| Literature DB >> 31847814 |
Joungmin Kim1, Taehee Pyeon1, Jeong Il Choi1, Jeong Hyeon Kang1, Seung Won Song1, Hong-Beom Bae2, Seongtae Jeong3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation (KT) is the most obvious method of treating a patient with end-stage renal disease. In the early stages of KT, urine production is considered a marker of successful reperfusion of the kidney after anastomosis. However, there is no clear conclusion about the relationship between initial urine output after KT and 1-year renal function. Thus, we investigated the factors that affect 1-year kidney function after KT, including urine output.Entities:
Keywords: Glomerular filtration rate; Graft survival; Kidney transplantation; Urine output
Year: 2019 PMID: 31847814 PMCID: PMC6916447 DOI: 10.1186/s12871-019-0904-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Anesthesiol ISSN: 1471-2253 Impact factor: 2.217
Fig. 1Data collection
Demographic data of kidney recipients
| Good residual function group ( | Poor residual function group ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 47.0 [38.0;54.5] | 47.0 [38.5;55.0] | .84 |
| Gender (male/female) | 111 (62.0%) / 68 (38.0%) | 79 (70.5%) / 33 (29.5%) | .18 |
| Height (cm) | 164.0 [158.0;171.0] | 167.5 [160.0;172.0] | .03 |
| Weight (kg) | 60.5 ± 9.7 | 65.2 ± 12.2 | .00 |
| BMI | 22.3 ± 3.0 | 23.4 ± 3.4 | .00 |
| Pre-transplant dialysis duration (month) | 36.0 [5.0;72.0] | 48.0 [12.0;72.0] | .12 |
| Pre-transplant dialysis type | .53 | ||
| HD | 108 (60.3%) | 66 (58.9%) | |
| PD | 44 (24.6%) | 33 (29.5%) | |
| HD + PD | 10 (5.6%) | 7 (6.2%) | |
| None | 17 (9.5%) | 6 (5.4%) | |
Pre-operative eGFR (ml/min/1.73m2) | 5.5 [4.3; 7.6] | 5.3 [4.0; 7.0] | .15 |
| KT history | .59 | ||
| 1st | 167 (93.3%) | 107 (95.5%) | |
| 2nd | 12 (6.7%) | 5 (4.5%) | |
| ABO incompatibility | .43 | ||
| Matched | 170 (95.0%) | 103 (92.0%) | |
| Un-matched | 9 (5.0%) | 9 (8.0%) | |
| Donated Kidney | .31 | ||
| Living | 84 (46.9%) | 45 (40.2%) | |
| Deceased | 95 (53.1%) | 67 (59.8%) | |
| HBV positive | 15 (8.4%) | 13 (11.6%) | .48 |
| HCV positive | 3 (1.7%) | 2 (1.8%) | 1.00 |
| Nephropathy positive | 10 (5.6%) | 9 (8%) | .56 |
| HTN positive | 155 (86.6%) | 103 (92.0%) | .22 |
| DM positive | 44 (24.6%) | 30 (26.8%) | .77 |
Data are present as mean ± standard deviation or median [95% confidence interval] or number (%)
Good residual function group: 1 year eGFR ≥60, Poor residual function group: 1 year eGFR < 60
BMI Body mass index, HD Hemodialysis, PD Peritoneal dialysis, eGFR Estimated glomerular filtration rate, KT Kidney transplantation, HBV Hepatitis B virus, HCV Hepatitis C virus, HTN Hypertension, DM Diabetes mellitus
Donated kidney characteristics
| Good residual function group | Poor residual function group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| All | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| Age | 40.0 [27.5;49.0] | 50.0 [44.0;56.0] | .00 |
| Creatinine (mg/dl) | 0.9 [0.7; 1.2] | 0.9 [0.7; 1.2] | .45 |
| DM positive | 5 (2.8%) | 9 (8.0%) | .08 |
| HTN positive | 210.1 ± 94.3 | 176.9 ± 94.5 | .04 |
| HLA mismatching | 3.0 [2.5; 4.0] | 4.0 [3.0; 5.0] | .00 |
| DGF positive | 4 (2.2%) | 4 (3.6%) | .75 |
| Living donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| Age | 40.2 ± 11.7 | 48.4 ± 9.2 | .00 |
