Abstract
Purpose
The feasibility of pancreas transplantation (PT) in older recipients remains a matter of debate. We examined the influence of recipient age on PT outcomes and identified the prognostic factors for older recipients.
Methods
We compared the outcomes of PT in recipients aged < 50 years (younger group; n = 285) with those in recipients aged ≥ 50 years (older group; n = 94). Prognostic factors in the older group were analyzed by a logistic regression model and the influence of recipient age on survival outcomes were analyzed using propensity score matching.
Results
The patient survival rate was significantly worse in the older group (P < 0.001). Patient death from infection or/and multiple organ failure or cardiac/cerebrovascular events was also more frequent in the older group than in the younger group (P = 0.012 and P = 0.045, respectively). A longer duration of diabetes was an independent risk factor of 1-year mortality in the older group. In a propensity score-matched comparison, the older recipients (n = 77) had significantly poorer survival than the younger recipients (n = 77) (P = 0.026).
Conclusions
PT should be considered with appropriate caution, especially for older recipients with a long duration of diabetes.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- BMI:
-
Body mass index
- DBD:
-
Donation after brain death
- CIT:
-
Cold ischemia time
- CPR:
-
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation
- DCD:
-
Donation cardiac death
- HR:
-
Hazard ratio
- OR:
-
Odds ratio
- PAK:
-
Pancreas after kidney
- PT:
-
Pancreas transplantation
- PTA:
-
Pancreas transplant alone
- ROC:
-
Receiver operating characteristic
- SPK:
-
Pancreas and kidney transplantation
References
Gruessner RW, Sutherland DE, Gruessner AC. Mortality assessment for pancreas transplants. Am J Transplant. 2004;4:2018–26.
Sutherland DE, Gruessner RW, Dunn DL, Matas AJ, Humar A, Kandaswamy R, et al. Lessons learned from more than 1000 pancreas transplants at a single institution. Ann Surg. 2001;233:463–501.
Gruessner AC, Gruessner RW. Long-term outcome after pancreas transplantation: a registry analysis. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2016;21:377–85.
Ollonger R, Margreiter C, Bosmuller C, Weissenbacher A, Frank F, Schneeberger S, et al. Evolution of pancreas transplantation: long-term results and perspectives from a high-volume center. Ann Surg. 2012;256:780–6.
Manske CL, Wang Y, Thomas W. Mortality of cadaveric kidney transplantation versus combined kidney-pancreas transplantation in diabetic patients. Lancet. 1995;346:1658–62.
Troppmann C, Gruessener AC, Dunn DL, Sutherland DE, Gruessner RW. Surgical complications requiring early relaparotomy after pancreas transplantation. A multivariate risk factor and economic impact analysis of the cyclosporine era. Ann Surg. 1998;227:255–68.
Viebahn R, Klein H, Kraemer B, Schenker P. Is pancreas transplantation getting old? Single-center experience in an aging society. Clin Transpl. 2009;165–9.
Gruessner AC, Gruessner RW. Reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and the International Pancreas Transplant Registry (IPTR). Rev Diabet Stud. 2016;13:35–58.
Kandaswamy R, Stock PG, Skeans MA, Gustafson SK, Sleeman EF, Wainright JL, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2011 annual data report: pancreas. Am J Transplant. 2013;13(Suppl. 1):47–72.
Schenker P, Vonend O, Kruger B, Klein T, Michalski S, Wunsch A, et al. Long-term results of pancreas transplantation in patients older than 50 years. Transpl Int. 2011;24:136–42.
Scalea JR, Redfield RR, Arpali E, Leverson G, Sollinger HW, Kaufman DB, et al. Pancreas transplantation in older patients is safe, but patient selection is paramount. Transpl Int. 2016;29:810–8.
Mittal S, Smilevska R, Franklin R, Hammer C, Knight S, Vrakas G, et al. An analysis of the association between older recipient age and outcomes after whole-organ pancreas transplantation—a single-organ retrospective study. Transpl Int. 2020;33:529–35.
Ito T, Kenmochi T, Aida N, Kurihara K, Asaoka T, Ito T. Are the outcomes of Japanese pancreas transplantation utilizing extended-criteria donors acceptable? A propensity score matching analysis for donors <50 or ≥50 years old. Transpl Int. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/tri.13636.
Sasaki K, Shindoh J, Nishioka Y, Sugawara T, Margonis GA, Andreatos N, et al. Postoperative low hepatitis C virus load predicts long-term outcomes after hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Surg Oncol. 2018;117:902–11.
Matsushima H, Sasaki K, Fujiki M, Uso TD, Aucejo F, Kwon CHD, et al. Too much, too little, or just right? The importance of allograft portal flow in deceased donor liver transplantation. Transplantation. 2020;104:770–8.
Asaoka T, Ito T, Kenmochi T. The Japan Society for pancreas and islet transplantation. The registry of Japaneses pancreas and islet transplantation 2018. Ishoku. 2018;53:139–47.
Soyama A, Eguchi S. The current status and future perspectives of organ donation in Japan: learning from the systems in other countries. Surg Today. 2016;46:387–92.
Ablorsu E, Ghazanfar A, Mehra S, Campbell B, Riad H, Pararajasingam R, et al. Outcome of pancreas transplantation in recipients older than 50 years: a single-centre experience. Transplantation. 2008;86:1511–4.
