissection, arterial anastomotic time, and early drain removal.

Minimal-invasive management of urological complications after kidney transplantation

Kidney transplantation represents the gold standard treatment option for patients with end-stage renal disease. Improvements in surgical technique and pharmacologic treatment have continuously prolonged allograft survival in recent years. However, urological complications are frequently observed, leading to both postoperative morbidity and putative deterioration of allograft function. While open redo surgery in these patients is often accompanied by elevated surgical risk, endoscopic management of urological complications is an alternative, minimal-invasive option. In the present article, we reviewed the literature on relevant urological postoperative complications after kidney transplantation and describe preventive approaches during the pre-transplantation assessment and their management using minimal-invasive approaches.

Imaging of Renal Transplant Complications throughout the Life of the Allograft: Comprehensive Multimodality Review

The kidney is the most commonly transplanted solid organ. Advances in surgical techniques, immunosuppression regimens, surveillance imaging, and histopathologic diagnosis of rejection have allowed prolonged graft survival times. However, the demand for kidneys continues to outgrow the available supply, and there are efforts to increase use of donor kidneys with moderate- or high-risk profiles. This highlights the importance of evaluating the renal transplant patient in the context of both donor and recipient risk factors. Radiologists play an integral role within the multidisciplinary team in care of the transplant patient at every stage of the transplant process. In the immediate postoperative period, duplex US is the modality of choice for evaluating the renal allograft. It is useful for establishing a baseline examination for comparison at future surveillance imaging. In the setting of allograft dysfunction, advanced imaging techniques including MRI or contrast-enhanced US may be useful for providing a more specific diagnosis and excluding nonrejection causes of renal dysfunction. When a pathologic diagnosis is deemed necessary to guide therapy, US-guided biopsy is a relatively low-risk, safe procedure. The range of complications of renal transplantation can be organized temporally in relation to the time since surgery and/or according to disease categories, including immunologic (rejection), surgical or iatrogenic, vascular, urinary, infectious, and neoplastic complications. The unique heterotopic location of the renal allograft in the iliac fossa predisposes it to a specific set of complications. As imaging features of infection or malignancy may be nonspecific, awareness of the patient's risk profile and time since transplantation can be used to assign the probability of a certain diagnosis and thus guide more specific diagnostic workup. It is critical to understand variations in vascular anatomy, surgical technique, and independent donor and recipient risk factors to make an accurate diagnosis and initiate appropriate treatment.^©RSNA, 2019.

Consensus on definition and severity grading of lymphatic complications after kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

The incidence of lymphatic complications after kidney transplantation varies considerably in the literature. This is partly because a universally accepted definition has not been established. This study aimed to propose an acceptable definition and severity grading system for lymphatic complications based on their management strategy.

METHODS

Relevant literature published in MEDLINE and Web of Science was searched systematically. A consensus for definition and a severity grading was then sought between 20 high-volume transplant centres.

RESULTS

Lymphorrhoea/lymphocele was defined in 32 of 87 included studies. Sixty-three articles explained how lymphatic complications were managed, but none graded their severity. The proposed definition of lymphorrhoea was leakage of more than 50 ml fluid (not urine, blood or pus) per day from the drain, or the drain site after removal of the drain, for more than 1 week after kidney transplantation. The proposed definition of lymphocele was a fluid collection of any size near to the transplanted kidney, after urinoma, haematoma and abscess have been excluded. Grade A lymphatic complications have a minor and/or non-invasive impact on the clinical management of the patient; grade B complications require non-surgical intervention; and grade C complications require invasive surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

A clear definition and severity grading for lymphatic complications after kidney transplantation was agreed. The proposed definitions should allow better comparisons between studies.

Role of early povidone iodine instillation in post-renal transplant lymphorrhea: A prospective randomized study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to prospectively evaluate the role of early povidone iodine instillation in the management of post-renal transplant lymphorrhea.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Live-related renal transplant recipients operated between January 2002 and December 2015 were included in the study. Significant lymphorrhea was defined as >50 mL lymph from drain beyond postoperative day 5. Such patients were randomized into two groups by simple randomization using a computer-generated random list: group A (received 0.5% povidone iodine instillation) and group B (no instillation). Absolute risk reduction and numbers needed to treat were calculated to estimate the effect of povidone iodine instillation for the treatment of lymphorrhea and decrease in the incidence of lymphocoele.

RESULTS

A total of 1766 patients underwent renal transplant during this period. One hundred seventeen patients with lymphorrhea through the drain underwent randomization into group A (n=61) and group B (n=56). In group A, 58 patients had successful resolution within 2 weeks, whereas in group B, 34 patients had successful resolution within 2 weeks. Overall, 9 (14.75%) patients in group A and 29 (51.78%) patients in group B had lymphatic collections (both symptomatic and asymptomatic). Symptomatic lymphocoele was present in 1 patient in group A and 7 patients in group B on follow-up. Absolute risk reduction was 10.8%, and for every symptomatic lymphocoele prevented, 10 patients needed povidone iodine instillation.

CONCLUSION

Povidone iodine instillation after 5 days of transplantation aids in the early resolution of post-renal transplantation lymphorrhea, as well as reduces the incidence of future lymphocoele.

Beyond death and graft survival-Variation in outcomes after kidney transplantation. Results from the NSQIP Transplant beta phase

The National Surgical Quality Program (NSQIP) Transplant was designed by transplant surgeons from the ground up to track posttransplant outcomes beyond basic recipient and graft survival. After an initial pilot phase, the program has expanded to 29 participating sites and enrolled more than 4300 recipient-donor pairs into the database, including 2876 complete kidney transplant cases. In this analysis, surgical site infection (SSI), urinary tract infection (UTI), and reoperation/intervention were evaluated for kidney transplant recipients. We observed impressive variation in the crude incidence between sites for SSI (0%-17%), UTI (0%-14%), and reoperation/intervention (0%-25%). After adjustment for donor and recipient factors, 2 sites were outliers with respect to their incidence of UTI. For the first time, the field of transplantation has data that demonstrate variation in kidney recipient surgical outcomes between sites. More importantly, NSQIP Transplant provides a powerful platform to improve care beyond basic patient and graft survival.