Angelika C. Gruessner

Pancreas transplant outcomes for United States (US) and non‐US cases as reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and the International Pancreas Transplant Registry (IPTR) as of June 2004

Abstract:  As of December 31, 2004, more than 23 000 pancreas transplant had been reported to the IPTR, >17 000 in the US and almost 6000 from outside the US. An analysis of US pancreas transplants performed between 1988 and 2003 showed a progressive improvement in outcome, with pancreas transplant graft survival rates (GSRs) going from 75% at 1 yr for 1988/1989 to 85% for 2002/2003 simultaneous pancreas–kidney (SPK) cases, from 55 to 78% for pancreas after kidney (PAK) cases, and from 45 to 77% for pancreas transplants alone (PTA) cases. The improvements were due both to decreases in technical failure (TF) rates (from 12 to 6% in SPK, 13–8% in PAK, and 24–7% in PTA) and immunological failure rates (going from 7 to 2% for SPK, from 28 to 7% for PAK, and from 38 to 8% for PTA cases). These results are even more impressive under the aspect that during the same time the rate of potential risk factors increased and the duct management techniques changed from bladder to enteric drainage. The improvement in outcome allowed also an increase in the number of solitary pancreas transplants from initially 12% to now 35%. Contemporary primary deceased donor pancreas transplant outcomes were calculated separately for 2000–2004 US and non‐US cases. The US patient survival rates at 1 yr were >95% in each recipient category, with 1 yr primary pancreas GSRs of 85% for SPK, 78% for PAK, and 76% for PTA (p < 0.0001). The immunological graft failure rates for 2000–2004 technically successful (TS) SPK, PAK, and PTA cases were 2, 8, and 10% at 1 yr (p = 0.0001). In the majority of all transplants ED was used for duct management (81% of SPK, 67% of PAK, and 56% for PTA cases). Of the ED transplants, venous drainage via the portal system was used for 20% of SPK, 23% of PAK, and 35% of PTA cases. Duct management technique did not have a significant impact on overall pancreas graft function in the univariate or the multivariate model. The outcomes of ED and BD transplants are comparable with 85 vs. 87% at 1 yr for SPK, 77 vs. 80% for PAK, and 72 vs. 79% for PTA. The overall TF rate was higher in ED pancreas transplants but this difference did reach significance only in SPK. In addition, in technically successful PTA the immunological graft loss rate was higher in ED vs. BD transplants (15 vs. 5% at 1 yr). The different vascular management techniques did not seem to have an impact on the outcome of the pancreas transplants. Kidney GSRs were not significantly different for ED vs. BD SPK cases, 93 and 91% at 1 yr (p = 0.24). The overall conversion rate from BD to ED was 9% at 1 yr and 17% at 3 yr post‐transplant. The most influential factor for patient survival in SPK and PAK in the multivariate and the univariate models was the status of the transplanted organ. The hazard ratio (HR) for a failed kidney was 14.99 in SPK and 9.17 in PAK (p = 0.0001). The HR for a failed pancreas graft was 3.51 in SPK and 4.17 for PAK (p = 0.0001). In PTA a failed pancreas graft did not have a direct impact on patient survival. SPK and PAK patients older than 44 yr at the time of transplants also showed an increased mortality risk, but at the same time the risk of immunological graft loss was significantly decreased for those patients. TAC&MMF remained the dominant maintenance immunosuppressant for 2000–2004 US cases (∼two‐third) in all three categories and with this regime 1‐year GSRs were ≥80% in all three recipient categories. The results were comparable (≥83% 1‐year GSR) for patients (∼10%) treated with Sirolimus (SIR) under various protocols. In regard to non‐US pancreas transplants, even for 2000–2004 the overwhelming majority continued to be in the SPK category (91%), with 1‐year patient, kidney and pancreas survival rates of 94, 92, and 87%. Solitary transplants are still very rarely done outside the US. Non‐US PAK GSR at 1 yr was 85%, non‐US PTA GSR at 1 yr was 76%. In summary, with the new advancements in immunosuppression and changes in surgical techniques the outcomes in patient survival and pancreas transplant graft function continue to improve even with an increasing proportion of high risk patients in all three categories.

