1
|
Thiessen C, Jacobson N, Campbell T. Don't Let the Label "Palliative Care" Stand in the Way of Meeting the Needs of Patients With Graft Loss. Am J Kidney Dis 2024; 83:136-138. [PMID: 38127033 DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2023.11.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2023] [Accepted: 11/09/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Carrie Thiessen
- Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
| | - Nora Jacobson
- Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, School of Nursing, University of Wisconsin Madison, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Toby Campbell
- Division of Hematology, Oncology, and Palliative Care, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin Madison, Madison, Wisconsin
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Murakami N, Reich AJ, He K, Gelfand SL, Leiter RE, Sciacca K, Adler JT, Lu E, Ong SC, Concepcion BP, Singh N, Murad H, Anand P, Ramer SJ, Dadhania DM, Lentine KL, Lakin JR, Alhamad T. Kidney Transplant Clinicians' Perceptions of Palliative Care for Patients With Failing Allografts in the US: A Mixed Methods Study. Am J Kidney Dis 2024; 83:173-182.e1. [PMID: 37726050 DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2023.07.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Revised: 06/03/2023] [Accepted: 07/09/2023] [Indexed: 09/21/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE Kidney transplant patients with failing allografts have a physical and psychological symptom burden as well as high morbidity and mortality. Palliative care is underutilized in this vulnerable population. We described kidney transplant clinicians' perceptions of palliative care to delineate their perceived barriers to and facilitators of providing palliative care to this population. STUDY DESIGN National explanatory sequential mixed methods study including an online survey and semistructured interviews. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS Kidney transplant clinicians in the United States surveyed and interviewed from October 2021 to March 2022. ANALYTICAL APPROACH Descriptive summary of survey responses, thematic analysis of qualitative interviews, and mixed methods integration of data. RESULTS A total of 149 clinicians completed the survey, and 19 completed the subsequent interviews. Over 90% of respondents agreed that palliative care can be helpful for patients with a failing kidney allograft. However, 46% of respondents disagreed that all patients with failing allografts benefit from palliative care, and two-thirds thought that patients would not want serious illness conversations. More than 90% of clinicians expressed concern that transplant patients and caregivers would feel scared or anxious if offered palliative care. The interviews identified three main themes: (1) transplant clinicians' unique sense of personal and professional responsibility was a barrier to palliative care engagement, (2) clinicians' uncertainty regarding the timing of palliative care collaboration would lead to delayed referral, and (3) clinicians felt challenged by factors related to patients' cultural backgrounds and identities, such as language differences. Many comments reflected an unfamiliarity with the broad scope of palliative care beyond end-of-life care. LIMITATIONS Potential selection bias. CONCLUSIONS Our study suggests that multiple barriers related to patients, clinicians, health systems, and health policies may pose challenges to the delivery of palliative care for patients with failing kidney transplants. This study illustrates the urgent need for ongoing efforts to optimize palliative care delivery models dedicated to kidney transplant patients, their families, and the clinicians who serve them. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY Kidney transplant patients experience physical and psychological suffering in the context of their illnesses that may be amenable to palliative care. However, palliative care is often underutilized in this population. In this mixed-methods study, we surveyed 149 clinicians across the United States, and 19 of them completed semistructured interviews. Our study results demonstrate that several patient, clinician, system, and policy factors need to be addressed to improve palliative care delivery to this vulnerable population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Naoka Murakami
- Division of Renal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Amanda J Reich
- Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Katherine He
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Samantha L Gelfand
- Division of Renal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Richard E Leiter
- Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Kate Sciacca
- Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Joel T Adler
- Department of Surgery, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
| | - Emily Lu
- Division of Nephrology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Song C Ong
- Division of Nephrology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Beatrice P Concepcion
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Neeraj Singh
- Willis Knighton Health System, Shreveport, Louisiana
| | - Haris Murad
- Department of Medicine, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan
| | - Prince Anand
- Medical University of South Carolina, Greenville, South Carolina
| | | | | | - Krista L Lentine
- Saint Louis University Transplant Center, SSM-Saint Louis University Hospital, St Louis, Missouri
| | - Joshua R Lakin
- Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
| | - Tarek Alhamad
- Division of Nephrology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ferrari K, Aarnink A, Ayav C, Frimat L, Couchoud C, Audry B, Antoine C, Girerd S. Evolution of HLA-sensitization according to immunosuppressive therapy management among kidney transplant patients returning to dialysis between 2008 and 2019: A French retrospective study. Clin Transplant 2024; 38:e15160. [PMID: 37823237 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.15160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2022] [Revised: 08/25/2023] [Accepted: 09/29/2023] [Indexed: 10/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal management of immunosuppressive therapy (IT) after kidney allograft failure (KAF) remains controversial. Although maintaining IT may reduce HLA-sensitization and improve access to retransplantation, it may also increase the rate of immunosuppression-related complications. The overall impact on patient mortality is unknown. The main objective of this study was to compare the evolution of HLA-sensitization 6 months after KAF according to IT management. METHODS Individual clinical and health care data were extracted from the French national end-stage kidney disease registry (Renal Epidemiology and Information Network [REIN]) and the French National Health Data system (SNDS), respectively. Patients aged > 18 years returning to dialysis after KAF between January 2008 and December 2019 in Lorraine were included. Patients were classified into two groups, IT continuation or IT discontinuation. HLA-sensitization was defined as an increase in incompatible graft rate (IGR) between KAF and 6 months post-KAF (change to a higher predefined category (0%-5%), (5%-20%), (20%-50%), (50%-85%), (85%-95%), (95%-98%), (98%-100%)). Secondary outcome was patient survival according to IT management. RESULTS A total of 121 patients were included, 35 (29%) of whom continued IT. HLA-sensitization after KAF tended to be higher in the "IT discontinuation" group (57% vs. 38% in the "IT continuation" group, p = .07). In multivariate analysis, IT continuation was associated with a lower increase in IGR (OR .37, 95% CI [.14; .93]). IT management was not associated with patient mortality. CONCLUSIONS Continuation of IT after KAF was associated with less change in IGR and was not associated with excess mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Ferrari
