title: Portal venous and enteric exocrine drainage versus systemic venous and bladder exocrine drainage of pancreas grafts: clinical outcome of 40 consecutive transplant recipients.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To test the hypothesis that pancreas transplantation using the more physiologic method of portal venous-enteric (PE) drainage could be performed without compromising patient and graft outcome, compared with the standard method of systemic venous-bladder (SB) drainage.
  
  
  METHODS
  Between November 1995 and November 1998, the authors prospectively followed up 20 consecutive patients with SB drainage followed by 20 consecutive patients with PE drainage. All patients underwent simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation, and all were immunosuppressed with antilymphocyte serum, cyclosporin, azathioprine, and steroids.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The actuarial patient survival rate at 1 year was 95% in the SB group and 100% in the PE group. Death-censored kidney graft survival was 100% in both groups; pancreas graft survival was 95% in the SB group and 100% in the PE group. The mean initial hospital stay was 15 days for both groups. However, during the first 6 months after transplantation, the SB group required more medical day-unit visits, mostly for treatment of metabolic acidosis and dehydration. The incidence of urinary tract infections was similar in both groups. The incidence of cytomegalovirus infections was significantly less in the PE group. The incidence of acute rejection was 37% in the SB group and 15% in the PE group. Mean serum creatinine levels 6 months after transplantation were significantly lower in the PE group than in the SB group. Glycemic control was excellent in both groups, but fasting serum insulin levels were significantly lower in the PE group.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The PE method of pancreas transplantation can be performed with excellent patient and graft outcomes.
authors.affiliation: Multiorgan Transplantation Program, The Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, and the Departments of Surgery and Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. mcattral@email.msn.com
authors.forename: M S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Cattral
authors.forename: D L
authors.initials: DL
authors.lastname: Bigam
authors.forename: A W
authors.initials: AW
authors.lastname: Hemming
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Carpentier
authors.forename: P D
authors.initials: PD
authors.lastname: Greig
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Wright
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Cole
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Donat
authors.forename: G F
authors.initials: GF
authors.lastname: Lewis
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D002648:Child; D003920:Diabetes Mellitus / Q000601:surgery; D005260:Female; D006084:Graft Rejection; D006085:Graft Survival; D006801:Humans; D007165:Immunosuppression Therapy / Q000379:methods; D016030:Kidney Transplantation; D007902:Length of Stay; D008297:Male; D016035:Pancreas Transplantation / Q000379:methods*; D011169:Portal Vein / Q000502:physiology*; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D011446:Prospective Studies; D015996:Survival Rate; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D001743:Urinary Bladder / Q000601:surgery