Lessons learned from more than 1,000 pancreas transplants at a single institution

ObjectiveTo determine outcome in diabetic pancreas transplant recipients according to risk factors and the surgical techniques and immunosuppressive protocols that evolved during a 33-year period at a single institution. Summary Background DataInsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus is associated with a high incidence of management problems and secondary complications. Clinical pancreas transplantation began at the University of Minnesota in 1966, initially with a high failure rate, but outcome improved in parallel with other organ transplants. The authors retrospectively analyzed the factors associated with the increased success rate of pancreas transplants. MethodsFrom December 16, 1966, to March 31, 2000, the authors performed 1,194 pancreas transplants (111 from living donors; 191 retransplants): 498 simultaneous pancreas–kidney (SPK) and 1 simultaneous pancreas–liver transplant; 404 pancreas after kidney (PAK) transplants; and 291 pancreas transplants alone (PTA). The analyses were divided into five eras: era 0, 1966 to 1973 (n = 14), historical; era 1, 1978 to 1986 (n = 148), transition to cyclosporine for immunosuppression, multiple duct management techniques, and only solitary (PAK and PTA) transplants; era 2, 1986 to 1994 (n = 461), all categories (SPK, PAK, and PTA), predominately bladder drainage for graft duct management, and primarily triple therapy (cyclosporine, azathioprine, and prednisone) for maintenance immunosuppression; era 3, 1994 to 1998 (n = 286), tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil used; and era 4, 1998 to 2000 (n = 275), use of daclizumab for induction immunosuppression, primarily enteric drainage for SPK transplants, pretransplant immunosuppression in candidates awaiting PTA. ResultsPatient and primary cadaver pancreas graft functional (insulin-independence) survival rates at 1 year by category and era were as follows: SPK, era 2 (n = 214) versus eras 3 and 4 combined (n = 212), 85% and 64% versus 92% and 79%, respectively; PAK, era 1 (n = 36) versus 2 (n = 61) versus 3 (n = 84) versus 4 (n = 92), 86% and 17%, 98% and 59%, 98% and 76%, and 98% and 81%, respectively; in PTA, era 1 (n = 36) versus 2 (n = 72) versus 3 (n = 30) versus 4 (n = 40), 77% and 31%, 99% and 50%, 90% and 67%, and 100% and 88%, respectively. In eras 3 and 4 combined for primary cadaver SPK transplants, pancreas graft survival rates were significantly higher with bladder drainage (n = 136) than enteric drainage (n = 70), 82% versus 74% at 1 year (P = .03). Increasing recipient age had an adverse effect on outcome only in SPK recipients. Vascular disease was common (in eras 3 and 4, 27% of SPK recipients had a pretransplant myocardial infarction and 40% had a coronary artery bypass); those with no vascular disease had significantly higher patient and graft survival rates in the SPK and PAK categories. Living donor segmental pancreas transplants were associated with higher technically successful graft survival rates in each era, predominately solitary (PAK and PTA) in eras 1 and 2 and SPK in eras 3 and 4. Diabetic secondary complications were ameliorated in some recipients, and quality of life studies showed significant gains after the transplant in all recipient categories. ConclusionsPatient and graft survival rates have significantly improved over time as surgical techniques and immunosuppressive protocols have evolved. Eventually, islet transplants will replace pancreas transplants for suitable candidates, but currently pancreas transplants can be applied and should be an option at all stages of diabetes. Early transplants are preferable for labile diabetes, but even patients with advanced complications can benefit.

Mortality Assessment for Pancreas Transplants

We determined and compared the mortality of pancreas transplant recipients and of patients on the pancreas waiting lists by using United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and International Pancreas Transplant Registry (IPTR) data. From January 1, 1995, through May 31, 2003, a total of 12 478 patients were listed for a simultaneous pancreas‐kidney (SPK) transplant; 2942 for a pancreas after (previous) kidney transplant (PAK); and 1207 for a pancreas transplant alone (PTA). In this retrospective observational cohort study, patients with multiple listings at different transplant centers and patients who changed transplant centers were counted only once. The Social Security Death Master File (SSDMF) and the UNOS kidney transplant database were used to update mortality information.