- Nephrology Department, University Hospital of Nancy, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - Alice Aarnink
- Histocompatibility Laboratory, University Hospital of Nancy, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France
- IMoPA6, UMR7365 CNRS, Université de Lorraine, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France
| | - Carole Ayav
- Clinical Epidemiology, Inserm CIC-EC, University Hospital of Nancy, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - Luc Frimat
- Nephrology Department, University Hospital of Nancy, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | | | | | | | - Sophie Girerd
- Nephrology Department, University Hospital of Nancy, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France
- Université de Lorraine, Inserm, Centre d'Investigation Clinique-1433, and Inserm U1116, CHRU Nancy, F-CRIN INI-CRCT, Nancy, France
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Casey MJ, Murakami N, Ong S, Adler JT, Singh N, Murad H, Parajuli S, Concepcion BP, Lubetzky M, Pavlakis M, Woodside KJ, Faravardeh A, Basu A, Tantisattamo E, Aala A, Gruessner AC, Dadhania DM, Lentine KL, Cooper M, Parsons RF, Alhamad T. Medical and Surgical Management of the Failed Pancreas Transplant. Transplant Direct 2024; 10:e1543. [PMID: 38094134 PMCID: PMC10715788 DOI: 10.1097/txd.0000000000001543] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2023] [Revised: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 02/22/2024] Open
Abstract
Despite the continued improvements in pancreas transplant outcomes in recent decades, a subset of recipients experience graft failure and can experience substantial morbidity and mortality. Here, we summarize what is known about the failed pancreas allograft and what factors are important for consideration of retransplantation. The current definition of pancreas allograft failure and its challenges for the transplant community are explored. The impacts of a failed pancreas allograft are presented, including patient survival and resultant morbidities. The signs, symptoms, and medical and surgical management of a failed pancreas allograft are described, whereas the options and consequences of immunosuppression withdrawal are reviewed. Medical and surgical factors necessary for successful retransplant candidacy are detailed with emphasis on how well-selected patients may achieve excellent retransplant outcomes. To achieve substantial medical mitigation and even pancreas retransplantation, patients with a failed pancreas allograft warrant special attention to their residual renal, cardiovascular, and pulmonary function. Future studies of the failed pancreas allograft will require improved reporting of graft failure from transplant centers and continued investigation from experienced centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J. Casey
- Division of Nephrology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC
| | - Naoka Murakami
- Division of Renal Medicine, Brigham and Women Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Song Ong
- Division of Nephrology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Joel T. Adler
- Division of Transplant Surgery, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX
| | | | - Haris Murad
- Section of Nephrology, The Aga Khan University, Medical College, Pakistan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Arpita Basu
- Division of Renal Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
| | | | - Amtul Aala
- Division of Nephrology, Beth Israel Deaconess, Boston, MA
| | | | | | - Krista L. Lentine
- Division of Nephrology, SSM Health Saint Louis University Transplant Center, St. Louis, MO
| | - Matthew Cooper
- Division of Transplant Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - Ronald F. Parsons
- Division of Transplant Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Tarek Alhamad
- Division of Nephrology, Washington University in St Louis, St. Louis, MO
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Josephson MA, Becker Y, Budde K, Kasiske BL, Kiberd BA, Loupy A, Małyszko J, Mannon RB, Tönshoff B, Cheung M, Jadoul M, Winkelmayer WC, Zeier M. Challenges in the management of the kidney allograft: from decline to failure: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference. Kidney Int 2023; 104:1076-1091. [PMID: 37236423 DOI: 10.1016/j.kint.2023.05.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2023] [Revised: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 05/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
In March 2022, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) held a virtual Controversies Conference to address the important but rarely examined phase during which the kidney transplant is failing or has failed. In addition to discussing the definition of a failing allograft, 4 broad areas were considered in the context of a declining functioning graft: prognosis and kidney failure trajectory; immunosuppression strategies; management of medical and psychological complications, and patient factors; and choice of kidney replacement therapy or supportive care following graft loss. Identifying and paying special attention to individuals with failing allografts was felt to be important in order to prepare patients psychologically, manage immunosuppression, address complications, prepare for dialysis and/or retransplantation, and transition to supportive care. Accurate prognostication tools, although not yet widely available, were embraced as necessary to define allograft survival trajectories and the likelihood of allograft failure. The decision of whether to withdraw or continue immunosuppression after allograft failure was deemed to be based most appropriately on risk-benefit analysis and likelihood of retransplantation within a few months. Psychological preparation and support was identified as a critical factor in patient adjustment to graft failure, as was early communication. Several models of care were noted that enabled a medically supportive transition back to dialysis or retransplantation. Emphasis was placed on the importance of dialysis-access readiness before initiation of dialysis, in order to avoid use of central venous catheters. The centrality of the patient to all management decisions and discussions was deemed to be paramount. Patient "activation," which can be defined as engaged agency, was seen as the most effective way to achieve success. Unresolved controversies, gaps in knowledge, and areas for research were also stressed in the conference deliberations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle A Josephson
