| Literature DB >> 33559315 |
Tarek Alhamad1, Michelle Lubetzky2, Krista L Lentine3, Emmanuel Edusei2, Ronald Parsons4, Martha Pavlakis5, Kenneth J Woodside6, Deborah Adey7, Christopher D Blosser8, Beatrice P Concepcion9, John Friedewald10, Alexander Wiseman11, Neeraj Singh12, Su-Hsin Chang1, Gaurav Gupta13, Miklos Z Molnar14, Arpita Basu4, Edward Kraus15, Song Ong16, Arman Faravardeh17, Ekamol Tantisattamo18, Leonardo Riella19, Jim Rice20, Darshana M Dadhania2.
Abstract
Kidney allograft failure and return to dialysis carry a high risk of morbidity. A practice survey was developed by the AST Kidney Pancreas Community of Practice workgroup and distributed electronically to the AST members. There were 104 respondents who represented 92 kidney transplant centers. Most survey respondents were transplant nephrologists at academic centers. The most common approach to immunosuppression management was to withdraw the antimetabolite first (73%), while only 12% responded they would withdraw calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) first. More than 60% reported that the availability of a living donor is the most important factor in their decision to taper immunosuppression, followed by risk of infection, risk of sensitization, frailty, and side effects of medications. More than half of respondents reported that embolization was either not available or offered to less than 10% as an option for surgical intervention. Majority reported that ≤50% of failed allograft patients were re-listed before dialysis, and less than a quarter of transplant nephrologists performed frequent visits with their patients with failed kidney allograft after they return to dialysis. This survey demonstrates heterogeneity in the care of patients with a failing allograft and the need for more evidence to guide improvements in clinical practice related to transition of care.Entities:
Keywords: clinical research/practice; dialysis; immunosuppression/immune modulation; kidney failure/injury; kidney transplantation/nephrology; transitional care
Year: 2021 PMID: 33559315 DOI: 10.1111/ajt.16523
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Transplant ISSN: 1600-6135 Impact factor: 8.086