2011 Update on Pancreas Transplantation: Comprehensive Trend Analysis of 25,000 Cases Followed Up Over the Course of Twenty-Four Years at the International Pancreas Transplant Registry (IPTR)

AIM This study aimed to analyze the outcome of pancreas and pancreas-kidney transplantations based on the comprehensive follow-up data reported to the International Pancreas Transplant Registry (IPTR). METHODS As of December 2010, more than 35,000 pancreas transplantations have been reported to the IPTR: more than 24,000 transplantations in the US and more than 12,000 outside the US. Cases with follow-up information until March 2011 were included in the analysis. RESULTS Pancreas transplantations in diabetic patients were divided into 3 categories: those performed simultaneously with a kidney (SPK) (75%), those given after a previous kidney transplantation (PAK) (18%), and pancreas transplantation alone (PTA) (7%). The total number of pancreas transplantations steadily increased until 2004 but has since declined. The largest decrease was seen in PAK, which decreased by 50% from 2004 through 2010. Comparatively, the number of SPK decreased by 7% during this time. Era analysis of US transplantations between 1987 and 2010 showed changes in recipient and donor characteristics. Recipient age at transplantation increased significantly as well as transplantations in type 2 diabetes patients. The trend over time was towards tighter donor criteria. There was a concentration on younger donors, preferable trauma victims, with short preservation time. Surgical techniques for the drainage of the pancreatic duct changed over time, too. Now enteric drainage is the predominantly used technique in combination with systemic drainage of the venous effluent of the pancreas graft. Immunosuppressive protocols developed towards antibody induction therapy with tacrolimus and MMF as maintenance therapy. The rate of transplantations with steroid avoidance increased over time in all 3 categories. These changes have led to improved patient and graft survival. Patient survival now reaches over 95% at one year post-transplant and over 83% after 5 years. The best graft survival was found in SPK with 86% pancreas and 93% kidney graft function at one year. PAK pancreas graft function reached 80%, and PTA pancreas graft function reached 78% at one year. In all 3 categories, early technical graft loss rates decreased significantly to 8-9%. Likewise, the 1-year immunological graft loss rate also decreased: in SPK, the immunological 1-year graft loss rate was 1.8%, in PAK 3.7%, and in PTA 6.0%. CONCLUSIONS Patient survival and graft function improved significantly over the course of 24 years of pancreas transplantation in all 3 categories. With further reduction in surgical complications and improvements in immunosuppressive protocols, pancreas transplantation offers excellent outcomes for patients with labile diabetes.

Decreased surgical risks of pancreas transplantation in the modern era.

OBJECTIVE To document the decreased incidence of surgical complications after pancreas transplantation in recent times. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Compared with other abdominal transplants, pancreas transplants have historically had the highest incidence of surgical complications. However, over the past few years, the authors have noted a significant decrease in the incidence of surgical complications. METHODS The authors studied the incidence of early (<3 months after transplant) surgical complications (e.g., relaparotomy, thrombosis, infections, leaks) after 580 pancreas transplants performed during a 12-year period. Patients were analyzed and compared in two time groups: era 1 (June 1, 1985, to April 30, 1994, n = 367) and era 2 (May 1, 1994, to June 30, 1997, n = 213). RESULTS Overall, surgical complications were significantly reduced in era 2 compared with era 1. The relaparotomy rate decreased from 32.4% in era 1 to 18.8% in era 2. Significant risk factors for early relaparotomy were donor age older than 40 years and recipient obesity. Recipients with relaparotomy had significantly lower graft survival rates than those without relaparotomy, but patient survival rates were not significantly different. A major factor contributing to the lower relaparotomy rate in era 2 was a significant decrease in the incidence of graft thrombosis; the authors believe this lower incidence is due to the routine use of postoperative low-dose intravenous heparin and acetylsalicylic acid. The incidence of bleeding requiring relaparotomy did not differ between the two eras. Older donor age was the most significant risk factor for graft thrombosis. The incidence of intraabdominal infections significantly decreased between the two eras; this decrease may be due to improved prophylaxis regimens in the first postoperative week. CONCLUSIONS Although a retrospective study has its limits, the results of this study, the largest single-center experience to date, show a significant decrease in the surgical risk associated with pancreas transplants. Reasons for this decrease are identification of donor and recipient risk factors, better prophylaxis regimens, refinements in surgical technique, and improved immunosuppressive regimens. These improved results suggest that more widespread application of pancreas transplantation is warranted.