- Section of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, and Transplant Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
| | - Yolanda Becker
- Transplantation Institute, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Klemens Budde
- Department of Nephrology and Medical Intensive Care, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Bertram L Kasiske
- Department of Medicine, Hennepin Healthcare, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Bryce A Kiberd
- Department of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Alexandre Loupy
- Université Paris Cité, INSERM U970, Paris Institute for Transplantation and Organ Regeneration, F-75015 Paris, France; Department of Kidney Transplantation, Necker Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Jolanta Małyszko
- Department of Nephrology, Dialysis and Internal Diseases, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Roslyn B Mannon
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA
| | - Burkhard Tönshoff
- Department of Pediatrics I, University Children's Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael Cheung
- Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Michel Jadoul
- Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Wolfgang C Winkelmayer
- Selzman Institute for Kidney Health, Section of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Martin Zeier
- Division of Nephrology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Budhiraja P, Nguyen M, Heilman R, Kaplan B. The Role of Allograft Nephrectomy in the Failing Kidney Transplant. Transplantation 2023; 107:2486-2496. [PMID: 37122077 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004625] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/02/2023]
Abstract
Patients with failed renal allografts have associated increased morbidity and mortality. The individualization of immunosuppression taper is the key element in managing these patients to avoid graft intolerance and sensitization while balancing the risk of continued immunosuppression. Most patients with uncomplicated chronic allograft failure do not require allograft nephrectomy (AN), and there is no clear evidence that it improves outcomes. The AN procedure is associated with variable morbidity and mortality. It is reserved mainly for early technical graft failure or in symptomatic cases associated with allograft infection, malignancy, or graft intolerance syndrome. It may also be considered in those who cannot tolerate immunosuppression and are at high risk for graft intolerance. AN has been associated with an increased risk of sensitization due to inflammatory response from surgery, immunosuppression withdrawal with allograft failure, and retained endovascular tissue. Although it is presumed that for-cause AN after transplant failure is associated with sensitization, it remains unclear whether elective AN in patients who remain on immunotherapy may prevent sensitization. The current practice of immunosuppression taper has not been shown to prevent sensitization or increase infection risk, but current literature is limited by selection bias and the absence of medication adherence data. We discuss the management of failed allografts based on retransplant candidacy, wait times, risk of graft intolerance syndrome, and immunosuppression side effects. Many unanswered questions remain, and future prospective randomized trials are needed to help guide evidence-based management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Bruce Kaplan
- Department of Medicine, Colorado Center for Transplantation Care, Research and Education (CCTCARE), University of Colorado, Aurora, CO
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Von Tokarski F, Fillon A, Maisons V, Thoreau B, Bayer G, Gatault P, Longuet H, Sautenet B, Buchler M, Vigneau C, Fakhouri F, Halimi JM. Thrombotic microangiopathies after kidney transplantation in modern era: nosology based on chronology. BMC Nephrol 2023; 24:278. [PMID: 37730583 PMCID: PMC10512637 DOI: 10.1186/s12882-023-03326-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/07/2023] [Indexed: 09/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Thrombotic microangiopathies (TMAs) are rare but can be severe in kidney transplant. recipients (KTR). METHODS We analysed the epidemiology of adjudicated TMA in consecutive KTR during the. 2009-2021 period. RESULTS TMA was found in 77/1644 (4.7%) KTR. Early TMA (n = 24/77 (31.2%); 1.5% of all KTR) occurred during the first two weeks ((median, IQR) 3 [1-8] days). Triggers included acute antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR, n = 4) and bacterial infections (n = 6). Graft survival (GS) was 100% and recurrence rate (RR) was 8%. Unexpected TMA (n = 31/77 (40.2%); 1.5/1000 patient-years) occurred anytime during follow-up (3.0 (0.5-6.2) years). Triggers included infections (EBV/CMV: n = 10; bacterial: n = 6) and chronic active ABMR (n = 5). GS was 81% and RR was 16%. Graft-failure associated TMA (n = 22/77 (28.6%); 2.2% of graft losses) occurred after 8.8 (4.9-15.5) years). Triggers included acute (n = 4) or chronic active (n = 14) ABMR, infections (viral: n = 6; bacterial: n = 5) and cancer (n = 6). 15 patients underwent transplantectomy. RR was 27%. Atypical (n = 6) and typical (n = 2) haemolytic and uremic syndrome, and isolated CNI toxicity (n = 4) were rare. Two-third of biopsies presented TMA features. CONCLUSIONS TMA are mostly due to ABMR and infections; causes of TMA are frequently combined. Management often is heterogenous. Our nosology based on TMA timing identifies situations with distinct incidence, causes and prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florent Von Tokarski
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
| | - Alexandre Fillon
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
| | - Valentin Maisons
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
| | - Benjamin Thoreau
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
| | - Guillaume Bayer
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
| | - Philippe Gatault
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
- EA4245, François-Rabelais University, Tours, France
| | - Hélène Longuet
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
| | - Bénédicte Sautenet
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
- Inserm U1246, Hôpital Bretonneau, CHU Tours, Tours, France
| | - Matthias Buchler
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France
- EA4245, François-Rabelais University, Tours, France
| | - Cécile Vigneau
- Service de Néphrologie, CHU Pontchaillou, 35033, Rennes, France
- Université Rennes 1, Inserm IRSET, UMR 1085, 35033, Rennes, France
| | - Fadi Fakhouri
- Department of medicine, Service of Nephrology, CHUV and Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Jean-Michel Halimi
- Service de Néphrologie-HTA, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Bretonneau Et Hôpital Clôcheville, CHU Tours, 2 Bd Tonnellé, 37044, Tours, Tours Cedex, France.
