The reduction of left ventricular hypertrophy after renal transplantation is not influenced by the immunosuppressive regimen

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the first cause of death after kidney transplantation. Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is one of the main CV risk factors. It has been reported that the antiproliferative properties of everolimus (EVE) treatment may decrease left ventricular mass. The aim of this study was to evaluate the evolution of LVH in two groups of kidney transplant recipients receiving immunosuppressive treatment with low-dose calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) + EVE or CNI + mycophenolate mofetil (MMF).

METHODS

We evaluated 104 patients of mean age 47.5 ± 13.1 years who underwent kidney transplantation between January 2006 and December 2009 pretransplant by echocardiography, which was repeated every year for 3 years during which all patients continued the initial therapy. Over the 3-year period 76 subjects were treated with MMF, and 28 with EVE. We recorded left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), interventricular septum thickness in diastole (IVSTD), left ventricular posterior wall thickness in diastole (LVPWD), left ventricular end-diastolic volume and end-systolic volume during the follow-up echocardiographic evaluations.

RESULTS

No differences in the evolution of the echocardiographic parameters were observed between the two groups-MMF versus EVE group: LVEDD, 50.3 ± 5.1 versus 51.2 ± 6.7 mm; IVSTD, 11.2 ± 1.9 versus 11.3 ± 2 mm; LVPWD, 10.2 ± 1.9 versus 10.5 ± 1.7 mm; relative wall thickness, 0.041 ± 0.08 versus 0.42 ± 0.08; ejection fraction, 63 ± 6% versus 61 ± 5%; and left ventricular mass index, 113 ± 28.9 versus 121.9 ± 39.4 g/m(2), respectively. Compared with pretransplant echocardiographic evaluations, similar reductions in left ventricular mass index were noted in both groups after transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed that after renal transplantation there was a reduction of the LVH respect to the pretransplant dialytic status. The two immunosuppressive regimen did not influence the evolution of post-transplant LVH.

Significant improvement in patient survival after renal transplantation in the last decade

INTRODUCTION

The extremely good results of renal transplantation have favored the use of pre-emptive procedures for treatment of patients with end-stage renal disease before entering dialysis, but still some concerns exist about patient survival. The aim of this study was to analyze the evolution of death rates and the causes of mortality among recipients of procedures performed between 1970 and 2007.

METHODS

We examined the outcomes at 1, 5, 10, and 15 years follow-up of 793 adults who underwent primary or repeat renal transplantation from living or deceased donors between January 1, 1970 and December 31, 2007. To evaluate the impact of immunosuppressive regimens on patient survivals, we considered 3 time intervals: the precyclosporine era, the cyclosporine era, and the postcyclosporine era.

RESULTS

During follow-up 115/793 (14.5%) renal transplant recipients died. There was a significant decrease in the overall mortality rate over the years. Patients who underwent transplantation more recently in the postcyclosporine era (1997-2007) showed a mortality rate of 1.8% (7/394) at 1 year and 3.3% (13/394) at 5 years, significantly lower than in previous periods. There was no significant change in the most frequent causes of death: cardiovascular diseases and sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Our data indicated a significant improvement in patient survival after renal transplantation over the last decade. These data are significantly better than those reported for dialysis treatment thus supporting the strategy of pre-emptive transplantation for end-stage renal disease.

Induction with basiliximab plus thymoglobulin is effective and safe in old-for-old renal transplantation: six-month results of a prospective clinical study

Old-for-old renal transplantation is becoming more frequent, but the optimal immunosuppressive regimens for this transplant population are still unclear. The aim of this pilot prospective study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of basiliximab with a short course of low-dose thymoglobulin induction therapy among a group of patients receiving kidneys from donors >60 years (OLD), compared with those receiving organs from donors <60 years (YNG). Forty-six consecutive deceased donor kidney transplant patients received induction therapy with a combination of basiliximab (20 mg IV on days 0 and 4) and thymoglobulin (200 mg total dose IV on days 0-3). As maintenance immunosuppression starting on day 4, patients received a low dose of calcineurin inhibitor and steroids. Demographic characteristics at baseline were not significantly different between the 2 groups. At 6 months, patient survival, graft survival, and acute rejection rates were similar between the YNG and OLD groups: 100% and 95%, 96% and 95%, and 8% and 0%, respectively. Patients in the OLD group showed higher serum creatinine concentrations (YNG 1.5 +/- 0.3 vs OLD 1.9 +/- 0.3 mg/dL; P = .0002) but not proteinuria (YNG 0.11 +/- 0.11 vs OLD 0.15 +/- 0.14 g/24 h; P = ns). No significant difference was evident between the 2 groups regarding infectious, hematologic, or posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder complications. This study showed that a combination of basiliximab and a short course of low-dose thymoglobulin provided effective and safe immunosuppression, in old-for-old renal transplantation, with good renal function without an increased risk of posttransplantation infectious or hematologic complications.