Technical failures after pancreas transplants: Why grafts fail and the risk factors: A multivariate analysis

Background. Technical failure (TF) rates remain high after pancreas transplants; while rates have decreased over the last decade, more than 10% of all pancreas grafts continue to be lost due to technical reasons. We performed a multivariate analysis to determine causes and risk factors for TF of pancreas grafts. Results. Between 1994 and 2003, 937 pancreas transplants were performed at our center in the following transplant categories: simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) (n=327), pancreas after kidney (PAK) (n=399), and pancreas transplant alone (PTA) (n=211). Of these, 123 (13.1%) grafts were lost due to technical reasons (thrombosis, leaks, infections). TF rates were higher for SPK (15.3%) versus PAK (12.2%) or PTA (11.4%), though this was not statistically significant. Thrombosis accounted for 52.0% of all TFs. Other causes were infections (18.7%), pancreatitis (20.3%), leaks (6.5%), and bleeding (2.4%). Thrombosis was the most common cause for TF in all three transplant categories. By multivariate analysis, the following were significant risk factors for TF of the graft: recipient body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m2 (relative risk [RR]=2.42, P=0.0003), preservation time >24 hr (1.87, P=0.04), cause of donor death other than trauma (RR=1.58, P=0.04), enteric versus bladder drainage (1.68, P=0.06), and donor BMI >30 kg/m2 (1.66, P=0.06). Not significant were donor or recipient age, a retransplant, and the category of transplant. Conclusions. TFs remain significant after pancreas transplants. In SPK recipients, TF represents the most common cause of pancreas graft loss. For isolated pancreas transplants, TF is second only to rejection as a cause of graft loss. Increased preservation times and donor or recipient obesity seem to be risk factors. Minimizing these risks factors would be important to try to decrease TF.

Surgical complications requiring early relaparotomy after pancreas transplantation: a multivariate risk factor and economic impact analysis of the cyclosporine era.

OBJECTIVES To study significant surgical complications requiring early (< or = 3 months posttransplant) relaparotomy (relap) after pancreas transplants, and to develop clinically relevant surgical and peritransplant decision-making guidelines for preventing and managing such complications. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Pancreas grafts are still associated with the highest surgical complication rate of all routinely transplanted solid organs. However, the impact of surgical complications on morbidity, hospital costs, and graft and patient survival rates has not been analyzed in detail to date. METHODS We retrospectively studied surgical complications requiring relap in 441 consecutive cadaver, bladder-drained pancreas transplants (54% simultaneous pancreas and kidney [SPK]; 22% pancreas after kidney [PAK]; 24% pancreas transplant alone [PTA]; 37% retransplant). Outcome and hospital charges were analyzed separately for recipients with versus without reoperation. RESULTS The overall relap rate was 32% (SPK, 36%; PAK, 25%; PTA, 16%; p = 0.04). The most common causes were intraabdominal infection and graft pancreatitis (38%), pancreas graft thrombosis (27%), and anastomotic leak (15%). Perioperative relap mortality was 9%; transplant pancreatectomy was necessary in 57% of all recipients with one or more relaps. The pancreas graft was lost in 80% of recipients with versus 41% without relap (p < 0.0001). Patient survival rates were significantly lower (p < 0.05) for recipients with versus without relap. By multivariate analysis, significant risk factors for graft loss included older donor age (SPK, PAK), retransplant (PAK), relap for infection (SPK, PAK), and relap for leak or bleeding (PAK). For death, risk factors included older recipient age (SPK, PAK),retransplant (SPK, PAK), relap for thrombosis (PAK), relap for infection or leak (SPK), and relap for bleeding (PTA). CONCLUSIONS Posttransplant surgical complications requiring relap were frequent, resulted in a high rate of pancreas (SPK, PAK, PTA) and kidney (SPK, PAK) graft loss, and had a major economic impact (p = 0.0001). Complications were associated with substantial perioperative mortality and decreased patient survival rates. The focus must therefore shift from graft salvage to preservation of the recipients life once a pancreas graft-related complication requiring relap occurs. Thus, the threshold for pancreatectomy should be low. In this context, acceptance of older donors and recipients must be reconsidered.