- EA4245, François-Rabelais University, Tours, France.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Noelle J, Mayet V, Lambert C, Couzi L, Chauveau B, Thierry A, Ecotière L, Bertrand D, Laurent C, Lemal R, Grèze C, Freist M, Heng AE, Rouzaire PO, Garrouste C. Impact of Calcineurin Inhibitor-Based Immunosuppression Maintenance During the Dialysis Period After Kidney Transplant Failure on the Next Kidney Graft Outcome: A Retrospective Multicenter Study With Propensity Score Analysis. Transpl Int 2023; 36:11775. [PMID: 37799669 PMCID: PMC10548547 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2023.11775] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2023] [Accepted: 08/25/2023] [Indexed: 10/07/2023]
Abstract
The impact of immunosuppressive therapy (IS) strategies after kidney transplant failure (KTF) on potential future new grafts is poorly established. We assessed the potential benefit of calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-based IS maintenance throughout the dialysis period on the outcome of the second kidney transplant (KT). We identified 407 patients who underwent a second KT between January 2008 and December 2018 at four French KT centers. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control for potential confounding. We included 205 patients with similar baseline characteristics at KTF: a total of 53 received at least CNIs on the retransplant day (G-CNI), and 152 did not receive any IS (G-STOP). On the retransplant date, G-STOP patients experienced a longer pretransplant dialysis time, were more often hyperimmunized, and underwent more expanded-criteria donor KTs than G-CNI patients. During the second KT follow-up period, rejection episodes were similar in both groups. The 10-year survival rates without death and dialysis were 98.7% and 59.5% in G-CNI and G-STOP patients, respectively. In the multivariable analysis, CNI-based IS maintenance was associated with better survival (hazard ratio: 0.08; 95% confidence interval: 0.01-0.58, p = 0.01). CNI-based IS maintenance throughout the dialysis period after KTF may improve retransplantation outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juliette Noelle
- Service de Néphrologie Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Valentin Mayet
- Service de Néphrologie Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Céline Lambert
- Unité de Biostatistiques, Direction de la recherche clinique et d’ innovation, Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Lionel Couzi
- Service de Néphrologie, Transplantation, Dialyse et Aphérèses, Centre hospitalo-universitaire Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
| | - Bertrand Chauveau
- Service de Pathologie, Centre hospitalo-universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
| | - Antoine Thierry
- Service de Néphrologie-Hémodialyse-Transplantation Rénale, Centre hospitalo-universitaire Poitiers, Poitiers, France
| | - Laure Ecotière
- Service de Néphrologie-Hémodialyse-Transplantation Rénale, Centre hospitalo-universitaire Poitiers, Poitiers, France
| | - Dominique Bertrand
- Service de Néphrologie, Centre hospitalier régional universitaire rouen, Rouen, France
| | - Charlotte Laurent
- Service de Néphrologie, Centre hospitalier régional universitaire rouen, Rouen, France
| | - Richard Lemal
- Service d’Histocompatibilité et Immunogénétique, Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Clarisse Grèze
- Service de Néphrologie Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Marine Freist
- Service de Néphrologie Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France
- Service de Néphrologie et Dialyse, Centre hospitalier Emile Roux, Le Puy-en-Velay, France
| | - Anne-Elisabeth Heng
- Service de Néphrologie Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Paul-Olivier Rouzaire
- Service d’Histocompatibilité et Immunogénétique, Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France
- EA 7453 CHELTER, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Cyril Garrouste
- Service de Néphrologie Centre hospitalo-universitaire Clermont-Ferrand, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France
- EA 7453 CHELTER, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Tanriover C, Copur S, Basile C, Ucku D, Kanbay M. Dialysis after kidney transplant failure: how to deal with this daunting task? J Nephrol 2023; 36:1777-1787. [PMID: 37676635 DOI: 10.1007/s40620-023-01758-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 08/06/2023] [Indexed: 09/08/2023]
Abstract
The best treatment for patients with end-stage kidney disease is kidney transplantation, which, if successful provides both a reduction in mortality and a better quality of life compared to dialysis. Although there has been significant improvement in short-term outcomes after kidney transplantation, long-term graft survival still remains insufficient. As a result, there has been an increase in the number of individuals who need dialysis again after kidney transplant failure, and increasingly contribute to kidney transplant waiting lists. Starting dialysis after graft failure is a difficult task not only for the patients, but also for the nephrologists and the care team. Furthermore, recommendations for management of dialysis after kidney graft loss are lacking. Aim of this narrative review is to provide a perspective on the role of dialysis in the management of patients with failed kidney allograft. Although numerous studies have reported higher mortality in patients undergoing dialysis following kidney allograft failure, reports are contrasting. A patient-centered, individualized approach should drive the choices of initiating dialysis, dialysis modality, maintenance of immunosuppressive drugs and vascular access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cem Tanriover
- Department of Medicine, Koc University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Sidar Copur
- Department of Medicine, Koc University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Carlo Basile
- Associazione Nefrologica Gabriella Sebastio, Via Battisti 192, 74121, Taranto, Italy.
