The evaluation of immunosuppressive regimens in kidney transplant Mongolian  recipients

Sarantsetseg J; Byambadorj B; Byambadash B; Munkhjargal B; Tumurbaatar B; Jambaljav L; Bayan-undur D; Ganbold L; Chuluunbaatar D; Oyunbileg B; Batbaatar G; Munkhbat B; Nyamsuren D

Return

The evaluation of immunosuppressive regimens in kidney transplant Mongolian recipients

VernacularTitle:Бөөр шилжүүлэн суулгуулсан Монгол хүмүүсийн дархлаа дарангуйлах эмчилгээнд хийсэн судалгаа
Author: Sarantsetseg J ¹ ; Byambadorj B ¹ ; Byambadash B ¹ ; Munkhjargal B ¹ ; Tumurbaatar B ¹ ; Jambaljav L ¹ ; Bayan-Undur D ¹ ; Ganbold L ¹ ; Chuluunbaatar D ¹ ; Oyunbileg B ¹ ; Batbaatar G ² ; Munkhbat B ² ; Nyamsuren D ¹
Author Information

1. The First Central Hospital of Mongolia, Kidney transplantation team
2. Mongolian National University of Medical Sciences
Publication Type:Journal Article
Keywords: kidney transplantation; immunosuppressive regimens
From: Health Laboratory 2019;9(1):21-27
CountryMongolia
Language:Mongolian
Abstract: Background:However kidney transplantation has being performed in Mongolia since 2006, because of pre-transplant sensitization, ABO incompatibility, hepatitis B and C virus activation many patients are taken kidney transplantation in abroad. The transplantation centers use own immunosuppressive regimens.
Objective:Our aim was to assess the immunosuppressive regimens efficacy and toxicity in kidney transplant Mongolian recipients.
Methods:We analyzed data from 96 adult kidney transplant recipients who had taken kidney transplantation in different transplant centers from August 2006 through January 2014. There were 3 kinds of regimens Group I Simulect induction with standard triple /FK506/CyA+MMF/AZA+steroid/, Group II Campath-1H induction with CNI monotherapy and Group III Campath-1H induction with standard triple /FK506/CyA+MMF/AZA+steroid/. We retrospectively collected the post-transplant first two years serum creatinine. The study was performed in 2014. The questionnaire was taken and blood samples collected for determination of tacrolimus through level and for other laboratory tests. The primary end point was the first two years serum creatinine, the secondary end points included rejection episodes, blood through level of tacrolimus and some laboratory findings.
Results:The post-transplant first two years serum creatinine levels were significantly different in 3 groups. Group III showed similar results compared to Group I. There was not enough data of biopsy proven acute rejection episodes however group II said more rejections occurred. However participants said that rejection occurred in 15 (15.6%) biopsy was done only 3 (3.1%) cases. Blood through level of tacrolimus was significantly different in three groups. Some laboratory findings showed different between three groups.
Conclusions:A regimen of Campath-1H induction with CNI monotherapy (Group II) may be advantageous for short-term renal function and cost effective but there were more rejection complications and increased creatinine. The regimen of Campath-1H induction 11 with standard triple (Group III) may be advantageous for long-term renal function, allograft survival, but there should consider about infection complications and polycythemia. Simulect induction with standard triple could be best choice but transplantations were performed in experienced centers. The study enrolled few cases and cases which were performed at the beginning of transplant program so many things could influence on the result. The study was compared beginner transplant center with experienced centers. Longitudinal cohort study needed in the future.
Full text:HL-2019-9(1)-21-27.pdf