scholarly journals Post-transplant renal function in the first year predicts long-term kidney transplant survival

2002 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 311-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sundaram Hariharan ◽  
Maureen A. Mcbride ◽  
Wida S. Cherikh ◽  
Christine B. Tolleris ◽  
Barbara A. Bresnahan ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. S259-S260
Author(s):  
S.M. Zaver ◽  
V. Chinta ◽  
J.Y. Wan ◽  
D. Lei ◽  
S. Emani ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Pardinhas ◽  
Rita Leal ◽  
Francisco Caramelo ◽  
Teofilo Yan ◽  
Carolina Figueiredo ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Aims As kidney transplants are growing in absolute numbers, so are patients with failed allografts and thus potential candidates for re-transplantation. Re-transplantation is challenging due to immunological barriers, surgical difficulties and clinical complexities but it has been proven that successful second transplantation improves life expectancy over dialysis. It is important to evaluate re-transplantation outcomes since 20% of patients on the waiting list are waiting for a second graft. Our aim was to compare major clinical outcomes such as acute rejection, graft and patient survival, between patients receiving a first or a second kidney transplant. Method We performed a retrospective study, that included 1552 patients submitted to a first (N=1443, 93%) or a second kidney transplant (N=109, 7%), between January 2008 and December 2018. Patients with more than 2 grafts or multi-organ transplant were excluded. Demographic, clinical and histocompatibility characteristics of both groups were registered from our unit database and compared. Delayed graft function was defined has the need of dialysis in the first week post-transplant. All acute rejection episodes were biopsy proven, according to Banff 2017 criteria. Follow-up time was defined at 1st June 2020 for functioning grafts or at graft failure (including death with a functioning graft). Results Recipients of a second graft were significantly younger (43 ±12 vs 50 ± 13 years old, p<0.001) and there were significantly fewer expanded-criteria donors in the second transplant group (31.5% vs 57.5%, p<0.001). The waiting time for a second graft was longer (63±50 vs 48±29 months, p=0.011). HLA mismatch was similar for both groups but PRA was significantly higher for second KT patients (21.6±25% versus 3±9%; p<0.001). All patients submitted to a second KT had thymoglobulin as induction therapy compared to 16% of the first KT group (p<0.001). We found no difference in primary dysfunction or delayed graft function between groups. Acute rejection was significantly more frequent in second kidney transplant recipients (19% vs 5%, p<0.001), being 10 acute cellular rejections, 7 were antibody mediated and 3 were borderline changes. For the majority of the patients (85%), acute rejection occurred in the first-year post-transplant. Death censored graft failure occurred in 236 (16.4%) patients with first kidney transplant and 25 (23%) patients with a second graft, p=0.08. Survival analysis showed similar graft survival for both groups (log-rank p=0.392). We found no difference in patients’ mortality at follow up for both groups. Conclusion Although second graft patients presented more episodes of biopsy proven acute rejection, especially at the first-year post-transplant, we found no differences in death censored graft survival or patients’ mortality for patients with a second kidney transplant. Second transplants should be offered to patients whenever feasible.


2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-41
Author(s):  
Juan J. Amenábar ◽  
Jhon A. Camacho ◽  
Nerea Gómez-Larrambe ◽  
Teresa Visus ◽  
José I. Pijoan ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 355-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Denizarde Bacelar Marques ◽  
Maria Júlia Correia Lima Nepomuceno Araújo ◽  
Fabiana Giorgetti Graciolli ◽  
Luciene Machado dos Reis ◽  
Rosa Maria R. Pereira ◽  
...  

BackgroundBone and mineral disorders commonly affect kidney transplant (KTx) recipients and have been associated with a high risk of fracture. Bisphosphonates may prevent or treat bone loss in such patients, but there is concern that these drugs might induce adynamic bone disease (ABD).MethodsIn an open label, randomized trial to assess the safety and efficacy of zoledronate for preventing bone loss in the first year after kidney transplant, we randomized 34 patients before transplant to receive zoledronate or no treatment. We used dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT), and bone biopsies to evaluate changes in bone in the 32 evaluable participants between the time of KTx and 12 months post-transplant.ResultsBoth groups of patients experienced decreased bone turnover after KTx, but zoledronate itself did not affect this outcome. Unlike previous studies, DXA showed no post-transplant bone loss in either group; we instead observed an increase of bone mineral density in both lumbar spine and total hip sites, with a significant positive effect of zoledronate. However, bone biopsies showed post-transplant impairment of trabecular connectivity (and no benefit from zoledronate); HR-pQCT detected trabecular bone loss at the peripheral skeleton, which zoledronate partially attenuated.ConclusionsCurrent immunosuppressive regimens do not contribute to post-transplant central skeleton trabecular bone loss, and zoledronate does not induce ABD. Because fractures in transplant recipients are most commonly peripheral fractures, clinicians should consider bisphosphonate use in patients at high fracture risk who have evidence of significantly low bone mass at these sites at the time of KTx.


2011 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Fonseca ◽  
M. Almeida ◽  
L.S. Martins ◽  
J. Santos ◽  
L. Dias ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. B75
Author(s):  
Lissa Levin ◽  
Gregory Malat ◽  
Mohit Gupta ◽  
Muhammad Saeed ◽  
Snehankita Kulkarni ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 86 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 466-467
Author(s):  
I Helal ◽  
E Abderrahim ◽  
F B. Hamida ◽  
M Ounissi ◽  
S Barbouche ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document