Syed Sikandar Raza1, Gaurav Agarwal1, Douglas Anderson2, Mark Deierhoi2, Huma Fatima3, Michael Hanaway2, Jayme Locke2, Paul MacLennan2, Babak Orandi2, Carlton Young2, Roslyn B Mannon4, Michael E Seifert1,5. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. 3. Department of Pathology, University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA. 5. Department of Pediatrics, University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Time-zero biopsies can detect donor-derived lesions at the time of kidney transplantation, but their utility in predicting long-term outcomes is unclear under the updated Kidney Allocation System. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of 272 consecutive post-reperfusion time-zero biopsies. We tested the hypothesis that abnormal time-zero histology is a strong indicator of donor quality that increases the precision of the kidney donor profile index (KDPI) score to predict long-term outcomes. RESULTS: We detected abnormal biopsies in 42% of the cohort, which were independently associated with a 1.2-fold increased hazard for a composite of acute rejection, allograft failure, and death after adjusting for clinical characteristics including KDPI. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, the relationship between abnormal time-zero histology and the composite endpoint was only significant in the subgroup of deceased donor kidney transplants with KDPI scores >35. Abnormal time-zero histology, particularly vascular intimal fibrosis and arteriolar hyalinosis scores, was independently associated with lower 12-month estimated GFR. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, abnormal time-zero histology is relatively common and identifies a group of kidney recipients at increased risk for worse long-term outcomes. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal patient population in which to deploy time-zero biopsies as an additional surveillance tool.
INTRODUCTION: Time-zero biopsies can detect donor-derived lesions at the time of kidney transplantation, but their utility in predicting long-term outcomes is unclear under the updated Kidney Allocation System. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of 272 consecutive post-reperfusion time-zero biopsies. We tested the hypothesis that abnormal time-zero histology is a strong indicator of donor quality that increases the precision of the kidney donor profile index (KDPI) score to predict long-term outcomes. RESULTS: We detected abnormal biopsies in 42% of the cohort, which were independently associated with a 1.2-fold increased hazard for a composite of acute rejection, allograft failure, and death after adjusting for clinical characteristics including KDPI. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, the relationship between abnormal time-zero histology and the composite endpoint was only significant in the subgroup of deceased donor kidney transplants with KDPI scores >35. Abnormal time-zero histology, particularly vascular intimal fibrosis and arteriolar hyalinosis scores, was independently associated with lower 12-month estimated GFR. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, abnormal time-zero histology is relatively common and identifies a group of kidney recipients at increased risk for worse long-term outcomes. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal patient population in which to deploy time-zero biopsies as an additional surveillance tool.
Authors: K Solez; R B Colvin; L C Racusen; M Haas; B Sis; M Mengel; P F Halloran; W Baldwin; G Banfi; A B Collins; F Cosio; D S R David; C Drachenberg; G Einecke; A B Fogo; I W Gibson; D Glotz; S S Iskandar; E Kraus; E Lerut; R B Mannon; M Mihatsch; B J Nankivell; V Nickeleit; J C Papadimitriou; P Randhawa; H Regele; K Renaudin; I Roberts; D Seron; R N Smith; M Valente Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2008-02-19 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: R B Munivenkatappa; E J Schweitzer; J C Papadimitriou; C B Drachenberg; K A Thom; E N Perencevich; A Haririan; F Rasetto; M Cooper; L Campos; R N Barth; S T Bartlett; B Philosophe Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: M Mengel; J Chang; D Kayser; W Gwinner; A Schwarz; G Einecke; V Broecker; K Famulski; D G de Freitas; L Guembes-Hidalgo; B Sis; H Haller; P F Halloran Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2010-11-29 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Panduranga S Rao; Douglas E Schaubel; Mary K Guidinger; Kenneth A Andreoni; Robert A Wolfe; Robert M Merion; Friedrich K Port; Randall S Sung Journal: Transplantation Date: 2009-07-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Michael E Seifert; Megan V Yanik; Daniel I Feig; Vera Hauptfeld-Dolejsek; Elizabeth C Mroczek-Musulman; David R Kelly; Frida Rosenblum; Roslyn B Mannon Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2018-06-27 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: M Ibernon; C González-Segura; F Moreso; M Gomà; D Serón; X Fulladosa; J Torras; L Garcia-Huete; S Gil-Vernet; J M Cruzado; M Carrera; V Duarte; J M Grinyó Journal: Transplant Proc Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 1.066
Authors: M Haas; A Loupy; C Lefaucheur; C Roufosse; D Glotz; D Seron; B J Nankivell; P F Halloran; R B Colvin; Enver Akalin; N Alachkar; S Bagnasco; Y Bouatou; J U Becker; L D Cornell; J P Duong van Huyen; I W Gibson; Edward S Kraus; R B Mannon; M Naesens; V Nickeleit; P Nickerson; D L Segev; H K Singh; M Stegall; P Randhawa; L Racusen; K Solez; M Mengel Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2018-01-21 Impact factor: 8.086