| | - Duygu Ucku
- Department of Medicine, Koc University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Mehmet Kanbay
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Koc University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ogawa L, Beaird OE, Schaenman JM. Risk factors for infection in patients with a failed kidney allograft on immunosuppressive medications. Front Nephrol 2023; 3:1149116. [PMID: 37675348 PMCID: PMC10479655 DOI: 10.3389/fneph.2023.1149116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 09/08/2023]
Abstract
Patients with a failing kidney allograft are often continued on immunosuppression (IS) to preserve residual kidney function and prevent allosensitization. It has been previously accepted that maintaining patients on immunosuppressive therapy results in an increased risk of infection, hospitalization, and mortality. However, as the management of IS in patients with a failed kidney allograft continues to evolve, it is important to review the data regarding associations between infection and specific immunosuppression regimens. We present a review of the literature of failed kidney allograft management and infection risk, and discuss practices for infection prevention. Fifteen studies, published from 1995 to 2022, which investigated the experience of patients with failed allograft and infection, were identified. Infection was most commonly documented as a general event, but when specified, included infections caused by Candida, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and Aspergillus. In addition, the definition of reduced "IS" varied from decreased doses of a triple drug regimen to monotherapy, whereas others did not specify which medications patients were receiving. Despite attempts at lowering net immunosuppression, patients with failed allografts remain at risk of acquiring opportunistic and non-opportunistic infections. Although opportunistic infections secondary to IS are expected, somewhat surprisingly, it appears that the greatest risk of infection may be related to complications of dialysis. Therefore, mitigating strategies, such as planning for an arteriovenous (AV) fistula over a hemodialysis catheter placement, may reduce infection risk. Additional studies are needed to provide more information regarding the types and timing of infection in the setting of a failed kidney allograft. In addition, more data are needed regarding specific medications, doses, and timing of taper of IS to guide future patient management and inform strategies for infection surveillance and prophylaxis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Joanna M. Schaenman
- Division of Infectious Diseases, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California—Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
McDonald M. Allograft nephrectomy vs. no nephrectomy for failed renal transplants. Front Nephrol 2023; 3:1169181. [PMID: 37675360 PMCID: PMC10479781 DOI: 10.3389/fneph.2023.1169181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2023] [Accepted: 06/13/2023] [Indexed: 09/08/2023]
Abstract
The role of allograft nephrectomy (AN) in failed renal transplants is a topic of debate, owing to controversial results reported in the literature and the fact that most of the studies are limited by a retrospective design and small numbers of participants. Allograft nephrectomy is most likely of benefit in the patient with recurrent allograft intolerance syndrome (AIS) following pulse steroids. Immunosuppression weaning in the presence of clinical signs related to a chronic inflammatory state is also reasonable grounds to pursue AN. Studies are mainly inconclusive but suggest that AN has no overall benefit for allograft survival after retransplant. This topic is still of interest in the transplant field and is particularly relevant for patients who are likely to require retransplantation within their lifetime. Further assessment is needed in the form of randomized controlled trials that control for various AN indications and immunosuppression regimens, and have clearly defined survival outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle McDonald
- Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Hickey MJ, Singh G, Lum EL. Continuation of immunosuppression vs. immunosuppression weaning in potential repeat kidney transplant candidates: a care management perspective. Front Nephrol 2023; 3:1163581. [PMID: 37746029 PMCID: PMC10513023 DOI: 10.3389/fneph.2023.1163581] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2023] [Accepted: 05/17/2023] [Indexed: 09/26/2023]
Abstract
Management of immunosuppression in patients with a failing or failed kidney transplant requires a complete assessment of their clinical condition. One of the major considerations in determining immunosuppression is whether or not such an individual is considered a candidate for re-transplantation. Withdrawal of immunosuppression in a re-transplant candidate can result in allosensitization and markedly reduce the chances of a repeat transplant. In this review, we summarize the effects of immunosuppression reduction on HLA sensitization, discuss the impacts of allosensitization in these patients, and explore reduction protocols and future directions. Risks of chronic immunosuppression, medical management of the failing allograft, and the effect of nephrectomy are covered elsewhere in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle J. Hickey
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Immunogenetics Center, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Gurbir Singh
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Erik L. Lum
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Lam NN, Quinn RR, Clarke A, Al-Wahsh H, Knoll GA, Tibbles LA, Kamar F, Jeong R, Kiberd J, Ravani P. Progression of Kidney Disease in Kidney Transplant Recipients With a Failing Graft: A Matched Cohort Study. Can J Kidney Health Dis 2023; 10:20543581231177203. [PMID: 37313362 PMCID: PMC10259097 DOI: 10.1177/20543581231177203] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2023] [Accepted: 03/26/2023] [Indexed: 06/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Few studies have assessed outcomes in transplant recipients with failing grafts as most studies have focused on outcomes after graft loss. Objective To determine whether renal function declines faster in kidney transplant recipients with a failing graft than in people with chronic kidney disease of their native kidneys. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Alberta, Canada (2002-2019). Patients We identified kidney transplant recipients with a failing graft (2 estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] measurements 15-30 mL/min/1.73 m2 ≥90 days apart). Measurements We compared the change in eGFR over time (eGFR with 95% confidence limits, LCLeGFRUCL) and the competing risks of kidney failure and death (cause-specific hazard ratios [HRs], LCLHRUCL). Methods Recipients (n = 575) were compared with propensity-score-matched, nontransplant controls (n = 575) with a similar degree of kidney dysfunction. Results The median potential follow-up time was 7.8 years (interquartile range, 3.6-12.1). The hazards for kidney failure (HR1.101.331.60) and death (HR1.211.592.07) were significantly higher for recipients, while the eGFR decline over time was similar (recipients vs controls: -2.60-2.27-1.94 vs -2.52-2.21-1.90 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year). The rate of eGFR decline was associated with kidney failure but not death. Limitations This was a retrospective, observational study, and there is a risk of bias due to residual confounding. Conclusions Although eGFR declines at a similar rate in transplant recipients as in nontransplant controls, recipients have a higher risk of kidney failure and death. Studies are needed to identify preventive measures to improve outcomes in transplant recipients with a failing graft.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ngan N. Lam
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Robert R. Quinn
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Alix Clarke
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Huda Al-Wahsh
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Greg A. Knoll
- Department of Medicine (Nephrology) and The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Lee Anne Tibbles
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Fareed Kamar
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Rachel Jeong
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - James Kiberd
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Pietro Ravani
- Division of Nephrology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Blosser CD, Portuguese AJ, Santana C, Murakami N. Transplant Onconephrology: An Update. Semin Nephrol 2023; 42:151348. [PMID: 37209580 DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2023.151348] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/22/2023]
Abstract
Transplant onconephrology is a growing specialty focused on the health care of kidney transplant recipients with cancer. Given the complexities associated with the care of transplant patients, along with the advent of novel cancer therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen-receptor T cells, there is a dire need for the subspecialty of transplant onconephrology. The management of cancer in the setting of kidney transplantation is best accomplished by a multidisciplinary team, including transplant nephrologists, oncologists, and patients. This review addresses the current state and future opportunities for transplant onconephrology, including the roles of the multidisciplinary team, and related scientific and clinical knowledge.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher D Blosser
- Division of Nephrology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Division of Nephrology, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA.
