Lithiasis in 1,313 Kidney Transplants: Incidence, Diagnosis, and Management

Background. Renal transplantation remains the optimal treatment of patients with end-stage renal disease. Urinary lithiasis represents an unusual urologic complication in renal transplantation, with an incidence of <1%. Today, recipients of kidneys from deceased donors are more likely to receive grafts with undiagnosed lithiasis, which does not occur in patients from living donors, owing to screening with computerized tomography. Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, diagnosis, and therapeutic management of renal lithiasis in transplanted kidneys at a single institution. Methods. We reviewed the medical records for 1,313 patients who underwent kidney transplantation from February 1968 to February 2011. Results. Among the grafts, 17 patients (1.29%) had nephrolithiasis: 9 women and 8 men. Ages ranged from 32 to 63 years (mean = 45.6 years). Fifteen patients received kidneys from cadaveric and only 2 from living related donors. Two stones, both located inside the ureter, were identified during transplant surgery (11.7%). Three instances of lithiasis were incidentally diagnosed by ultrasound during graft evaluation, within 7 days after surgery (17.6%); all 3 were in the calyces. The 12 remaining patients had the stones diagnosed later (70.58%): 6 in the calyces, 3 in the renal pelvis, and 3 inside the ureter. Conclusions. Urinary lithiasis is a rare complication in renal transplantation. In most patients the condition occurs without pain. The diagnosis and treatment options for graft urolithiasis are similar to those patients with nephrofithiasis in the general population. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was the most common treatment method.

Single Center Experience With Elective Surgical Patients as Living Kidney Donors

Purpose. To report a single center experience with elective surgical patients as living kidney donors. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed a prospective database of 458 living kidney donors from September 2005 to May 2011. Fifteen (3.2%) of them were elective surgical patients simultaneously undergoing living donor nephrectomy. We reviewed age, gender, operative time, intraoperative blood transfusion, intra- and postoperative complications, as well as length of hospital stay. Recipients were evaluated for delayed graft function. Four hundred forty-three patients undergoing living donor nephrectomy alone composed the control group. Results. Among the elective surgical patients group, the mean (range) operative time was 155 (90 to 310) minutes and mean (range) length of hospital stay was 3 (2 to 9) days. One (6.7%) recipient displayed delayed graft function. Among the regular living kidney donors group, the mean (range) operative time was 100 (70 to 150) minutes, mean (range) length of hospital stay was 3 (2 to 5) days, and delayed graft function was observed in 5.6% of recipients. Only operative time (P = .03) was significantly different between the groups. Conclusions. Elective surgical patients are potential donors who may be treated at the same time as the living donor nephrectomy.

Living Invisible: HTLV-1-Infected Persons and the Lack of Care in Public Health

Introduction: Human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) infection is intractable and endemic in many countries. Although a few individuals have severe symptoms, most patients remain asymptomatic throughout their lives and their infections may be unknown to many health professionals. HTLV-1 can be considered a neglected public health problem and there are not many studies specifically on patients' needs and emotional experiences. Objective: To better understand how women and men living with HTLV-1 experience the disease and what issues exist in their healthcare processes. Methods: A qualitative study using participant observation and life story interview methods was conducted with 13 symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, at the outpatient clinic of the Emilio Ribas Infectious Diseases Institute, in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Results and Discussion: The interviewees stated that HTLV-1 is a largely unknown infection to society and health professionals. Counseling is rare, but when it occurs, focuses on the low probability of developing HTLV-1 related diseases without adequately addressing the risk of infection transmission or reproductive decisions. The diagnosis of HTLV-1 can remain a stigmatized secret as patients deny their situations. As a consequence, the disease remains invisible and there are potentially negative implications for patient self-care and the identification of infected relatives. This perception seems to be shared by some health professionals who do not appear to understand the importance of preventing new infections. Conclusions: Patients and medical staff referred that the main focus was the illness risk, but not the identification of infected relatives to prevent new infections. This biomedical model of care makes prevention difficult, contributes to the lack of care in public health for HTLV-1, and further perpetuates the infection among populations. Thus, HTLV-1 patients experience an "invisibility" of their complex demands and feel that their rights as citizens are ignored.