HLA-IDENTITY-LONG-TERM RENAL GRAFT SURVIVAL, ACUTE VASCULAR, CHRONIC VASCULAR, AND ACUTE INTERSTITIAL REJECTION1

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The object is analysis of the impact of acute and chronic rejection on long-term function in HLA-identical renal transplants performed from 1967 to 1995 by the Saskatchewan Renal Transplant Unit. Forty-eight grafts in 46 patients were studied, of which 39 were first and nine second grafts. Forty-two were for primary and six for secondary renal disease. Thirty-five received azathioprine/prednisone prophylaxis, and 13 received cyclosporine/prednisone with/without azathioprine. Ten-year all graft actuarial survival was 84%, 10-year actuarial graft survival in patients with primary renal disease 90%, and with subsequent graft after first HLA graft failed 97.5%, for age-matched population 98.5% (P=NS). Overall death rate was 8.7% (4/46); in secondary renal disease patients 50% (3/6); in primary renal disease patients 2.5% (1/40, P=0.004). All (9/9) HLA-identical second grafts functioned. Acute rejection with azathioprine/prednisone prophylaxis occurred in 55% (9/17) of grafts treated with 5 units in 12% (2/16, P=0.015), and with cyclosporine prophylaxis in 13% (2/15, P=0.021). Pulse steroids alone reversed all acute rejection. Grafts failed in 6.2% (3/48), all in primary renal disease patients and one from technical one noncompliance, and one chronic rejection. Graft cost/patient/year amortized over 9 years is $3,855 and comparable dialysis cost would be $35,650; cost for all patients on dialysis for 9 years would be $11,293,320 while comparable graft cost was 1,221,418, a savings of 89.2%. Our conclusions are that HLA-identity associates with the following: (1) a 10-year actuarial survival in primary renal disease that equals that of the age-matched population, (2) uniform success in repeat grafts, (3) virtual absence of chronic rejection despite a high incidence of acute rejection in azathioprine/prednisone grafts that (4) always reversed on pulse steroids, and (5) a cost reduction for grafting of 93.2% compared with dialysis therapy.