Once daily everolimus is safe and effective in de novo renal transplant recipients: six-month results of a pilot study

INTRODUCTION

The half-life of everolimus is approximately 28 hours, but everolimus is normally administered twice a day. The aim of this prospective, single-center, exploratory study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a once a day (OD) everolimus regimen versus the standard twice a day regimen (BID) for immunosuppressive therapy in renal transplantation.

METHODS

Forty de novo renal transplant recipients prospectively assigned to OD (n = 21) or BID (n = 19) were followed for 6 months. In the OD group, everolimus was given orally once a day to target a trough blood level of 2-6 ng/mL. In the BID, group everolimus was given twice a day to target a trough blood level of 3-12 ng/mL. All patients also received induction treatment with basiliximab and low-dose calcineurin inhibitors.

RESULTS

At 6 months follow-up, patient and graft survivals were 100%; renal function and acute rejection rates were similar between the 2 regimens. Patients in the OD group showed significantly lower cholesterol and triglyceride levels compared with those in the BID group, namely, total cholesterol level, OD 212 +/- 54 versus BID 249 +/- 59 mg/dL (P < .05), and serum triglycerides, OD 162 +/- 72 versus BID 245 +/- 133 mg/dL (P < .02).

DISCUSSION

This study showed that OD administration of everolimus provided excellent patient and graft survivals and good renal function without an increased incidence of acute rejection episodes. The lipid profile was significantly better among patients receiving everolimus OD. These findings suggested that everolimus can be safely administered once a day.

Higher Incidence of Acute Rejection in Renal Transplant Recipients With Low Everolimus Exposure

Everolimus (EVL) has shown a potential to reduce nephrotoxicity associated with cyclosporine (CsA) while providing similar protection against rejection. We analyzed the incidence of acute rejection episodes (ARE) among 20 cadaveric renal transplant recipients treated with the combination of EVL + CsA. Immunosuppression consisted of basiliximab induction given pretransplant and on day 4 posttransplant; EVL at a starting dose of 1.5 mg/day followed by concentration control to trough levels of 3 to 8 ng/mL by day 7; CsA at a starting dose of 4 mg/kg per day and then concentration controlled with C2 monitoring (C2 500-700 ng/mL); and steroids in a tapering regimen to reach 5 mg by day 30. The overall incidence of ARE was 25%. On postoperative day 7, patients with ARE showed significantly lower mean EVL trough concentrations compared with those not experiencing ARE (NO ARE: 2.2 +/- 2.1 ng/mL vs 4.8 +/- 2.4 ng/mL) (P = .05). The CsA C2 values were close to the lower end of the target range on day 3 (583 +/- 334 ng/mL). All rejecting grafts were functioning at 3 months posttransplantations, but mean serum creatinine was higher in the ARE group (ARE 2.2 +/- 0.7 mg/dL vs 1.1 +/- 0.2 NO ARE; P = .04). In conclusion, whenever EVL is used in combination with CsA to protect kidney transplant patients against the risk of acute rejection, a threshold of 3 ng/mL must be reached in the first week posttransplantation. We suggest careful monitoring of EVL exposure and increased EVL starting doses.

