Kidney transplantation due to medical urgency: time for reconsideration?

Risk of infections related to endovascular catheters and cardiac implantable devices in hemodialysis patients

Patients requiring dialysis are extremely vulnerable to infectious diseases. The high burden of comorbidities and weakened immune system due to uremia and previous immunosuppressive therapy expose the patient on dialysis to more infectious events than the general population. The infectious risk is further increased by the presence of endovascular catheters and implantable cardiologic devices. The former is generally placed as urgent vascular access for dialysis and in subjects requiring hemodialysis treatments without autogenous arteriovenous fistula. The high frequency of cardiovascular events also increases the likelihood of implanting indwelling implantable cardiac devices (CIED) such as pacemakers (PMs) and defibrillators (ICDs). The simultaneous presence of CVC and CIED yields an increased risk of developing severe prosthetic device-associated bloodstream infections often progressing to septicemia. Although, antibiotic therapy is the mainstay of prosthetic device-related infections, antibiotic resistance of biofilm-residing bacteria reduces the choice of infection eradication. In these cases, the resolution of the infection process relies on the removal of the prosthetic device. Compared to CVC removal, the extraction of leads is a more complex procedure and poses an increased risk of vessel tearing. As a result, the prevention of prosthetic device-related infection is of utmost importance in hemodialysis (HD) patients and relies principally on avoiding CVC as vascular access for HD and placement of a new class of wireless implantable medical devices. When the combination of CVC and CIED is inevitable, prevention of infection, mainly due translocation of skin bacteria, should be a mandatory priority for healthcare workers.

Improving equity in kidney transplant allocation policies through a novel genetic metric: The Matched Donor Potential

The demand for donors' kidneys continues to increase amid a shortage of available donors. Managing policies to thoughtfully allocate this scarce resource is a complex process. Although human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matching has been shown to prolong graft survival, its relative contribution to allocation schemes is empirically compromised owing to competing priorities. We explored using a new metric, Matched Donor Potential (MDP), to facilitate improved HLA matching while promoting equity. We interrogated all active kidney waitlist patients (N = 164 427), their corresponding unacceptable antigen files, and all effective donors in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (January 1, 2016-December 31, 2017). Cause-specific hazard functions were evaluated to assess the potential impact of the MDP metric on deceased donor transplant access rates for all candidates. Access was affected by ethnicity, blood group type, and calculated Panel Reactive Antibody (cPRA). Importantly, we show that access to transplantation is influenced by the patient's own HLA makeup regardless of their ethnicity and by the HLA makeup of effective donors. The MDP metric demonstrates a high association with access to transplantation. Adjusting Cox models to include this new metric resulted in improved access to kidney transplantation for waitlist candidates of minority heritage while significantly promoting HLA matching. Thus, the MDP metric accounts for balanced, equitable organ allocation algorithms.

High-Urgency Renal Transplantation for Patients With Vascular Access Failure: A Single-Center Experience

In the face of access failure for renal replacement therapy or severe complications despite or due to dialysis, high-urgency renal transplant (HU-RT) allocation is possible. Vascular access failure patients have multiple comorbidities and a higher risk of cardiovascular and thrombotic events. Thus, it is presumed that graft and patient survivals might be worse for these patients. The aim of this paper was to analyze the characteristics and outcomes of HU-RT patients due to access failure for renal replacement therapy when comparing them to a population of deceased-donor renal transplant (DDRT) patients. We analyzed data from our Renal Transplantation Unit from January 2006 to April 2017. In this period, 374 patients had a renal transplant. Of these, 11 patients received a high-urgency deceased-donor renal transplant (HU-DDRT). Compared with patients who had a DDRT, HU-DDRT patients were predominantly female (54.5% vs 43.5%, P = .007) and younger (41.6 ± 7.9 vs 49.4 ± 11.8, P = .031). HU-DDRT patients were not significantly more sensitized than DDRT (14.1 ± 27.4 vs 13.5 ± 24.1, P = .935), and had a comparable number of HLA mismatches (3.4 ± 1.4 vs 3.6 ± 1.2, P = .343). Despite the higher incidence in hypertensive (90.9 vs 73.5%, P = .196) and diabetic patients (27.3% vs 15.7%, P = .305) in the HU-DDRT group, this difference was not statistically significant. The percentage of retransplantation was similar in both groups (9.1% vs 7.2%, P = .808). Donor sex, age, and baseline serum creatinine were similar between the groups. There was an increased proportion of expanded criteria donors in HU-DDRT (54.5% vs 25.1%, P = .028). There were no differences in cold or warm ischemia time nor in serum creatinine at discharge or during the first 2 years of follow-up. In both groups, a similar proportion of patients experienced acute rejection episodes. Comparable to DDRT patients, HU-DDRT patients had a high proportion of graft survival at the 1-year follow-up (90.9% vs 93.1%, P = .777). At a 2-year follow-up, graft survival was lower in the HU-DDRT group (81.8% vs 91.5%, P = .267). Mean follow-up for both groups was comparable (78.5 ± 46.7 vs 68.4 ± 40.8 months, P = .424). Overall, graft loss occurred in approximately 36.4% of HU-DDRT patients and 20.9% of DDRT patients (P = .219). Both groups had an overall mortality rate of around 9%. The differences were not statistically significant due to the limited number of patients. More comorbidities and reportedly worse cardiovascular prognosis of access failure (AF) patients and use of expanded criteria donors did not negatively reflect in worse short-term outcomes in our cohort, which highlights the importance of HU-RT in prolonging the survival of AF patients.