Background. The objective of the study was an analysis of results of repeated kidney transplantations (Tx2, Tx3) implemented during the first 29 years of activities of the Transplantation Centre of the Institute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine in subjects with a different maintenance immunosuppression. Methods and Results. The retrospective study pertains to 134 Tx2 and 17 Tx3 in 134 non-diabetic subjects: 43 of them had during Tx1 and Tx2 (1966 - 1981 and 1966 - 1985 resp.) immunosuppression on the basis of azathioprin (Aza, sub-group AA), 42 during Tx1 (1972-85), Aza, while during Tx2 (1984-85) immunosuppression on the basis of cyclosporin (CyA, subgroup AC) and 49 both during Tx1 and Tx2 (1985-93 and 1986-95 resp.) CyA (subgroup CC). Compared was survival of grafts by the actuarial method (with regard to all losses regardless of cause) by the end of the 4th year inside the subgroups (Tx2 vs. Tx1 and Tx3 vs. Tx2 in the same subjects) and between subgroups (Tx1 vs. Tx1 and Tx2 vs. Tx2 in different subjects). Moreover in paired investigations the survival of recipients and grafts after Tx2 was compared after immunosuppression on the basis of CyA with the same parameters after Tx1 in different subjects with the same immunosuppression, operated at approximately the same time (n = 81) and survival of subjects with Tx1 + Tx2 on the CC regime regardless whether the second grafts functioned at the time of the last examination, with survival of subjects after Tx1 where after graft failure Tx2 was not performed (n = 34). Prophylaxis with antilymphocyte globulins was not used. Survival of second and first grafts did not differ in any of the subgroups, third grafts survived at the end of the third year more frequently than second grafts (66 vs. 18%, p < 0.01). Second grafts in CC survived more than in AA (55 vs. 28%, p < 0.01). In the paired study Tx2 vs. Tx1 the survival of grafts and recipients was the same (88 vs. 89%, N.S. and 47 vs. 62% resp.), in the paired study Tx1 + Tx2 vs. Tx1 more subjects with Tx1 + Tx2 survived 10 years after Tx1 than subjects who did not have Tx2 (82 vs. 49%, p < 0.05). Conclusions. A further transplantation of the kidney after functional loss of the first graft is the method of choice: the mortality is low, the probability of several years´ function is considerable and the prognosis as regards quality and length of life better than with regular dialysis treatment.

        Key words: retransplantation, azathioprin, cyclosporin, regular dialysis.