Living Donation Kidney Transplantation with Multiple Renal Arteries Vs. Single Renal Artery

Steffan Jackobs,Michael Neipp,Thomas Becker,Bjoern Nashan,Juergen Klempnauer,Rainer Lueck

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007890-200407271-01116

2004-01-01

Transplantation

Abstract:P171A Aim: For technical reasons living donor kidneys are procured without an aortal patch for transplantation. Many centers avoid to obtain kidneys from living donors presenting multiple renal arteries (MRA). At our institution kidneys from living donors with MRA are routinely transplanted by sequential arterial anastomosis technique while others prefer ex situ vascular reconstruction procedures. The aim of this study was to analyze outcome of recipients receiving kidneys from living donors presenting MRA in comparison to kidney grafts with singular renal arteries (SRA). Patients and Materials: Intraoperative details as well as postoperative courses of 196 kidney transplanted patients following living donation between May 1996 to December 2003 were studied prospectively. Postoperative creatinin levels, urea levels, blood presure, initial non function (INF) of kidney grafts, incidence of complications as well as graft survival and patient survival were assessed. Results: Of 196 kidney transplantations 33 kidney grafts revieled MRA (17%). Of those, 2 arteries were present in 27 (14%) and 3 arteries in 6 cases (3%). There was no significant difference in age (SRA: 33 ± 18 years; MRA: 33 ± 19 years), height (SRA: 1,74 ± 0,10m; MRA: 1,71 ± 0,08m), body weight (SRA: 75 ± 16kg; MRA: 72 ± 11kg), and sex of recipients (SRA: 113 males/50 females; MRA: 19 males/14 females). All implantations of MRA were performed by sequential anastomosis to the common and/or external iliac artery. The incidence of surgical complications was 23% for the SRA and 30% for the MRA group, respectively (n.s.). In detail, there was no difference in the incidence of urinary leakage (SRA: n=7, 4% vs. MRA: n= 2, 6%) as well as bleeding (SRA: n= 5, 1% vs. MRA: n=1, 3%) for both groups. In the SRA group 2 vascular complications occurred. Namely one arterial stenosis and one intima lesion were observed, both requiring surgical revision. No vascular complications were seen in the MRA group. The incidence of lymphoceles was significantly higher in the MRA than in the SRA group (SRA: n=5, 3% vs. MRA: n= 4, 12%; p<0,01). In both groups operative revision for lymphocele was required in 3 patients, respectively. The rate of initial non-function of kidney grafts was 3% for the SRA and 3% for the MRA group. The 1- and 5-year patient survival was 99% and 94% for the SRA and 100% and 100% for the MRA group (n.s.) Corresponding death censored 1- and 5-year graft survival was 97% and 92% for the SRA and 100% and 100% for the MRA group (n.s.) Conclusions: Although MRA have been considered a relative contraindication for living donation kidney transplantation in the past, we implanted succesfully kidneys with MRA using sequential anastomosis technique. Thus, results are comparable to transplantation of kidneys with SRA. The higher incidence of lymphoceles in the MRA group might be related to a more extensive preparation of the iliac arteries to allow sequential anastomosis. However, this did neither lead to reduced patient nor graft survival. We suggest that the presence of MRA should not be considered as a contraindication for living donation. This may help to expand the pool of living kidney donors.