Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mieghem, A. V.
Right arrow Articles by Pirson, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mieghem, A. V.
Right arrow Articles by Pirson, Y.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant (2001) 16: 1686-1691
© 2001 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association

Outcome of cadaver kidney transplantation in 23 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Ann Van Mieghem1, Catherine Fonck1, Willy Coosemans5, Bernard Vandeleene2, Yves Vanrenterghem4, Jean-Paul Squifflet3 and Yves Pirson1,

Departments of 1Nephrology, 2Endocrinology and 3Kidney transplantation, Cliniques Universitaires St-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCL), Bruxelles, and Departments of 4Nephrology and 5Abdominal Transplantation Surgery, Universitair Ziekenhuis Gasthuisberg, Katholieke Universiteit van Leuven (KUL), Leuven, Belgium

Background. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is a growing cause of end-stage renal failure worldwide. Yet, only a minority of type 2 diabetics are considered today for kidney transplantation (KT). The scarcity of data on the outcome of such patients after KT prompted us to review our experience.

Methods. Between 1 January 1983 and 30 June 1996, 23 patients with type 2 DM received a first cadaver KT at a mean age of 57±9 (41–73) years, after a dialysis period ranging from 5 to 72 (mean 25±18) months. Only nine patients had a history of coronary and/or peripheral vascular disease before KT. All were given cyclosporin- or tacrolimus-based immunosuppression. Post-KT follow-up ranged from 4 to 181 (mean 70±38) months. Outcome analysis focused on the impact of cardiovascular complications.

Results. Patient survival at 1, 5 and 8 years was 91, 83 and 76% respectively. Death was due to infection in three patients and to a cardiovascular event in two. The actuarial risk of coronary, cerebrovascular, peripheral vascular, and any cardiovascular event after KT was 14, 13, 9 and 30% at 1 year, 20, 13, 50 and 58% at 5 years, and 20, 46, 66 and 72% at 8 years respectively. Post-KT hospital readmissions averaged 10 days/patient-year and were mostly related to the management of peripheral vascular disease.

Conclusion. KT is an excellent therapeutic option for selected patients with type 2 DM. Peripheral vascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity following KT. KT should be considered in type 2 diabetics with a low/medium cardiovascular risk.

Keywords: coronary artery disease; kidney transplantation; type 2 diabetes mellitus; vascular complications

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Yves Pirson MD, Cliniques Universitaires St-Luc, Department of Nephrology, av. Hippocrate 10, B-1200 Bruxelles, Belgium.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
R. Schiel, S. Heinrich, T. Steiner, U. Ott, and G. Stein
Long-term prognosis of patients after kidney transplantation: a comparison of those with or without diabetes mellitus
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., March 1, 2005; 20(3): 611 - 617.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
P. Boucek, F. Saudek, E. Pokorna, S. Vitko, M. Adamec, R. Koznarova, and V. Lanska
Kidney transplantation in type 2 diabetic patients: a comparison with matched non-diabetic subjects
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., September 1, 2002; 17(9): 1678 - 1683.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.