| Creatinine (mg/dl) | 0.8 [0.6; 0.9] | 0.8 [0.6; 0.9] | .80 |
| DM positive | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (2.2%) | .75 |
| HTN positive | 7 (8.3%) | 3 (6.7%) | 1.00 |
| HLA mismatching | 3.0 [2.0; 3.0] | 3.0 [3.0; 4.0] | .02 |
| DGF positive | 2 (2.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | .76 |
| Deceased donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| Age | 39.0 [24.0;50.5] | 49.5 [44.0;56.0] | .00 |
| Creatinine (mg/dl) | 1.0 [0.7; 1.5] | 1.1 [0.8; 1.4] | .65 |
| DM positive | 5 (5.3%) | 8 (11.9%) | .21 |
| HTN positive | 12 (12.6%) | 13 (19.4%) | .34 |
| HLA mismatching | 3.0 [3.0; 4.0] | 4.0 [3.0; 5.0] | .02 |
| DGF positive | 2 (2.1%) | 4 (6.0%) | .39 |
Data are present as mean ± standard deviation or median [95% confidence interval]
HTN Hypertension, DM Diabetes mellitus, HLA Human leukocyte antigen
Relationship of 1 yr residual kidney function and postoperative urine output (ml/kg/hr) of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd day
| Good residual function group | Poor residual function group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| All | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 13.2 [10.0;17.8] | 9.5 [5.8;15.2] | .00 |
| POD2 | 8.2 [6.1;10.7] | 7.1 [5.1; 9.3] | .00 |
| POD3 | 6.9 [5.2; 8.8] | 6.1 [4.2; 7.9] | .01 |
| Living donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 16.8 [12.9;20.4] | 14.8 [11.4;18.8] | .06 |
| POD2 | 8.0 [6.3;10.3] | 8.0 [6.0; 9.1] | .42 |
| POD3 | 6.8 [5.1; 8.8] | 6.8 [5.7; 7.8] | .61 |
| Deceased donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 11.1 [7.1;14.5] | 7.2 [4.5;10.1] | .00 |
| POD2 | 8.3 [5.9;11.2] | 6.9 [4.1; 9.3] | .00 |
| POD3 | 6.9 [5.2; 9.0] | 5.7 [3.4; 8.1] | .01 |
Data are present as median [95% confidence interval]
Good residual function group: 1 year eGFR ≥60, Poor residual function group: 1 year eGFR < 60
POD Postoperative day
Relationship of residual kidney function and postoperative fluid therapy (ml/kg/hr) of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd day
| Good residual function group | Poor residual function group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| All | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 13.9 [9.9;19.1] | 11.2 [7.5;16.6] | .00 |
| POD2 | 11.2 [7.8;13.4] | 8.6 [6.1;12.1] | .00 |
| POD3 | 9.1 [6.3;11.3] | 7.6 [4.9;10.3] | .00 |
| Living donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 17.0 [13.0;21.3] | 16.2 [13.4;20.7] | .30 |
| POD2 | 11.6 [9.1;13.9] | 10.3 [9.0;13.8] | .37 |
| POD3 | 9.1 [7.0;10.9] | 8.2 [6.4;10.0] | .09 |
| Deceased donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 11.2 [7.4;15.1] | 9.0 [6.3;11.9] | .02 |
| POD2 | 10.6 [7.0;13.3] | 7.1 [5.2; 9.8] | .00 |
| POD3 | 8.9 [5.7;11.8] | 7.0 [4.3;10.4] | .03 |
Data are present as median [95% confidence interval]
Good residual function group: 1 year eGFR ≥60, Poor residual function group: 1 year eGFR < 60
POD Postoperative day
Relationship of residual kidney function and postoperative furosemide dosage (mg) of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd day
| Good residual function group | Poor residual function group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| All | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 40 [20; 80] | 40 [20; 80] | .61 |