A multicenter analysis of the first experience with FK506 for induction and rescue therapy after pancreas transplantation

Between May 1, 1993 and April 5, 1995, 154 pancreas allograft recipients at 9 institutions were given FK506 posttransplant. Three groups were studied: (1) recipients given FK506 initially for induction and maintenance therapy (n = 82), (2) recipients switched to FK506 for antirejection or rescue therapy (n = 61), and (3) recipients converted to FK506 for other reasons (n = 11). Of 82 patients in the induction group, 7 (9%) had simultaneous bone marrow (BM) and pancreas-kidney (SPK-BM) transplants, 54 (66%) had SPK transplants without BM, 14 (17%) had pancreas transplants alone (PTA), and 7 (9%) had pancreas after previous kidney transplants (PAK). All but 1 recipient was given quadruple immunosuppression (anti-T cell agents plus azathioprine and prednisone) for induction. The median FK506 starting dose was 4 mg/day p.o.; the median average FK506 blood level, 12 ng/ml. The most common side effects were neurotoxicity (16%), nephrotoxicity (13%), and gastrointestinal toxicity (9%). New-onset diabetes mellitus requiring permanent insulin therapy did not occur. Of 61 transplants in the rescue group, 44 (72%) were SPK, 11 (18%) PTA, and 6 (10%) PAK. All but 3 (95%) of the recipients had been on cyclosporine-azathioprine-prednisone triple immunosuppression before substitution of FK506 for cyclosporine; 46% of the recipients had one, and 54% > or = 2, rejection episodes preconversion. The most common side effects were nephrotoxicity (25%), neurotoxicity (23%), and gastrointestinal toxicity (21%). Two recipients were reconverted to cyclosporine because of transient hyperglycemia, and one recipient is on insulin. In the induction group, patient survival at 6 months was 90% for SPK, 100% for PTA, and 100% for PAK. According to a matched-pair analysis, pancreas graft survival for SPK recipients at 6 months was 87% for FK506 versus 70% for cyclosporine recipients (P = 0.04); for PTA recipients, 84% versus 66% (P = n.s.); and for PAK recipients, 80% versus 14% (P = 0.11). When technical failures and death with functioning grafts were censored, pancreas graft survival remained significantly better in the FK506 group. The incidence of first reversible rejection episodes by 6 months in FK506 recipients was 35% for SPK, 40% for PTA, and 20% for PAK. Of 75 pancreas grafts, 64 are currently functioning; in 5 recipients the pancreas failed (1 from rejection); 6 recipients died with a functioning pancreas graft. There were 3 posttransplant lymphomas (all EBV-positive); 2 recipients died and 1 is alive after subtotal colectomy and transplant pancreatectomy. In the antirejection rescue group, patient survival rates at 6 months were 91% for SPK, 100% for PTA, and 80% for PAK (P = n.s.). Pancreas graft survival rates at 6 months were 90% for SPK, 72% for PTA, and 40% for PAK. The incidence of first reversible rejection episodes after conversion to FK506 at 6 months was 44% in SPK, 54% in PTA, and 50% in PAK. Of 61 pancreas grafts, 51 are currently functioning; in 7 recipients the pancreas failed (5 from rejection); 3 recipients died with a functioning graft. There were no posttransplant lymphomas in the rescue group. This multicenter survey shows that FK506 in pancreas transplantation is associated with (1) a low rate of graft loss from rejection when used for induction therapy, (2) a high rate of graft salvage when used for rescue or rejection therapy, and (3) a very low rate of new-onset insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. These encouraging results are tarnished by 3 posttransplant lymphomas in the induction group; a possible explanation is overimmunosuppression, but further (randomized) studies are necessary to analyze the long-term risk-benefit ratio of FK506 after pancreas transplantation.

Islet autotransplant outcomes after total pancreatectomy: a contrast to islet allograft outcomes.

