Masayoshi Okumi1, Yasuyuki Sato2, Kohei Unagami3, Toshihito Hirai2, Hideki Ishida2, Kazunari Tanabe2. 1. Department of Urology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku, Tokyo, 162-8666, Japan. okumi@kc.twmu.ac.jp. 2. Department of Urology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku, Tokyo, 162-8666, Japan. 3. Department of Medicine, Kidney Center, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The reasons for improved outcomes associated with preemptive kidney transplantation (PKT) are incompletely understood, and post-transplant complications have been scarcely investigated. METHODS: We evaluated the outcomes of PKT in both unmatched (n = 1060) and propensity score matched cohorts (n = 186) of adults who underwent living kidney transplant between 2000 and 2014. Outcomes were estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), biopsy-proven rejection, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM), cardiovascular disease (CVD), graft failure (non-censored for death), and malignancy. Primary endpoint was post-transplant renal function assessed with eGFR. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients (9.0 %) underwent PKT. The 2-week mean eGFR after transplant was comparable between the matched PKT and non-PKT groups (45.2 vs. 46.5 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively, P = 0.56). Sensitivity analysis using various formulas did not change the results. PKT was not superior to non-PKT in reducing the risk of biopsy-proven rejection, CMV, PTDM, and malignancy, regardless of matching. The risk of graft failure and CVD was significantly reduced in the unmatched PKT group (ARR, -6.2 %; 95 % CI, -8.6 to -0.7; P = 0.03, and ARR, -6.7 %; 95 % CI, -9.6 to -0.7, P = 0.03, respectively); nevertheless, the corresponding ARRs were -3.2 % (95 % CI, -10.0 to 2.9; P = 0.44) and -2.2 % (95 % CI, -9.1 to 4.4; P = 0.72) after matching. CONCLUSIONS: PKT was associated with neither improvement of post-transplant renal function nor a lower rate of common post-transplant complications than non-PKT among patients with end-stage renal disease who underwent living KT.
BACKGROUND: The reasons for improved outcomes associated with preemptive kidney transplantation (PKT) are incompletely understood, and post-transplant complications have been scarcely investigated. METHODS: We evaluated the outcomes of PKT in both unmatched (n = 1060) and propensity score matched cohorts (n = 186) of adults who underwent living kidney transplant between 2000 and 2014. Outcomes were estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), biopsy-proven rejection, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM), cardiovascular disease (CVD), graft failure (non-censored for death), and malignancy. Primary endpoint was post-transplant renal function assessed with eGFR. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients (9.0 %) underwent PKT. The 2-week mean eGFR after transplant was comparable between the matched PKT and non-PKT groups (45.2 vs. 46.5 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively, P = 0.56). Sensitivity analysis using various formulas did not change the results. PKT was not superior to non-PKT in reducing the risk of biopsy-proven rejection, CMV, PTDM, and malignancy, regardless of matching. The risk of graft failure and CVD was significantly reduced in the unmatched PKT group (ARR, -6.2 %; 95 % CI, -8.6 to -0.7; P = 0.03, and ARR, -6.7 %; 95 % CI, -9.6 to -0.7, P = 0.03, respectively); nevertheless, the corresponding ARRs were -3.2 % (95 % CI, -10.0 to 2.9; P = 0.44) and -2.2 % (95 % CI, -9.1 to 4.4; P = 0.72) after matching. CONCLUSIONS: PKT was associated with neither improvement of post-transplant renal function nor a lower rate of common post-transplant complications than non-PKT among patients with end-stage renal disease who underwent living KT.
Authors: Henrik Ekberg; Helio Tedesco-Silva; Alper Demirbas; Stefan Vítko; Björn Nashan; Alp Gürkan; Raimund Margreiter; Christian Hugo; Josep M Grinyó; Ulrich Frei; Yves Vanrenterghem; Pierre Daloze; Philip F Halloran Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-12-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: H U Meier-Kriesche; F K Port; A O Ojo; S M Rudich; J A Hanson; D M Cibrik; A B Leichtman; B Kaplan Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Andrew S Levey; Lesley A Stevens; Christopher H Schmid; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Alejandro F Castro; Harold I Feldman; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Tom Greene; Josef Coresh Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-05-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Josipa Radić; Marijana Vučković; Andrea Gelemanović; Marija Roguljić; Josip Orešković; Katja Kovačević; Ela Kolak; Dora Bučan Nenadić; Mislav Radić Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-07-08 Impact factor: 4.996