Incidence of Posttransplant Diabetes Mellitus in Kidney Transplant Recipients Immunosuppressed With Sirolimus in Combination With Cyclosporine

Sirolimus (SRL) in combination with Cyclosporine A (CsA) and steroids has been shown to lower the incidence of acute renal allograft rejection episodes, allowing CsA sparing. We retrospectively compared the incidence of posttransplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) among kidney transplant recipients (KTx) immunosuppressed with SRL + CsA versus CsA alone. Patients were divided into two groups: SRL + CsA (n = 38) versus CsA (n = 48). Mean follow-up was 53.9 +/- 17.1 months. Seventeen/86 subjects (19.8%) developed diabetes after transplantation (7 IFG, 8.1%; 10 PTDM, 11.6%). The incidence was significantly higher in SRL + CsA (12/38 patients, 31.6%) compared with CsA (5/43 patients, 10.4%) (P = .0144, odds ratio 3.97). More patients required treatment in the SRL + CsA compared to CsA alone cohort (13.2% vs 2.1%, P = .051): 4 pts (10.5%) became insulin- dependent among SRL+CsA, vs none in the CsA group. Use of OHD was similar in both groups (2.6% SRL + CsA vs 2.1% CsA). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, sex distribution, BMI, or serum creatinine at 1 to 3 and 5 years from transplantation. All PTDM patients are alive at follow-up, while two grafts were lost due to chronic renal allograft dysfunction. Within the limits of a small retrospective study, we observed that SRL in combination with CsA increased the diabetogenic potential of CsA. A possible explanation of our findings is that higher CsA doses were used in the early experience with SRL + CsA; therefore the higher incidence of PTDM that we observed in the SRL + CsA combination may be a sign of toxicity. Careful monitoring of blood levels is mandatory in the SRL + CsA combination to avoid pleiotropic toxicity.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm in renal transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) requiring surgical management are encountered more frequently in renal transplant recipients, presenting an important technical problem during the repair. The aim of the present study was to analyze the epidemiology and natural evolution of AAA among renal allograft recipients.

METHODS

Three hundred ninety-four renal transplant recipients were periodically evaluated with abdominal aortic ultrasound tomography for AAA. The indication for surgery was a maximal diameter >5 cm. Renal function, graft, and patient survival were evaluated after a mean follow-up of 51 months.

RESULTS

Four AAA were detected in 394 renal transplant recipients, a prevalence of 1.01%. All of the AAA were found in male recipients of mean age 59.2 +/- 5.5 years and mean time posttransplantation of 82.7 +/- 77.3 months. The mean follow-up period between diagnosis and indication for surgery was 14.2 +/- 10.8 months. Two patients underwent open repair with aneurysmectomy and conventional tube graft positioning, and 2 patients refused surgical repair. To preserve renal graft function during the aortic cross-clamping phase, cold perfusion with 4 degrees C Ringer acetate and local hypothermia with sterile ice were used. Renal function did not change after the operation (preoperative serum creatinine levels were 1.2 and 1.3 mg/dL; postoperative 1.3 and 1.5 mg/dL respectively). The 2 patients who underwent surgery are alive with excellent graft functioning after a follow-up of 1.5 and 7 years, respectively. The 2 patients who refused surgical treatment are dead.

CONCLUSIONS

Yearly ultrasound screening for AAA must be recommended in renal transplant recipients as part of the routine posttransplantation follow-up. De novo AAA occurs in younger subject in the transplant population and shows a faster evolution.

Gonadal function and immunosuppressive therapy after renal transplantation

End-stage renal disease is associated with disorders in hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal function. Immunosuppressive therapies may influence the restoration of normal levels of gonadal hormones after renal transplantation. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the hormonal status of successful renal transplant recipients who were treated with different immunosuppressive agents.

METHODS

Testosterone, luteinizing hormone (LH), and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) were measured in 59 male renal transplant recipients with stable graft function with serum creatinine <2.5 mg/dL. Patients were treated with three different immunosuppressive regimens: group I, calcineurin inhibitors (CI; n = 15), group II, sirolimus without calcineurin inhibitors (SRL; n = 15), group III, sirolimus in combination with calcineurin inhibitors (SRL * CI; n = 29).

RESULTS

Testosterone was significantly lower in group II versus group I (3.12 +/- 1.23 versus 4.39 +/- 1.53 ng/mL; P < .0197). Group III had higher testosterone values than group II, but lower than group I. FSH and LH were also higher in the SRL group, but the differences were not statistically significant, perhaps because of the small number of patients. No relationship was found between testosterone blood levels and age, posttransplant follow-up, renal function, time on dialysis, body mass index, steroid use, or posttransplant diabetes.

CONCLUSION

Sirolimus seems to impair the improvement of gonadal function after renal transplantation. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these data before patients are advised of this potential side effect.