No abstract

No abstract

Fluid collections following renal transplantation are not rare and may be associated with serious complications. We studied the incidence, clinical features, pathology and treatment outcome of perirenal fluid collections after kidney transplantation. Between January 1977 and June 1985, 386 consecutive renal transplants were performed at our university. All allografts were studied with B-mode ultrasonography together with a renal scan in the immediate post-transplant period, at 6-month intervals or when clinically indicated. Symptomatic fluid collections, those associated with rejection episodes and those containing more than 50 to 100 ml. fluid were aspirated under sonographic control via aseptic techniques. There were 190 fluid collections (49 per cent) observed during followup (2 to 11 years). Of these collections 98 (51 per cent) were estimated to be less than 50 ml. in volume, were clinically insignificant and resulted in no morbidity. A total of 92 collections was aspirated with 1 aspiration being diagnostic and therapeutic in 57 instances (serous or serosanguinous fluid). The 35 collections remaining were revealed to be lymphoceles on biochemical grounds. Of 13 lymphoceles associated with rejection episodes 8 resolved on initial aspiration. Of the recurrent lymph collections 27 were treated with repeated aspiration, tetracycline sclerotherapy or an operation (10 were treated with marsupialization into the peritoneal cavity). No large collections of urine or blood were detected and 1 infected lymphocele required external drainage. No renal allograft was lost as a result of a fluid collection and over-all graft survival was not affected by the development of perirenal fluid collections. We conclude that perirenal fluid collections are detected commonly in the post-transplant period using B-mode ultrasonography. The majority of these collections are small and will require careful observation only or they will resolve with a single aspiration. Aggressive diagnostic and therapeutic measures are used only for those collections that are symptomatic or result in allograft dysfunction. A rational approach to the diagnosis and treatment of peritransplant fluid collections is described in the form of an algorithm.

Prostaglandins of the E series have been shown to have immunosuppressive properties. To study the effects of the prostaglandin E1 analogue misoprostol on renal function and graft rejection after transplantation, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 77 renal-allograft recipients. The subjects received misoprostol (200 micrograms four times daily by mouth; n = 38) or placebo (n = 39) for the first 12 weeks after transplantation, in addition to standard immunosuppression with cyclosporine and prednisone. They were then observed for an additional four weeks after the drug or placebo was discontinued. Treatment with misoprostol was associated with a significant improvement in renal function as judged by the mean (+/- SEM) serum creatinine concentration (128 +/- 7 vs. 158 +/- 11 mumol per liter after 12 weeks; P = 0.03) and creatinine clearance (84 +/- 6 vs. 69 +/- 5 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area; P = 0.05). There was a significant reduction in the incidence of acute rejection in the group treated with misoprostol as compared with the placebo group (10 of 38 vs. 20 of 39; P = 0.02), and there was less need for rehospitalization after transplantation (4 +/- 1 days with misoprostol vs. 10 +/- 2 days for placebo; P = 0.03). Although blood levels of cyclosporine did not differ significantly between the groups, they tended to be higher in the misoprostol group, as did the incidence of acute nephrotoxicity due to cyclosporine (13 of 38 vs. 8 of 39). Infectious complications tended to be fewer in the misoprostol-treated group (14 of 38 vs. 21 of 39). We conclude that misoprostol improves renal function and safely reduces the incidence of acute rejection in renal-transplant recipients treated concurrently with cyclosporine and prednisone.