| | | | | | - Naoka Murakami
- Division of Renal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Loban K, Horton A, Robert JT, Hales L, Parajuli S, McAdams-DeMarco M, Sandal S. Perspectives and experiences of kidney transplant recipients with graft failure: A systematic review and meta-synthesis. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2023; 37:100761. [PMID: 37120965 DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2023.100761] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2023] [Revised: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 04/11/2023] [Indexed: 05/02/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Kidney transplant recipients with graft failure are a rapidly rising cohort of patients who experience high morbidity, mortality, and fragmented transitions of care between transplant and dialysis teams. Current approaches to improving care focus on medical and surgical interventions, increasing re-transplantation, and improving coordination between treating teams with little understanding of patient needs and perspectives. METHODS We undertook a systematic literature review of personal experiences of patients with graft failure. Six electronic and five grey literature databases were searched systematically. Of 4664 records screened 43 met the inclusion criteria. Six empirical qualitative studies and case studies were included in the final analysis. Thematic synthesis was used to combine data that included the perspectives of 31 patients with graft failure and 9 caregivers. RESULTS Using the Transition Model, we isolated three interconnected phases as patients transition through graft failure: shattering of lifestyle and plans associated with a successful transplant; physical and psychological turbulence; and re-alignment by learning adaptive strategies to move forward. Critical factors affecting coping included multi-disciplinary healthcare approaches, social support, and individual-level factors. While clinical transplant care was evaluated positively, participants identified gaps in the provision of information and psychosocial support related to graft failure. Graft failure had a profound impact on caregivers especially when they were living donors. CONCLUSIONS Our review reports patient-identified priorities for improving care and can help inform research and guideline development that strives to improve the care of patients with graft failure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katya Loban
- Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Division of Experimental Medicine, Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Anna Horton
- Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Jorane-Tiana Robert
- Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Lindsay Hales
- Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Sandesh Parajuli
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Mara McAdams-DeMarco
- Department of Surgery, NYU Grossman School of Medicine and NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Shaifali Sandal
- Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Division of Experimental Medicine, Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Murakami N, Reich AJ, Pavlakis M, Lakin JR. Conservative Kidney Management in Kidney Transplant Populations. Semin Nephrol 2023; 43:151401. [PMID: 37499572 PMCID: PMC10543459 DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2023.151401] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/29/2023]
Abstract
Conservative kidney management (CKM) has been increasingly accepted as a therapeutic option for seriously ill patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. CKM is active medical management of advanced chronic kidney disease without dialysis, with a focus on delaying the worsening of kidney disease and minimizing symptom burden. CKM may be considered a suitable option for kidney transplant recipients with poorly functioning and declining allografts, defined as patients with low estimated glomerular filtration rate (<20 mL/min per 1.73 m2) who are approaching allograft failure. CKM may be a fitting option for transplant patients facing high morbidity and mortality with or without dialysis resumption, and it should be offered as a choice for this patient population. In this review, we describe clinical considerations in caring for patients with poorly functioning and declining kidney allografts, especially the unique decision-making process around kidney replacement therapies. We discuss ways to incorporate CKM as an option for these patients. We also discuss financial and policy considerations in providing CKM for this population. Patients with poorly functioning and declining kidney allografts should be supported throughout transitions of care by an interprofessional and multidisciplinary team attuned to their unique challenges. Further research on when, who, and how to integrate CKM into existing care structures for patients with poorly functioning and declining kidney allografts is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Naoka Murakami
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Division of Renal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
| | - Amanda J Reich
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Martha Pavlakis
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA
| | - Joshua R Lakin
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Division of Palliative Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Huang B, Huang M, Zhang C, Yu Z, Hou Y, Miao Y, Chen Z. Individual dynamic prediction and prognostic analysis for long-term allograft survival after kidney transplantation. BMC Nephrol 2022; 23:359. [DOI: 10.1186/s12882-022-02996-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2022] [Accepted: 11/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Predicting allograft survival is vital for efficient transplant success. With dynamic changes in patient conditions, clinical indicators may change longitudinally, and doctors’ judgments may be highly variable. It is necessary to establish a dynamic model to precisely predict the individual risk/survival of new allografts.
Methods
The follow-up data of 407 patients were obtained from a renal allograft failure study. We introduced a landmarking-based dynamic Cox model that incorporated baseline values (age at transplantation, sex, weight) and longitudinal changes (glomerular filtration rate, proteinuria, hematocrit). Model performance was evaluated using Harrell’s C-index and the Brier score.
