A significant fraction of ESRD patients experiences dialysis and kidney transplantation at different time periods. These treatment decisions may affect the incidence and nature of the disease and mortality after the onset of ESRD (
21). This study indicated a significant difference between the average age of the first and second transplant patients. Based on the results, the second transplant patients had a higher average age compared to the first, which is consistent with the results of Ingsathit et al. (
22). Legendre et al. reported that many factors affected the long-term outcome of kidney transplantation, which were schematically characterized by the patient's death, renal dysfunction, and graft loss. The quality of the transplant is one of the most important factors. Other factors include the recipient's age, disease recurrence, HLA compliance, HLA immunization, recipient ethnicity, dialysis time, and cardiovascular diseases. The graft survival was not significantly different based on the first and second transplants in the present study. Moreover, the graft survival for the second transplant in the third (89%) and fifth (69%) years compared with that of the first transplant in the third (98%) and fifth (73%) years showed that it was lower in the second transplant. A significant difference was observed between the graft survival of the first and second transplants in the female patients (
23). The graft survival of the first and second transplants was 136.85 ± 8.52 and 59.25 ± 4.69 months, respectively. However, the graft survival in the men was not significantly different in the first and second transplants. No significant difference was found between the survival of the patients based on the first and second transplants. The survival of the patients with the first and second transplants was 165.14 ± 4.49 and 101.34 ± 2.42 months, respectively. Based on the results, patients with the first transplant had longer survival than those with the second transplant.
All patients received the kidney from a living donor in the present study. Therefore, better results were obtained in this study compared to the study using the kidney from a corpse. This issue can play an important role in the survival of the graft and patients. Wang et al. indicated that the graft rate was 90% in the first year of the transplantation (
24).
Coeman’s et al. assessed 108787 transplant recipients in the European population and indicated that improvement in graft survival from 1986 to 1999 was more pronounced in the short period than in the long period. The hazard rate at one, five and ten years post-transplant after transplantation decreased 64% (95% confidence interval, 61 - 66%), 53% (49 - 57%), and 45% (39 - 50%), respectively. The hazard rate at one, five, and ten years post-transplant declined 22% (12 - 30%), 47% (36 - 56%), and 64% (45 - 76%), respectively from 2000 to 2015 (
19). Improvement in graft survival in the first five years after transplantation has been significantly less since 2000. However, improvement after five years was comparable to before. These changes were independent of the characteristics of the donor and the recipient. Short-term improvement in graft survival has decreased since 2000. However, the long-term improvement did not change in Europe (
14,
19).
In the study performed by the Medin et al. in the Stockholm between January 1987 and April 1996, five-year survival was considerably better after LD-kidney transplantation (94%), then after cadaveric-kidney transplantation (76%) or on chronic dialysis (60%). Cox hazard regression analysis gave an age-adjusted relative risk for death of 0.46 for LD-transplanted and 1.49 for remaining on dialysis compared with cadaveric-transplanted patients (
18).
Based on the studies, the two-year survival rate of a living donor was reported to be 76% in Sweden (
18). Furthermore, the transplant survival rate in the first, third, and fifth years was 90%, 73%, and 65% in Mexico, respectively (
25), which is almost consistent with the results of the present study. The one-year survival rate was reported to be 85% and 92% in Norway (
25) and Australia, respectively, which is lower compared to that of the present study (
26).
In this study, only the first transplant of patients was not enough, and the complications after transplantation and the study of underlying diseases were also studied.
5.1. Limitations of the Study
Due to the retrospective nature of the study and the incompleteness of the information recorded in the patients' files, 245 samples in a 25-year period were considered. Furthermore, access to patients (completion of incomplete information) was limited, and calling patients was not possible.
5.2. Conclusions
In general, the results indicated that the patients with the first transplant have longer survival than the second transplant. Further, the survival of patients in the first, third, and fifth years in the second transplant is less than in the first transplant.
However, some studies have reported that diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular diseases, along with advanced age, are considered as the conditions, which facilitate chronic renal failure. It is necessary for each country to obtain its local information due to racial differences, environmental factors, and different food-cultural habits in order to identify the importance of each of the risk factors.
Further, there is the possibility of transplant rejection and reduced survival rate if the underlying diseases and quality of life in people who receive their first transplant and the level of activity of the immune system is not controlled, leading to the rejection of the transplant due to high antibody levels.
The incidence of advanced kidney disease in the country can be reduced when the patients at risk are identified and treated. Due to limited resources, it is recommended to do screening for high-risk patients. Since controlling the underlying disease is the purpose of therapy with mild renal insufficiency, population studies are considered as the condition for any planning and determination of the target group for therapeutic or preventive treatment.
5.3. Suggestions
Since long-term follow-up of patients after transplantation to assess the need for multiple transplants is time-consuming, the patients who have already had a kidney transplant were evaluated retrospectively, which may have some shortcomings. In addition, due to the review of transplant patients over a period of 25 years (1991 - 2016), 245 patients were included in this study. Thus, the sample size was small for evaluation in some cases. For this purpose, the present study recommends the use of information from several centers for a more comprehensive review.