Cardiac transplantation in patients over 60 years of age

Cardiac transplant programs have routinely excluded patients over 55 years of age from consideration as transplant candidates. The Texas Heart Institute modified this policy of using age as a contraindication to transplantation. Between July, 1982, and August, 1987, a total of 200 cardiac transplants were performed, 28 (14%) of which were in patients over 60 years of age, the eldest being 66 years old at the time of transplant. Our immunosuppressive regimen consisted primarily of cyclosporine and prednisone. In 1985, azathioprine was added in an effort to decrease dosages of cyclosporine, thereby decreasing its associated nephrotoxicity. The incidences of rejection and infection were 1.2 and 1.4 episodes/patient, respectively, for those over 60 years of age versus 1.7 and 1.3 episodes/patient, respectively, for those less than 60 years of age. Of the 28 patients, 23 are alive and well. Four deaths were caused by infection, and the other by diffuse coronary arteritis. The one-year actuarial survival for patients over 60 years of age was 83%, compared with 75% for the other transplant patients. We conclude that persons over 60 years of age can undergo cardiac transplantation with results equal to or perhaps better than those of other heart transplant patients. Our experience suggests that advanced age should not be considered a major contraindication to cardiac transplantation.     

Liver transplantation in patients over 60 years of age

Abstract Liver transplantation was previously only offered to patients under 60 years of age. We have analyzed the outcome after acceptance on the waiting list and after liver transplantation of patients over 60 years old. A total of 150 patients over 60 years old were listed for a first liver transplantation during 1990‐1998. The annual number increased throughout the period. Primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and acute hepatic failure were the most frequent diagnoses. A total of 119 patients received a first liver allograft. The patient 1‐year survival was 75 % and 3‐year survival 62%, which was not significantly lower (P = 0.21) than that of the younger patients. When correcting for year of transplantation, the survival was, however, moderately but significantly lower than among the younger patients. Survival among those > 65 years (n = 38) did not differ from that of patients 60‐65 years of age (n = 81). We conclude that an increasing number of patients over 60 years old can be listed for liver transplantation and receive a liver allograft with highly satisfying results.     

Results of kidney transplantation in patients over 60 years of age]

In the same measure as the age of population is growing, the importance of the problems rising by the renal transplantation in elder persons is increasing. At the University Hospital of Zurich 1313 kidney transplantations were performed between 1964 and 1990, 44 of them to patients who at the moment of operation were older than 60 years of age. The actuarial patient survival after 3 months reached 81%, after 1 year 74% and after 5 years 42%. The actuarial allograft survival after 3 months was 75%, after 1 year 67%, after 5 years 40%. The mortality was 131 per 1000, the mortality ratio compared to a standard population 6 times higher. The main causes of death were infections (52%) and cardiovascular diseases (28%). These results explain our opinion, that renal transplantation in elder patients should be indicated retentively.     

Quality of life in renal transplant patients over 60 years of age

Kidney transplantation not only drastically improves the life-expectancy of hemodialyzed patients, but it also affords psychological and social advantages with improvements in short- and long-term personal and working lives. Quality of life (QoL) is one of the parameters of psychological well-being. There is an improvement of QoL from pre- to posttransplant, but it is not to the level of healthy samples. The aim of this study was to examine QoL in older renal transplant recipients. All recipients older than age 60 were included, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. To measure QoL, the nationally standardized ShortForm-36 (SF-36) questionnaire was administered. The SF-36 responses by our patients were compared with national age- and gender-appropriate norms, and also between genders. The enrolled population included 19 women (36.5%) and 33 men (63.5%), with a mean age of 66.8 years (range, 60-73 years). Enrolled women reported significant limitations compared to gender- and age-matched norms in social activities (42.11 vs 70.58), perception of pain (22.11 vs 59.17), and general health perception (39.58 vs 48.69). Enrolled men reported significant limitations compared to gender- and age-matched norms in social activities (46.59 vs 78.35), perception of pain (18.18 vs 73.62), psycho-physical energy (50.15 vs 67.88), and general health perception (37.33 vs 61.66). No significant differences were noted between the genders. This study clearly showed how the psychological state was not as good as the clinico-physical recovery following renal transplantation in older recipients.     