Results
Six predictors were included in our analysis. The Kaplan–Meier estimates of survival at baseline showed an overall 5-year survival rate of 87.2%. The dynamic Cox model showed the individual survival prediction with more accuracy at different time points (for the 5-year survival prediction, the C-index = 0.789 and Brier score = 0.065 for the average of all time points) than the static Cox model at baseline (C-index = 0.558, Brier score = 0.095). Longitudinal covariate prognostic analysis (with time-varying effects) was performed.
Conclusions
The dynamic Cox model can utilize clinical follow-up data, including longitudinal patient information. Dynamic prediction and prognostic analysis can be used to provide evidence and a reference to better guide clinical decision-making for applying early treatment to patients at high risk.
Collapse
|
18
|
Leal R, Pardinhas C, Martinho A, Sá HO, Figueiredo A, Alves R. Challenges in the Management of the Patient with a Failing Kidney Graft: A Narrative Review. J Clin Med 2022; 11:jcm11206108. [PMID: 36294429 PMCID: PMC9605319 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11206108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2022] [Revised: 09/29/2022] [Accepted: 09/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Patients with a failed kidney allograft have steadily increase in recent years and returning to dialysis after graft loss is one of the most difficult transitions for chronic kidney disease patients and their assistant physicians. The management of these patients is complex and encompasses the treatment of chronic kidney disease complications, dialysis restart and access planning, immunosuppression withdrawal, graft nephrectomy, and evaluation for a potential retransplant. In recent years, several groups have focused on the management of the patient with a failing renal graft and expert recommendations are arising. A review of Pubmed, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library was performed focusing on the specific care of these patients, from the management of low clearance complications to concerns with a subsequent kidney transplant. Conclusion: There is a growing interest in the failing renal graft and new approaches to improve these patients’ outcomes are being defined including specific multidisciplinary programs, individualized immunosuppression withdrawal schemes, and strategies to prevent HLA sensitization and increase retransplant rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rita Leal
- Nephrology Department, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +351-239-400400
| | - Clara Pardinhas
- Nephrology Department, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal
| | - António Martinho
- Coimbra Histocompatibility Center, Portuguese Institute of Blood and Transplantation, 3041-861 Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Helena Oliveira Sá
- Nephrology Department, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Arnaldo Figueiredo
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal
- Urology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Rui Alves
- Nephrology Department, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Leal R, Pardinhas C, Martinho A, Sá HO, Figueiredo A, Alves R. Strategies to Overcome HLA Sensitization and Improve Access to Retransplantation after Kidney Graft Loss. J Clin Med 2022; 11:5753. [PMID: 36233621 PMCID: PMC9572793 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11195753] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2022] [Revised: 09/24/2022] [Accepted: 09/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
An increasing number of patients waitlisted for kidney transplantation have a previously failed graft. Retransplantation provides a significant improvement in morbidity, mortality, and quality of life when compared to dialysis. However, HLA sensitization is a major barrier to kidney retransplantation and the majority of the highly sensitized patients are waiting for a subsequent kidney transplant. A multidisciplinary team that includes immunogeneticists, transplant nephrologists and surgeons, and adequate allocation policies is fundamental to increase access to a kidney retransplant. A review of Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library was performed on the challenges of kidney retransplantation after graft loss, focusing on the HLA barrier and new strategies to overcome sensitization. Conclusion: Technical advances in immunogenetics, new desensitization protocols, and complex allocation programs have emerged in recent years to provide a new hope to kidney recipients with a previously failed graft.
Collapse
|
20
|
Knoll G, Campbell P, Chasse M, Fergusson D, Ramsay T, Karnabi P, Perl J, House A, Kim J, Johnston O, Mainra R, Houde I, Baran D, Treleaven D, Senecal L, Tibbles LA, Hébert MJ, White C, Karpinski M, Gill J. Immunosuppressant Medication Use in Patients with Kidney Allograft Failure: A Prospective Multi-Center Canadian Cohort Study. J Am Soc Nephrol 2022; 33:1182-1192. [PMID: 35321940 PMCID: PMC9161795 DOI: 10.1681/asn.2021121642] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2021] [Accepted: 01/03/2022] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Patients with kidney transplant failure have a high risk of hospitalization and death due to infection. The optimal use of immunosuppressants after transplant failure remains uncertain and clinical practice varies widely. Methods: This prospective cohort study enrolled patients within 21 days of starting dialysis after transplant failure in 16 Canadian centers. Immunosuppressant medication use, death, hospitalized infection, rejection of the failed allograft, and panel reactive anti-HLA antibodies (PRA) were determined at 1, 3, 6 , and 12 months and bi-annually until death, repeat transplantation, or loss to follow-up. Results: The 269 study patients were followed for a median of 558 days. There were 33 deaths, 143 patients hospitalized for infection, and 21 rejections. Most patients (65%) continued immunosuppressants, 20% continued prednisone only, while 15% discontinued all immunosuppressants. In multivariable models, patients who continued immunosuppressants had a lower risk of death (HR =0.40, 95% CI, 0.17-0.93) and were not at increased risk of hospitalized infection (HR 1.81; 95% CI 0.82 to 4.0) compared to patients who discontinued all immunosuppressants or continued prednisone only. The mean class I and class II PRA increased from 11% to 27% and 25% to 47%, respectively, but did not differ by immunosuppressant use. Continuation of immunosuppressants was not protective of rejection of the failed allograft (HR 0.81, 95% CI, 0.22-2.94). Conclusions: Prolonged use of immunosuppressants greater than one year after transplant failure was not associated with a higher risk of death or hospitalized infection but was insufficient to prevent higher anti-HLA antibodies or rejection of the failed allograft.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Greg Knoll
- G Knoll, Department of Medicine (Nephrology), University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Patrica Campbell
- P Campbell, Department of Laboratory Medicine & Pathology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Michael Chasse
- M Chasse, Department of Medicine (Critical Care), University of Montreal Hospital Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | - Dean Fergusson
