Primary hyperoxaluria diagnosed after kidney transplant: A review of the literature and case report of aggressive renal replacement therapy and lumasiran to prevent allograft loss

Author(s):  
Hillarey K. Stone ◽  
Katherine VandenHeuvel ◽  
Alexander Bondoc ◽  
Francisco X. Flores ◽  
David K. Hooper ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol In Press (In Press) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maliheh Khoddami ◽  
Nasrin Esfandiar ◽  
Maryam Kazemi Aghdam

Therapies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Collignon ◽  
Ines Gana ◽  
Sihem Benaboud ◽  
Julie Toubiana ◽  
Martin Castelle ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 2118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Irene Bellini ◽  
Aisling E Courtney ◽  
Jennifer A McCaughan

Background: Failed kidney transplant recipients benefit from a new graft as the general incident dialysis population, although additional challenges in the management of these patients are often limiting the long-term outcomes. Previously failed grafts, a long history of comorbidities, side effects of long-term immunosuppression and previous surgical interventions are common characteristics in the repeated kidney transplantation population, leading to significant complex immunological and technical aspects and often compromising the short- and long-term results. Although recipients’ factors are acknowledged to represent one of the main determinants for graft and patient survival, there is increasing interest in expanding the donor’s pool safely, particularly for high-risk candidates. The role of living kidney donation in this peculiar context of repeated kidney transplantation has not been assessed thoroughly. The aim of the present study is to analyse the effects of a high-quality graft, such as the one retrieved from living kidney donors, in the repeated kidney transplant population context. Methods: Retrospective analysis of the outcomes of the repeated kidney transplant population at our institution from 1968 to 2019. Data were extracted from a prospectively maintained database and stratified according to the number of transplants: 1st, 2nd or 3rd+. The main outcomes were graft and patient survivals, recorded from time of transplant to graft failure (return to dialysis) and censored at patient death with a functioning graft. Duration of renal replacement therapy was expressed as cumulative time per month. A multivariate analysis considering death-censored graft survival, decade of transplantation, recipient age, donor age, living donor, transplant number, ischaemic time, time on renal replacement therapy prior to transplant and HLA mismatch at HLA-A, -B and -DR was conducted. In the multivariate analysis of recipient survival, diabetic nephropathy as primary renal disease was also included. Results: A total of 2395 kidney transplant recipients were analysed: 2062 (83.8%) with the 1st kidney transplant, 279 (11.3%) with the 2nd graft, 46 (2.2%) with the 3rd+. Mean age of 1st kidney transplant recipients was 43.6 ± 16.3 years, versus 39.9 ± 14.4 for 2nd and 41.4 ± 11.5 for 3rd+ (p < 0.001). Aside from being younger, repeated kidney transplant patients were also more often males (p = 0.006), with a longer time spent on renal replacement therapy (p < 0.0001) and a higher degree of sensitisation, expressed as calculated reaction frequency (p < 0.001). There was also an association between multiple kidney transplants and better HLA match at transplantation (p < 0.0001). A difference in death-censored graft survival by number of transplants was seen, with a median graft survival of 328 months for recipients of the 1st transplant, 209 months for the 2nd and 150 months for the 3rd+ (p = 0.038). The same difference was seen in deceased donor kidneys (p = 0.048), but not in grafts from living donors (p = 0.2). Patient survival was comparable between the three groups (p = 0.59). Conclusions: In the attempt to expand the organ donor pool, particular attention should be reserved to high complex recipients, such as the repeated kidney transplant population. In this peculiar context, the quality of the donor has been shown to represent a main determinant for graft survival—in fact, kidney retrieved from living donors provide comparable outcomes to those from single-graft recipients.


Nephron ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Calzavara ◽  
M. Marangelld ◽  
M. Petrarulo ◽  
P. Ballanti ◽  
E. Bonucci ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Noppakun Thammatacharee ◽  
Anne Mills ◽  
Dorothea Nitsch ◽  
Adisorn Lumpaopong

Abstract Based on projected numbers, approximately only 50% of those requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) receive it. Many patients who require RRT live in low- and middle-income countries. The objective of this study was to examine the changing pattern over time of entry into the RRT programme in Thailand following RRT’s inclusion in the Universal Coverage Scheme. This study was an ecological study using the age-period-cohort analysis to look at dialysis registration and kidney transplant trends during RRT programme implementation. Data from 2008 to 2016 of patients diagnosed with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were obtained from the National Health Security Office. The study found that the numbers of new patients with ESRD, aged 20–69, registered with the dialysis programme increased over time. For patients aged 20–40 years, the dialysis programme took up to 400 new patients for every 1000 new ESRD diagnoses. For kidney transplant, the rates increased slowly. The kidney transplant programme could at best treat only around 50 cases for every 1000 new ESRD diagnoses in patients aged 20–30 years. Findings of this study highlighted the importance of promoting strategies to reduce the increasing number of patients with kidney disease, to consider conservative therapy for older/frail patients, and to improve access to kidney transplantation and live-donation.


Mycoses ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 61 (8) ◽  
pp. 594-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphaël Gaisne ◽  
Fakhri Jeddi ◽  
Florent Morio ◽  
Quentin-Côme Le Clerc ◽  
Maryvonne Hourmant ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document