Incidence of knee arthroscopy in patients over 60 years of age in Scotland

Arthroscopy has been utilised in the management of knee osteoarthritis for over 70 years but in recent years there has been growing debate about the efficacy of such treatment. We reviewed data from a national register, the Scottish Arthroplasty Project. We analysed 8897 knee arthroscopies performed in patients aged over 60 in Scotland between 1997 and 2006. Marked regional differences were noted for the rate of arthroscopy, with an upper rate of 230 arthroscopies per 100,000 age corrected population and a low of 80 per 100,000. No apparent reasons could be identified for this disparity. Regions with the highest rate of arthroscopy also had the highest rate of conversion to knee arthroplasty within 2 years, indicating a high level of ineffective and inappropriate arthroscopic surgery being performed in many areas of Scotland.     

Hypertonic lactated saline resuscitation of severely burned patients over 60 years of age

Twenty-six adults more than 60 years old with burns greater than or equal to 30% of the body surface area were resuscitated using hypertonic lactated saline (HLS). Hemodynamic parameters of resuscitation were measured in ten of the patients using a Swan-Ganz catheter. In spite of signs of hemodynamic stability, these patients demonstrated mean cardiac indices (CI) below their age-corrected norms and pulmonary capillary wedge pressures (PCWP) below 5 mm Hg through 24 hours, yet 92% of the patients produced normal or super-normal volumes of urine. Hemodynamic monitoring may be helpful for precise fluid replacement in extensively burned elderly patients; however, a normal CI and PCWP may not be the appropriate endpoint for resuscitation of the elderly when using HLS. This review supports the concept that HLS resuscitation of critically burned older patients is both safe and efficacious, leading to an 81% survival of this severely compromised group well past the resuscitation phase of injury.     

Renal transplantation in patients over 60 years of age: a single-center experience

The prevalence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) increases with advancing age. In most countries renal transplant recipients are getting older, too. Transplantation must be considered for ESRD patients older than 60 years; however, there are few data regarding outcomes in this population. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of recipients aged > or =60 years (n = 43) who underwent primary or repeated grafts from August 1988 to December 2004. We then compared recipient and donor characteristics as well as graft and patient survivals with recipients aged 18 to 59 years (n = 1058) who were transplanted during the same time. Donor age tended to be higher among the oldest recipient group (P < .001). Mean follow-up was significantly shorter in the group aged > or =60 years (P < .001), as our institution only recently has frequently accepted patients > or =60 years. Older recipients showed more frequent delayed graft function (P = .007), longer initial hospitalization (P = .005), and a significantly lower incidence of posttransplant acute rejection episodes (P = .015). Patient (P = .057), graft (P = .407), and death-censored graft (P = .649) survivals were not different between the two groups. Seven recipients aged > or =60 years died; the main cause of which was cardiovascular in origin. The loss of organs (n = 11) in the older patients was mainly due to death with a functioning kidney (54.5%). Our results confirm that renal transplant must be considered in selected patients older than 60 years as patient and graft survivals are similar to those of younger patients.     

Long-term results of liver transplantation in older patients 60 years of age and older

BACKGROUND: Advances in perioperative care and immunosuppression have enabled clinicians to broaden the indications for organ transplantation. Advanced age is no longer considered a contraindication to transplantation at most centers. Although short-term studies of elderly liver transplant recipients have demonstrated that the incidence of complications and overall patient survival are similar to those of younger adults, transplant center-specific, long-term data are not available. METHODS: From August of 1984 to September of 1997, 91 patients 60 years of age or older received primary liver transplants at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. This group of patients was compared with a group of younger adults (n=387) ranging in age from 18 to 59 years who received primary liver transplants during the same period. The most common indications for transplantation in both groups were Laennec's cirrhosis, hepatitis C, primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and cryptogenic cirrhosis. There was no difference in the preoperative severity of illness between the groups. Results. The length of hospitalization was the same for both groups, and there were no significant differences in the incidence of rejection, infection (surgical or opportunistic), repeat operation, readmission, or repeat transplantation between the groups. The only significant difference identified between the groups was long-term survival. Five-year patient survival was 52% in the older group and 75% in the younger group (P<0.05). Ten-year patient survival was 35% in the older group and 60% in the younger group (P<0.05). The most common cause of late mortality in elderly liver recipients was malignancy (35.0%), whereas most of the young adult deaths were the result of infectious complications (24.2%). CONCLUSION: Although older recipients at this center did as well as younger recipients in the early years after liver transplantation, long-term survival results were not as encouraging.