Objective To evaluate the effect of LifePort combined with polymyxin B in preventing donor-derived infections caused by preservation solution contamination. Methods Clinical data of 110 kidney transplant recipients were retrospectively analyzed. According to the decontamination status of preservation solution, the recipients were divided into the decontamination group (n=62) and the non-decontamination group (n=48). The general data of the two groups were compared, and the preventive effect of polymyxin B on possible donor-derived infections (p-DDI) was analyzed, especially infections associated with multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR GNB). Results There were no statistically significant differences in baseline data (gender, age, preservation solution contamination status, etc.) between the decontamination group and the non-decontamination group (all P > 0.05). The overall contamination rate of preservation solution was 80.0%, and 68 contaminated samples were with single microorganism and 20 with multiple microorganisms. Coagulase-negative staphylococci, Enterococcus and Klebsiella pneumoniae were the most common microorganisms in the positive samples. Fifteen cases of preservation solution were contaminated by MDR GNB, including 10 cases in the non-decontamination group and 5 cases in the decontamination group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.053). Postoperative infection-related events occurred in 69 recipients, including 39 cases in the non-decontamination group and 30 cases in the decontamination group, with the incidence rate in the non-decontamination group significantly higher than that in the decontamination group (P < 0.001). Only 10 cases of infections were identified as p-DDI, all of which were positive for preservation solution culture, including 8 cases in the non-decontamination group and 2 cases in the decontamination group (P < 0.05). There were 5 cases of p-DDI related to MDR GNB in the non-decontamination group, while no such cases occurred in the decontamination group (P < 0.05). No adverse reactions related to polymyxin B were observed, and no recipient death or renal allograft dysfunction occurred in either group. Conclusions Adding polymyxin B to the preservation fluid during hypothermic machine perfusion with LifePort before renal transplantation may reduce p-DDI and its potential adverse consequences.

Objective To compare the safety and efficacy between flexible ureteroscope lithtripsy (FURL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in treating the renal calculus.Methods From Jan.2012 to Oct.2013,120 male and 87 female patients with renal calculus were accepted FURL (n =108)or PCNL (n=99) in our hospital.In FURL group,108 cases were classified according to the diameter of the stone,including 33 patients with the diameter of renal stone more than 20mm (range 20-39 mm,mean 29.2±5.6 mm)and 75 patients with the diameter of renal stone less than 20 mm (range 13-19 mm,mean 16.8± 1.3 mm).In PCNL group,99 cases were also classified according to the diameter of the stone,including 51 patients with the diameter of renal stone more than 20 mm (range 20-45 mm,mean 30.4±6.6 mm)and 48 patients with the diameter of renal stone less than 20 mm (range 14-19 mm,mean 17.2±1.4mm).There were no significant differences between the groups FURL and PCNL in the stone size(P＞0.05).Demographic data,operative duration,postoperative hospital stay,complication rate,and stone-free rate were recorded and compared.Results The overall stone free rate in group FURL was significantly lower 80.6％ (87/108) than that in group PCNL 91.9％ (91/99) (P＜0.05).In those patients with the diameter of stones less than 20 mm,the stone free rate was 88.0％ (66/75) in group FURL vs 93.8％ (45/48) in group PCNL (P＞0.05).The operative time was 30-65 (mean 49.5±6.9) min and 30-65 (mean 46.9±7.2) min in FURL and PCNL group,respectively (P＞0.05).In those patients with the diameter of stones more than 20 mm,the stone free rate was 63.6％ (21/33) in group FURL,which was lower than that in group PCNL 90.2％ (46/51) (P＜0.05).The operative time was 60-115 min (85.0±16.3) min and 30-95 min (68.3± 16.7) min in FURL and PCNL group,respectively (P＜0.05).The overall complication rate was significantly lower in group FURL 2.8％ (3/108) compared to group PCNL 8.1％ (8/99) (P＜0.05).Postoperative hospitalization stay were 2-6 d (3.5±1.4) d and 3-9 d (5.8±1.9) d in FURL and PCNL group,respectively (P＜0.05).Conclusions Both PCNL and FURS are efficacy and safe surgical alteration for patients with renal calculus.As to the FURS,its merits were faster recovery,less invasiveness than those in PCNL.Therefore,it can be considered as the first-line treatment for renal calculus ＜20 mm.However,for renal calculus ≥20 mm stones,FURS is still effective.