Search

Abstract Background Thrombotic microangiopathies (TMAs) are rare but can be severe in kidney transplant. recipients (KTR). Methods We analysed the epidemiology of adjudicated TMA in consecutive KTR during the. 2009–2021 period. Results TMA was found in 77/1644 (4.7%) KTR. Early TMA (n = 24/77 (31.2%); 1.5% of all KTR) occurred during the first two weeks ((median, IQR) 3 [1–8] days). Triggers included acute antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR, n = 4) and bacterial infections (n = 6). Graft survival (GS) was 100% and recurrence rate (RR) was 8%. Unexpected TMA (n = 31/77 (40.2%); 1.5/1000 patient-years) occurred anytime during follow-up (3.0 (0.5–6.2) years). Triggers included infections (EBV/CMV: n = 10; bacterial: n = 6) and chronic active ABMR (n = 5). GS was 81% and RR was 16%. Graft-failure associated TMA (n = 22/77 (28.6%); 2.2% of graft losses) occurred after 8.8 (4.9–15.5) years). Triggers included acute (n = 4) or chronic active (n = 14) ABMR, infections (viral: n = 6; bacterial: n = 5) and cancer (n = 6). 15 patients underwent transplantectomy. RR was 27%. Atypical (n = 6) and typical (n = 2) haemolytic and uremic syndrome, and isolated CNI toxicity (n = 4) were rare. Two-third of biopsies presented TMA features. Conclusions TMA are mostly due to ABMR and infections; causes of TMA are frequently combined. Management often is heterogenous. Our nosology based on TMA timing identifies situations with distinct incidence, causes and prognosis.

Abstract Background The impact of blood pressure on neurological symptoms and risk of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is unknown in primary and secondary thrombotic microangiopathies (TMAs). Methods We measured baseline systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) BP in consecutive 563 patients with adjudicated primary and secondary TMAs, and assessed its association with the risk of ESKD. Results Normal BP, grade 1, 2 and 3 hypertension were present in 243 (43.1%), 132 (23.4%), 101 (17.9%) and 88 (15.6%), respectively. Significant BP differences were noted in relation to the cause of TMA: highest BP values were found in patients with atypical hemolytic-uremic syndrome (aHUS), pregnancy, transplantation and auto-immune-related TMAs. Normal BP or grade 1 hypertension was found in 17/18 (94.4%) patients with thrombotic thrombocytopenic patients (only 1/18 (5.6%) had a SBP value>150 mmHg). In contrast, BP values could not differentiate isolated “essential” malignant hypertension (MH) from MH associated with aHUS (isolated MH (n=15): BP (median (IQR)): 220 (182-249)/132 (101-150) mmHg; MH with aHUS (n=5): BP: 223 (196-245)/131 (111-144) mmHg). The risk of vigilance disturbances (6.9%, 15.0%, 25.0%, respectively), epileptic seizures (1.5%, 4.0%, 12.5%, respectively) and posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (0.76%, 2.97%, 6.82%, respectively) increased with increasing baseline BP values from grade 1 to grade 3 hypertension. ESKD occurred in 35/563 (6.2%) patients (1.23%, 2.27%, 11.9% and 19.3% of patients with normal BP, grade 1, 2 and 3 hypertension, respectively). As compared to patients with normal BP (

Abstract Background As patients on daily hemodialysis (DHD) have heterogeneous profiles, DHD benefit in terms of survival is still debated. The aim of this study was to compare DHD practices in France and in Australia and New Zealand. Methods This study was based on data from the French Renal Epidemiology and Information Network (REIN) and the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA). All incident patients from both registries who underwent DHD (i.e., 5–6 sessions/week, including short daily hemodialysis and long nocturnal hemodialysis) at least once during their trajectories were included, and their characteristics and care trajectories were compared. For survival analyses, one French patient was matched to one Australian or New Zealand patient, based on age, sex and year of dialysis start. Survival was assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model, and access to renal transplantation was evaluated using the Fine & Gray model to take into account death as competing risk. Results Between 2003 and 2012, 523 patients from the AZNDATA and 753 from the REIN registry started DHD. ANZDATA patients were younger (54.8 vs 64.0 years, p

Abstract Background Emergency start (ES) of dialysis has been associated with worse outcome, but remains poorly documented. This study aims to compare the profile and outcome of a large cohort of patients starting dialysis as an emergency or as a planned step in France. Methods Data on all patients aged 18 years or older who started dialysis in mainland France in 2012 or in 2006 were collected from the Renal Epidemiology and Information Network and compared, depending on the dialysis initiation condition: ES or Planned Start (PS). ES was defined as a first dialysis within 24 h after a nephrology visit due to a life-threatening event. Three-year survival were compared, and a multivariate model was performed after multiple imputation of missing data, to determine the parameters independently associated with three-year survival. Results In 2012, 30.3% of all included patients (n = 8839) had ES. Comorbidities were more frequent in the ES than PS group (≥ 2 cardiovascular diseases: 39.2% vs 28.8%, p < 0.001). ES was independently associated with worse three-year survival (57% vs. 68.2%, p = 0.029, HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01–1.19) in multivariate analysis. Among ES group, a large part had a consistent previous follow-up: 36.4% of them had ≥3 nephrology consultations in the previous year. This subgroup of patients had a particularly high comorbidity burden. ES rate was stable between 2006 and 2012, but some proactive regions succeeded in reducing markedly the ES rate. Conclusion ES remains frequent and is independently associated with worse three-year survival, demonstrating that ES deleterious impact is never overcome. This study shows that a large part of patients with ES had a previous follow-up, but high comorbidity burden that could favor acute decompensation with life-threatening conditions before uremic symptoms appearance. This suggests the need of closer end-stage renal disease follow-up or early dialysis initiation in these high-risk patients.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported that all of the authors’ names were processed incorrectly so that their given and family names were interchanged.