Pancreas preservation with the University of Wisconsin versus Celsior solutions.

INTRODUCTION

The use of Celsior solution for organ preservation has not been thoroughly studied in pancreas transplantation. The aim of this study was to compare University of Wisconsin and Celsior solutions for preservation of pancreas grafts.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From March 1995 to December 2005, 72 patients with type 1 diabetes underwent pancreas transplantation. There were 42 men and 30 women, with a mean age at transplantation of 38.1 +/- 7.5 years (range: 27 to 55 years), and a mean duration of diabetes of 22.5 +/- 6.6 years. Recipients were classified into two groups according to the preservation solution: (A) Celsior (n = 28, 38.9%) and (B) Wisconsin (n = 44, 61.1%).

RESULTS

The donor and recipient characteristics were similar in both groups. There were five cases of venous thrombosis in the Wisconsin group and two in the Celsior group (P = NS). The venous drainage technique in the former group was portocaval in 19 patients and portoiliac in 25; in the Celsior group, portocaval in 23 patients and portoiliac in five (P = .001). Enteric drainage was used in 19 patients from the Celsior group and 17 patients from the Wisconsin group (P = .01). Actuarial 2-year graft survival was 74.6% in the Wisconsin group and 77.4% in the Celsior group (P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were observed in venous thrombosis between the two groups. The lower rate of venous thrombosis with the portocaval technique was related to the type of venous drainage rather than the type of preservation solution. Celsior solution may be considered as good as Wisconsin solution for pancreas transplantation.