Introduction. Islet allografts are currently associated with a high rate of early insulin independence, but after 1 year insulin-independence rates rapidly decline for unclear reasons. In contrast, as shown here, islet autotransplants (IATs) show durable function and extended insulin-independence rates, despite a lower beta-cell mass. Methods. IAT function was determined in 173 patients after total pancreatectomy at our center. Islet function was considered full in insulin-independent patients, partial when euglycemic on once-daily long-acting insulin (all tested were C-peptide positive), and failed if on a standard diabetic regimen. Outcomes for autoislet recipients by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were compared with those of alloislet recipients in the Collaborative Islet Transplant Registry. Results. IAT function (full/partial combined) and insulin independence correlated with islet yield. Overall only 65% functioned within the first year, and only 32% were insulin independent, but of IATs that functioned initially (n=112), 85% remained so 2-years later, in contrast to 66% of allografts (n=262). Of IAT recipients who became insulin independent (n=55), 74% remained so 2-years later versus 45% of initially insulin-independent allograft recipients (n=154). Of IATs that functioned or induced insulin independence, the rates at 5 years were 69% and 47%, respectively. Conclusion. Islet function is more resilient in autografts than allografts. Indeed, the 5-year insulin-independence persistence rate for IATs is similar to the 2-year rate for allografts. Several factors unique to allocases are likely responsible for the differences, including donor brain death, longer cold ischemia time, diabetogenic immunosuppression, and auto- and alloimmunity. IAT outcomes provide a minimum theoretical standard to work toward in allotransplantation.

The surgical risk of pancreas transplantation in the cyclosporine era: an overview

BACKGROUND Pancreas transplants are still associated with the highest surgical complication rate of all routinely performed solid organ transplants. To date, the impact of serious surgical complications in the cyclosporine era on perioperative patient morbidity, graft and patient survival, and hospital costs has not been analyzed in detail. STUDY DESIGN We retrospectively studied surgical complications after 445 consecutive pancreas transplants (45% simultaneous pancreas-kidney [SPK], 24% pancreas after kidney [PAK], and 31% pancreas transplant alone [PTA]). Of these, 80% were primary transplants, 20% were retransplants. Cadaver donors were used in 92%, living related donors in 8%. To develop guidelines for their prevention and management, we studied the impact of significant surgical complications (intra-abdominal infections, vascular graft thrombosis, and anastomotic leak) requiring relaparotomy on graft and patient survival. RESULTS Relaparotomy was required after 32% of all pancreas transplants (SPK: 36%, PAK: 25%, PTA: 16% [p = 0.04]). Perioperative mortality was 9%. Graft and patient survival rates were significantly lower for recipients with (versus without) relaparotomy. The most common procedures were drainage of intra-abdominal abscess with graft necrosectomy (50% of all relaparotomies) and transplant pancreatectomy (34%). The most common causes of relaparotomy were intra-abdominal infection, vascular graft thrombosis, and anastomotic leak. Intra-abdominal infection occurred in 20% (SPK: 18%, PAK: 24%, PTA: 20% [p = NS]). The rate was significantly higher for living related donor (42%) versus cadaver donor (18%) recipients and for those with enteric-drained (39%) versus bladder-drained (18%) transplants. Graft and patient survival rates were significantly lower for recipients with (versus without) intra-abdominal infection. Outcome was better after bacterial (versus fungal) infections. For SPK recipients, those not on dialysis before the transplant had significantly higher graft survival than those on dialysis. Vascular graft thrombosis occurred in 12% of all recipients. The rate was significantly higher for PAK (21%) than for PTA (10%) and SPK (9%) recipients. It was significantly lower for recipients of grafts with donor iliac Y-graft reconstruction (versus all other types of arterial reconstruction) and with right-sided (versus left-sided) graft placement. Of note, patient survival was not different for recipients with versus without vascular graft thrombosis. The incidence of anastomotic or duodenal stump leaks was 10%; of these recipients, 70% required relaparotomy. Patient and graft survival rates were no different for recipients with versus without leaks. CONCLUSIONS Serious surgical complications occurred in 35% of pancreas recipients and had a significant impact on patient and graft survival. Based on multivariate risk factor analyses, we recommend the following: donors over 45 years and those dying of cerebrocardiovascular disease should not be used; recipients over 45 years and those with a history of cardiac disease should be considered for a kidney transplant alone (KTA); surgical technique for graft procurement, preparation, and implantation should be meticulous; right-sided implantation and arterial Y-graft reconstruction should be performed when possible, since they had the highest success rates; when complications require relaparotomy, the focus must switch from graft salvage to life preservation; and the threshold for pancreatectomy should be low. Diagnosis should be timely, and treatment and relaparotomy expeditious. These cornerstones of success should help decrease the risk of surgical complications and mortality after pancreas transplants.