Post-renal transplant surgical complications with newer immunosuppressive drugs: Mycophenolate mofetil vs. m-TOR inhibitors

International Urology and Nephrology

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 279-284

  Srivastava, Aneesh ^a   Muruganandham, K ^a   Vinodh, P B ^a   Singh, Pratipal ^a   Dubey, Deepak ^a   Kapoor, Rakesh ^a   Kumar, Anant ^a   Sharma, Raj Kumar ^a   Prasad, Narayan ^a  

^a SANJAY GANDHI POSTGRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (India)

Author keywords

Immunosuppressive drugs; Surgical complications

Indexed keywords

CYCLOSPORIN A; EVEROLIMUS; INTERLEUKIN 2 RECEPTOR ANTIBODY; MAMMALIAN TARGET OF RAPAMYCIN INHIBITOR; METHYLPREDNISOLONE; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID 2 MORPHOLINOETHYL ESTER; PREDNISOLONE; RAPAMYCIN; THYMOCYTE ANTIBODY;

ACUTE GRAFT VERSUS HOST DISEASE; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG SUBSTITUTION; DRUG WITHDRAWAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GRAFT RECIPIENT; GRAFT VERSUS HOST REACTION; HEMATURIA; HUMAN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; INCIDENCE; KIDNEY GRAFT; KIDNEY GRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LENGTH OF STAY; LUNG INFECTION; LYMPHOCELE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; SURGICAL DRAINAGE; TREATMENT RESPONSE; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; URINE INCONTINENCE; WOUND DEHISCENCE; WOUND DRESSING; WOUND INFECTION;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; INCIDENCE; INTRACELLULAR SIGNALING PEPTIDES AND PROTEINS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROTEIN-SERINE-THREONINE KINASES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77956225968     PISSN: 03011623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11255-009-9601-6     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. European Mycophenolate Mofetil Cooperative Study Group (1999) Mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplantation: 3-year results from the placebo-controlled trial. Transplantation 68:391-396. doi:10.1097/00007890-19990 8150-100011
2. Flechner SM, Goldfarb D, Modlin C, Feng J, Krishnamurthi V, MastroianniBet al (2002) Kidney transplantation without calcineurin inhibitor drugs: a prospective, randomized trial of sirolimus versus cyclosporine. Transplantation 74:1070. doi:10.1097/00007890-200210270-00002
3. Nashan B (2001) The role of Certican™ (everolimus, RAD) in the many pathways of chronic rejection. Transpl Proc 33:3215-3220. doi:10.1016/S0041- 1345(01)02369-7
4. Humar A, Ramcharan T, Denny R, Gillingham KJ, Payne WD, Matas AJ (2001) Are wound complications after a kidney transplant more common with modern immunosuppression? Transplantation 72:1920. doi:10.1097/00007890-200112270-00009
5. Flechner SM, Zhou L, Derweesh I, Mastroianni B, Savas K, Goldfarb D et al (2003) The impact of sirolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclosporine, azathioprine, and steroids on wound healing in 513 kidney-transplant recipients. Transplantation 76:1729. doi:10.1097/01.TP.0000093502.26208.42
6. Allison AC, Eugui EM (1996) Purine metabolism and immunosuppressive effects of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). Clin Transpl 10(1 Pt 2):77-84
7. Halloran PF (2000) Sirolimus and cyclosporin for renal transplantation. Lancet 356:179-180. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02473-9
8. Akselband Y, Harding MW, Nelson PA (1991) Rapamycin inhibits spontaneous and fibroblast growth factor betastimulated proliferation of endothelial cells and fibroblasts. Transpl Proc 23:2833-2836
9. Hariharan S, Johnson CP, Bresnahan BA, Taranto SE, McIntosh MJ, Stablein D (2000) Improved graft survival after renal transplantation in the United States, 1988 to 1996. N Engl J Med 342:605. doi:10.1056/NEJM200003 023420901
10. Valente JF, Hricik D, Weigel K, Seaman D, Knauss T, Siegel CT et al (2003) Comparison of sirolimus vs. mycophenolate mofetil on surgical complications and wound healing in adult kidney transplantation. Am J Transpl 3: 1128. doi:10.1034/j.1600-6143.2003.00185.x
11. Dean P, Lund WJ, Larson TS et al (2004) Wound healing complications after kidney transplantation: a prospective, randomized comparison of Sirolimus and tacrolimus. Transplantation 77:1555. doi:10.1097/01.TP.0000123082. 31092.53
12. Troppmann C, Pierce JL, Gandhi MM et al (2003) Higher surgical complication rates with Sirolimus immunosuppression after kidney transplantation: a matched pair pilot study. Transplantation 76:426. doi:10.1097/01.TP.000007 2016.13090.4E
13. Burgos FJ, Pascual J, Quicios C, Marcen R, Fernández A, López Fando L et al (2006) Post-Kidney transplant surgical complications under new immunosuppressive regimens. Transplant Proc 38:2445-2447. doi:10.1016/j.transproceed. 2006.08.192
14. Humar R,Kiefer FN, Berns H, Resink TJ, Battegay EJ (2002) Hypoxia enhances vascular cell proliferation and angiogenesis in vitro via rapamycin (mTOR)-dependent signaling. FASEB J 16:771-780. doi:10.1096/fj.01-0658com
15. Schuler W, Sedrani R, Cottens S et al (1997) SDZ RAD, a new rapamycin derivative. Pharmacologic properties in vitro and in vivo. Transplantation 64:36-42. doi:10.1097/ 00007890-199707150-199800008
16. Goel M, Flechner S, Zhou L et al (2004) The influence of various maintenance immunosuppressive drugs on lymphocele formation and treatment after kidney transplantation. J Urol 17:1788. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000121441.76 094.6f
17. Tiong HY, Flechner SM, Zhou L, Wee A, Mastroianni B, Savas K, Goldfarb D, Derweesh I, Modlin C (2009) A systematic approach to minimizing wound problems for de novo sirolimus-treated kidney transplant recipients. Transplantation 27;87(2):296-302