Siskind E, Maloney C, Akerman M, Alex A, Ashburn S, Barlow M, et al. An analysis of pancreas transplantation outcomes based on age groupings—an update of the UNOS database. Clin Transplant. 2014;28:990–4.
Montagud-Marrahi E, Molina-Andujar A, Pane A, Ramirez-Bajo MJ, Amor A, Esmatjes E, et al. Outcomes of pancreas transplantation in older diabetic patients. BMJ Open Diab Res Care. 2020;8:e000916.
Fox CS, Sullivan L, D’Agostino RB Sr, Wilson PW, Framingham Heart Study. The significant effect of diabetes duration on coronary heart disease mortality: the Framingham Heart Study. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:704–8.
Reis JP, Allen NB, Bancks MP, Carr JJ, Lewis CE, Lima JA, et al. Duration of diabetes and prediabetes during adulthood and subclinical atherosclerosis and cardiac dysfunction in middle age: the CARDIA study. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:731–8.
Nakamura J, Kamiya H, Haneda M, Inagaki N, Tanizawa Y, Araki E, et al. Causes of death in Japanese Patients with diabetes based on the results of survey of 45,708 cases during 2001–2010: report of the committee on causes of death in diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Investig. 2017;8:397–410.
Ekser B, Mangus RS, Powelson JA, Goble ML, Mujtaba MA, Taber TE, et al. Impact of duration of diabetes on outcome following pancreas transplantation. Int J Surg. 2015;18:21–7.
Rohan VS, McGillicuddy JW, Taber DJ, Nadig SN, Baliga PK, Bratton CF. Long-standing diabetes mellitus and pancreas transplantation: an avenue to increase utilization of an ideal treatment modality. Clin Transplant. 2019;33:e13695.
Bilbao I, Dopazo C, Lazaro JL, Castells L, Escartin A, Lopez I, et al. Our experience in liver transplantation in patients over 65 year of age. Clin Transplant. 2008;22:82–8.
Ikegami T, Bekki Y, Imai D, Yoshizumi T, Ninomiya M, Hayashi H, et al. Clinical outcomes of living donor liver transplantation for patients 65 years old or older with preserved performance status. Liver Transpl. 2014;20:408–15.
Knoll GA. Kidney transplantation in the older adult. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013;61:790.
Tullis SG, Milford E. Kidney allocation and the aging immune response. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1369–70.
Laurence JM, Marquez MA, Seal JB, Sapisochin G, Bazerbachi F, Selzner M, et al. The effect of recipient age on outcome after pancreas transplantation. Transplantation. 2015;99:e13.
Rosenberg AS, Sechler JM, Horvath JA, Maniero TG, Bloom ET. Assessment of alloreactive T cell subpopulations of aged mice in vivo. CD4+ but not CD8+ Tcell-mediated rejection response declines with advanced age. Eur J Immunol. 1994;24:1312–6.
Naylor K, Li G, Vallejo AN, Lee WW, Koetz K, Bryl E, et al. The influence of age on T cell generation and TCR diversity. J Immunol. 2005;174:7446–52.
Acknowledgements
We thank Dr. Masaaki Watanabe and Dr. Yasuyuki Koshizuka (Hokkaido University Hospital), Dr Shigehito Miyagi and Dr. Kazuaki Tokodai (Tohoku University Hospital), Dr. Takuro Saito and Dr. Akira Kenjo (Fukushima Medical University Hospital), Dr. Keiichi Kubota and Dr. Masato Kato (Dokkyo Medical University Hospital), Dr. Ichiro Nakajima and Dr. Ichiro Koyama (Tokyo Women’s Medical University Hospital), Dr. Shigeyuki Kawachi and Dr. Hitoshi Iwamoto (Tokyo Medical University Hachioji Medical Center), Dr. Michihiro Maruyama and Dr. Kazunori Otsuki (National Chiba-Higashi Hospital), Dr. Toshifumi Wakai and Dr. Takashi Kobayashi (Niigata University Hospital), Dr. Shunji Narumi and Dr. Takahisa Hiramitsu (Nagoya Daini-Red Cross Hospital), Dr. Hidetaka Ushigome and Dr. Shuji Nobori (Kyoto Prefectural University Hospital), Dr. Hideaki Okajima and Dr. Takayuki Anazawa (Kyoto University Hospital), Dr. Hidetoshi Eguchi and Dr. Yoshito Tomimaru (Osaka University Hospital), Dr. Hirochika Toyama and Dr. Sachio Terai (Kobe University Hospital), Dr. Hideki Ohdan and Dr. Hiroyuki Tahara (Hiroshma University Hospital), Dr. Keiichi Okano and Dr. Minoru Oshima (Kagawa University Hospital), Shinichiro Ono and Tomohiko Adachi (Nagasaki University Hospital) and Dr. Keizo Kaku and Dr. Yasuhiro Okabe (Kyushu University Hospital) for their cooperation with the registry of Japanese Pancreas Transplantation.
Funding
No funding was received for this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
HM, TK, IT, and NA conceptualized the idea and design of the study. HM, TK, IT, NA, KK, YT, and TI participated in data collection, analysis, and interpretation. HM, and IT wrote the article. HM, TK, IT, and NA, revised the article. All authors approved the final draft.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
We have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Matsushima, H., Ito, T., Aida, N. et al. Outcomes of pancreas transplantation in older versus younger recipients: a comparative analysis. Surg Today 51, 1655–1664 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-021-02284-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-021-02284-8