- D Fergusson, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Tim Ramsay
- T Ramsay, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Priscilla Karnabi
- P Karnabi, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Health Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Jeffrey Perl
- J Perl, Division of Nephrology, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada
| | - Andrew House
- A House, Department of Medicine (Nephrology), Western University, London, Canada
| | - Joe Kim
- J Kim, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Canada
| | - Olwyn Johnston
- O Johnston, Division of Nephrology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Rahul Mainra
- R Mainra, Saskatchewan Transplant Program, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada
| | - Isabel Houde
- I Houde , Transplantation Unit, Renal Division, Department of Medicine, Laval University Faculty of Medicine, Quebec, Canada
| | - Dana Baran
- D Baran, Division of Nephrology and the Multi Organ Transplant Program, Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal, Canada
| | - Darin Treleaven
- D Treleaven, Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Lynne Senecal
- L Senecal, Department of Nephrology, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Montreal, Canada
| | - Lee Ann Tibbles
- L Tibbles, ALTRA Transplant Program, Southern Alberta, Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Marie-Josée Hébert
- M Hébert, Centre de recherche, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | - Christine White
- C White, Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
| | - Martin Karpinski
- M Karpinski, Department of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
| | - John Gill
- J Gill, Division of Nephrology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Nardelli L, Scalamogna A, Messa P, Gallieni M, Cacciola R, Tripodi F, Castellano G, Favi E. Peritoneal Dialysis for Potential Kidney Transplant Recipients: Pride or Prejudice? Medicina (B Aires) 2022; 58:medicina58020214. [PMID: 35208541 PMCID: PMC8875254 DOI: 10.3390/medicina58020214] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2021] [Revised: 01/24/2022] [Accepted: 01/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Kidney transplantation (KT) is recognized as the gold-standard of treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that receiving a pre-emptive KT ensures the best recipient and graft survivals. However, due to an overwhelming discrepancy between the organs available and the patients on the transplant waiting list, the vast majority of transplant candidates require prolonged periods of dialysis before being transplanted. For many years, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) have been considered competitive renal replacement therapies (RRT). This dualistic vision has recently been questioned by evidence suggesting that an individualized and flexible approach may be more appropriate. In fact, tailored and cleverly planned changes between different RRT modalities, according to the patient’s needs and characteristics, are often needed in order to achieve the best results. While home HD is still under scrutiny in this particular setting, current data seems to favor the use of PD over in-center HD in patients awaiting a KT. In this specific population, the demonstrated advantages of PD are superior quality of life, longer preservation of residual renal function, lower incidence of delayed graft function, better recipient survival, and reduced cost.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luca Nardelli
- Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.S.); (P.M.); (F.T.); (G.C.)
| | - Antonio Scalamogna
- Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.S.); (P.M.); (F.T.); (G.C.)
| | - Piergiorgio Messa
- Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.S.); (P.M.); (F.T.); (G.C.)
- Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
| | - Maurizio Gallieni
- Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Università di Milano, 20157 Milan, Italy;
- Nephrology and Dialysis Unit, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, 20157 Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Cacciola
- Department of Surgical Sciences, Università di Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy;
| | - Federica Tripodi
- Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.S.); (P.M.); (F.T.); (G.C.)
| | - Giuseppe Castellano
- Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.S.); (P.M.); (F.T.); (G.C.)
- Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
| | - Evaldo Favi
- Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Kidney Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-3666036167
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Garg N, Viney K, Burger J, Hidalgo L, Parajuli S, Aziz F, Mohamed MA, Djamali A, Mandelbrot DA. Factors affecting sensitization following kidney allograft failure. Clin Transplant 2021; 36:e14558. [PMID: 34923658 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14558] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2021] [Revised: 12/03/2021] [Accepted: 12/07/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Management of immunosuppression in a kidney transplant recipient with a failed allograft is complex; continuation carries infectious and metabolic risks, and discontinuation can lead to sensitization. We evaluated risk factors for sensitization in 89 kidney or simultaneous kidney-pancreas recipients, whose kidney transplant failed after 1/2013 and who were subsequently re-evaluated for kidney transplantation. Among recipients with pre graft failure cPRA <50%, calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) continuation (OR 0.11, p = 0.003) and steroid continuation (OR 0.17, p = 0.04) were associated with significantly lower odds of developing an absolute increase in cPRA of ≥50%. Each additional HLA mismatch was associated with OR of 2.16 (p = 0.02). CNI use was associated with OR of 0.09 (p = 0.001) for increase in cPRA to ≥80% if pre graft failure cPRA was <50%, and OR of 0.08 (p = 0.02) for increase in cPRA to ≥98% if pre graft cPRA was <80%. Anti-metabolites were continued more often among recipients who had a <50% increase (p = 0.006), however the association was lost on multivariate analyses. Weaning off immunosuppression and higher number of HLA mismatches are associated with greater likelihood of sensitization. While both CNI and steroid continuation conferred some protection against increase in cPRA, CNI continuation was the only factor protecting against becoming highly sensitized. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neetika Garg
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Kelley Viney
- HLA laboratory, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - John Burger
- HLA laboratory, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Luis Hidalgo
- HLA laboratory, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Sandesh Parajuli
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Fahad Aziz
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Maha A Mohamed
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Arjang Djamali
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA.,Division of Transplant Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI
| | - Didier A Mandelbrot
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| |
Collapse
|