Wai H Lim1,2,3, David W Johnson3,4,5,6, Armando Teixeira-Pinto7, Germaine Wong7,8,9. 1. Department of Renal Medicine, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Western Australia, Australia. 2. School of Medicine, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 3. Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, Adelaide, Australia. 4. Princess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South and Ipswich Nephrology and Transplant Services, Queensland, Australia. 5. University of Queensland, Queensland, Australia. 6. Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia. 7. Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 8. Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 9. Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prolonged duration of delayed graft function (DGF) may be associated with adverse allograft outcomes, but the association between threshold duration of DGF, acute rejection and long-term allograft loss remains undefined. We aimed to determine the impact of DGF duration on allograft outcomes and to assess whether this association was mediated by acute rejection. METHODS: Using data from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, Cox proportional modeling was used to determine the association between quartiles of DGF duration, acute rejection at 6 months and death-censored graft loss (DCGL). Mediation analysis was conducted to determine whether acute rejection was a causal intermediate between DGF and DCGL. RESULTS: Of 7668 deceased donor kidney transplants between 1997 and 2014, 1497 (19.5%) recipients experienced DGF requiring dialysis. The median (interquartile range) duration of DGF was 7 (9) days, with 25% requiring dialysis for 14 days or longer. Among recipients who had experienced a DGF duration of 1 to 4 days, the adjusted hazard ratio for duration of 5 to 7, 8 to 13, and 14 days or longer were 1.13 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-1.55; P = 0.43), 1.44 (95% CI, 1.08-1.91; P = 0.013), and 1.99 (95% CI, 1.50-2.65; P < 0.001), respectively, for acute rejection; and were 1.10 (95% CI< 0.73-1.67; P = 0.64), 1.45 (95% CI, 1.00-2.11; P = 0.05) and 1.60 (95% CI, 1.10-2.31; P = 0.01), respectively, for DCGL. On average, 8% of the effects between DGF duration and DCGL were explained by acute rejection. CONCLUSIONS: There was a direct dose-dependent effect between DGF duration and DCGL, with acute rejection explaining less than 10% of the effects between DGF duration and DCGL. Future research identifying other potential modifiable mediators that lies in the causal pathway between DGF duration and allograft loss is essential.
BACKGROUND: Prolonged duration of delayed graft function (DGF) may be associated with adverse allograft outcomes, but the association between threshold duration of DGF, acute rejection and long-term allograft loss remains undefined. We aimed to determine the impact of DGF duration on allograft outcomes and to assess whether this association was mediated by acute rejection. METHODS: Using data from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, Cox proportional modeling was used to determine the association between quartiles of DGF duration, acute rejection at 6 months and death-censored graft loss (DCGL). Mediation analysis was conducted to determine whether acute rejection was a causal intermediate between DGF and DCGL. RESULTS: Of 7668 deceased donor kidney transplants between 1997 and 2014, 1497 (19.5%) recipients experienced DGF requiring dialysis. The median (interquartile range) duration of DGF was 7 (9) days, with 25% requiring dialysis for 14 days or longer. Among recipients who had experienced a DGF duration of 1 to 4 days, the adjusted hazard ratio for duration of 5 to 7, 8 to 13, and 14 days or longer were 1.13 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-1.55; P = 0.43), 1.44 (95% CI, 1.08-1.91; P = 0.013), and 1.99 (95% CI, 1.50-2.65; P < 0.001), respectively, for acute rejection; and were 1.10 (95% CI< 0.73-1.67; P = 0.64), 1.45 (95% CI, 1.00-2.11; P = 0.05) and 1.60 (95% CI, 1.10-2.31; P = 0.01), respectively, for DCGL. On average, 8% of the effects between DGF duration and DCGL were explained by acute rejection. CONCLUSIONS: There was a direct dose-dependent effect between DGF duration and DCGL, with acute rejection explaining less than 10% of the effects between DGF duration and DCGL. Future research identifying other potential modifiable mediators that lies in the causal pathway between DGF duration and allograft loss is essential.
Authors: Tom Darius; Martial Vergauwen; Matteo Mueller; Selda Aydin; Philipp Dutkowski; Pierre Gianello; Michel Mourad Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2020-06-11
Authors: Maria Ramona Bădulescu; Mihai Adrian Socaciu; Tudor Moisoiu; Alexandra Andries; Gheorghiţă Iacob; Radu Badea Journal: Med Pharm Rep Date: 2020-04-22
Authors: Juan Pei; Yeoungjee Cho; Yong Pey See; Elaine M Pascoe; Andrea K Viecelli; Ross S Francis; Carolyn van Eps; Nicole M Isbel; Scott B Campbell; Philip A Clayton; Jeremy Chapman; Michael Collins; Wai Lim; Wen Tang; Germaine Wong; Carmel M Hawley; David W Johnson Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: João Batista Saldanha De Castro Filho; Jeferson De Castro Pompeo; Rafael Berlezi Machado; Luiz Felipe Santos Gonçalves; Andrea Carla Bauer; Roberto Ceratti Manfro Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: Arthur J Matas; Erika Helgeson; Ann Fieberg; Robert Leduc; Robert S Gaston; Bertram L Kasiske; David Rush; Lawrence Hunsicker; Fernando Cosio; Joseph P Grande; J Michael Cecka; John Connett; Roslyn B Mannon Journal: Transplantation Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 5.385