| POD2 | 40 [20; 80] | 40 [20; 60] | .31 |
| POD3 | 20 [20; 40] | 20 [20; 40] | .08 |
| Living donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 40 [20; 80] | 40 [20; 80] | .69 |
| POD2 | 60 [40; 100] | 60 [40; 80] | .56 |
| POD3 | 20 [20; 40] | 20 [20; 40] | .21 |
| Deceased donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 60 [20; 80] | 40 [20; 60] | .17 |
| POD2 | 20 [20; 60] | 20 [20; 60] | .68 |
| POD3 | 20 [20; 40] | 20 [20; 40] | .20 |
Data are present as median [95% confidence interval]
Good residual function group: 1 year eGFR ≥60, Poor residual function group: 1 year eGFR < 60
POD Postoperative day
Relationship of residual kidney function and postoperative mannitol dosage (g) of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd day
| Good residual function group | Poor residual function group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| All | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 30 [30; 30] | 30 [30; 30] | .51 |
| POD2 | 30 [30; 30] | 30 [30; 30] | .39 |
| POD3 | 0 [0; 30] | 30 [0; 30] | .28 |
| Living donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 30 [30; 30] | 30 [0; 30] | .65 |
| POD2 | 30 [30; 30] | 30 [30; 30] | .35 |
| POD3 | 0 [0; 30] | 0 [0; 30] | .85 |
| Deceased donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | ||
| POD1 | 30 [30; 30] | 30 [30; 30] | .49 |
| POD2 | 30 [30; 30] | 30 [30; 30] | .83 |
| POD3 | 30 [0; 30] | 30 [0; 30] | .44 |
Data are present as median [95% confidence interval]
Good residual function group: 1 year eGFR ≥60, Poor residual function group: 1 year eGFR < 60
POD Postoperative day
Predicting DGF incidence with postoperative urine output using ROC curve
| AUC | |
|---|---|
| POD1UO | 0.913 |
| POD2UO | 0.984 |
| POD3UO | 0.944 |
| POD1UO + 2 + 3 | 0.969 |
AUC Area under curve, PODUO Post-operative day urine output
Fig. 2ROC curve of urine output POD1–3 for 1 year eGFR. (POD = postoperative day)
Rejection episode
| Good residual function group | Poor residual function group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| All | |||
| ( | ( | .00 | |
| Positive | 9 (5%) | 33 (29%) | |
| Negative | 170 (95%) | 79 (71%) | |
| Living donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | .00 | |
| Positive | 6 (7%) | 16 (36%) | |
| Negative | 78 (93%) | 29 (64%) | |
| Deceased donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | .00 | |
| Positive | 3 (3%) | 17 (25%) | |
| Negative | 92 (97%) | 50 (75%) | |
Data are present as number (%)
Good residual function group: 1 year eGFR ≥60, Poor residual function group: 1 year eGFR < 60
Viral infection
| Good residual function group | Poor residual function group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| All | |||
| ( | ( | .00 | |
| Positive | 19 (11%) | 35 (31%) | |
| Negative | 160 (89%) | 77 (69%) | |
| Living donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | .00 | |
| Positive | 4 (5%) | 13 (29%) | |
| Negative | 80 (95%) | 32 (71%) | |
| Deceased donor kidney | |||
| ( | ( | .01 | |
| Positive | 15 (16%) | 22 (33%) | |
| Negative | 80 (84%) | 45 (67%) | |
Data are present as number (%)
Good residual function group: 1 year eGFR ≥60, Poor residual function group: 1 year eGFR < 60