Search

BackgroundDespite the institution of a new Kidney Allocation System in 2014, A2/A2B to B transplantation has not increased as expected. The current Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network policy requires subtyping on two separate occasions, and in the setting of discrepant results, defaulting to the A1 subtype. However, there is significant inherent variability in the serologic assays used for blood group subtyping and genotyping is rarely done.MethodsThe National Kidney Registry, a kidney paired donation (KPD) program, performs serological typing on all A/AB donors, and in cases of non-A1/non-A1B donors, confirmatory genotyping is performed.ResultsBetween 2/18/2018 and 9/15/2020, 13.0% (145) of 1,111 type A donors registered with the NKR were ultimately subtyped as A2 via genotyping. Notably, 49.6% (72) of these were subtyped as A1 at their donor center, and in accordance with OPTN policy, ineligible for allocation as A2.ConclusionInaccurate A2 subtyping represents a significant lost opportunity in transplantation, especially in KPD where A2 donors can not only facilitate living donor transplantation for O and highly sensitized candidates, but can also facilitate additional living donor transplants. This study highlights the need for improved accuracy of subtyping technique, and the need for policy changes encouraging optimal utilization of A2 donor kidneys.

Hypertensive emergency is a clinical entity with potentially serious health implications and high healthcare utilization. There is a lack of nationally representative data on incidence, causes, and predictors of 30-day readmission after hospitalization for hypertensive emergency. We used the 2013 to 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database to identify index hospitalizations for hypertensive emergency. Primary outcome was all-cause unplanned 30-day readmission. Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of readmission. There were 166 531 index hospitalizations for hypertensive emergency representative of 355 627 (SE, 9401) hospitalizations nationwide in 2013 to 2014. Mean age was 66.0 (SE, 0.14) years, and 53.7% were women. The overall incidence of unplanned 30-day readmissions was 17.8%. The most common causes of readmission were heart failure (14.2%), hypertension with complications (10.2%), sepsis (5.9%), acute kidney injury (5.1%), and cerebrovascular accident (5.1%). Noncardiovascular causes accounted for 57.9% of readmissions. We found age

Background: Serial monitoring of dd‐cfDNA and change from baseline can provide meaningful information beyond absolute thresholds. We describe dd‐cfDNA trajectories from the baseline before and after acute rejection (AR) and de novo donor‐specific antibodies (dnDSA) detection in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). Methods: We included KTR from 02/2019 to 03/2022 with serial dd‐cfDNA. The primary analysis compared the time‐varying change in dd‐cfDNA from baseline in KTR first AR on biopsy [AR] to patients with no‐AR on biopsy [no‐AR]. Results: 151 KTR were analyzed (AR = 56 KTR, no‐AR = 95 KTRs). In the AR group, dd‐cfDNA rose ahead of diagnosis: median rise from baseline was 75% at −3 months, 32% at −2 months, and 325% at −1 month before biopsy. At the time of biopsy, the median rise in dd‐cfDNA from baseline was 291% (IQR [interquartile range] 88%–1081%) in AR and 17% (IQR 0%– 194%) in no‐AR (p < 0.0001). Following treatment, dd‐cfDNA values fell in the AR group with a median change from baseline of 94.7% at +1 month, 10.5% at +2 months, and 0% at +3 months. These trajectories were not observed in the no‐AR group. Similarly, there were no significant differences in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate) trajectories between the two groups. The median change from baseline to dnDSA detection was 141% (IQR 112%–574%). In KTRs with persistent rejection, median dd‐cfDNA was 0.95% (IQR 0.44–1.8) compared to 0.19% (IQR 0.12–0.31) in subjects with no rejection on follow‐up (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The significant changes from baseline observed before and after AR show how serial monitoring enhances dd‐cfDNA utility and allows for earlier identification of evolving injury and monitoring treatment response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Outcomes of deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) recipients from the same donor with donor–recipient sex discordance have been studied with inconsistent results. Methods: Adult DDKT where both kidneys from the same donor occurred at our center in two different recipients of different sexes were included. Outcomes were analyzed separately for male and female donors, based on the concordance or discordance between donor–recipient sex: Male‐male (M‐m) versus Male to female (M‐f) or vice versa, F‐f versus F‐m. Acute rejection (AR) and uncensored graft failure were primary outcomes of interest. The univariate and multivariate risks for AR and graft failure were conducted using the Cox proportional hazards model and log‐rank tests. Results: A total of 130 donors, 84 male and 46 female fulfilled our selection criteria and were transplanted in 260 recipients. With respect to the concordant groups (M‐m or F‐f), sex discordance was not significantly associated with the risk of rejection in multivariate analysis (M‐f vs. M‐m HR 1.15 [0.53–2.53, P = 0.72]; F‐m vs. F‐f HR 1.77 [0.71–4.39, P = 0.23]). Sex discordance was also not significantly associated with graft failure in multivariate analysis. Interestingly, risk factors for AR differed among male donors and female donors. The higher calculated panel reactive antibodies (cPRA) and nonwhite recipients were at increased risk for AR in F‐m, but not in M‐f. Conclusions: Donor–recipient sex discordance was not significantly associated with AR or graft failure. Risk factors for AR may differ across male and female donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Describing risk factors and outcomes in kidney transplant recipients with oxalate nephropathy (ON) may help elucidate the pathogenesis and guide treatment strategies. We used a large single‐center database to identify patients with ON and categorized them into delayed graft function with ON (DGF‐ON) and late ON. Incidence density sampling was used to select controls. A total of 37 ON cases were diagnosed between 1/2011 and 1/2021. DGF‐ON (n = 13) was diagnosed in 1.05% of the DGF population. Pancreatic atrophy on imaging (36.4% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.002) and gastric bypass history (7.7% vs. 0%; p = 0.06) were more common in DGF‐ON than with controls with DGF requiring biopsy but without evidence of ON. DGF‐ON was not associated with worse graft survival (p = 0.98) or death‐censored graft survival (p = 0.48). Late ON (n = 24) was diagnosed after a mean of 78.2 months. Late ON patients were older (mean age 55.1 vs. 48.4 years; p = 0.02), more likely to be women (61.7% vs. 37.5%; p = 0.03), have gastric bypass history (8.3% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.02) and pancreatic atrophy on imaging (38.9% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.02). Late ON was associated with an increased risk of graft failure (HR 2.0; p = 0.07) and death‐censored graft loss (HR 2.5; p = 0.10). We describe two phenotypes of ON after kidney transplantation: DGF‐ON and late ON. Our study is the first to our knowledge to evaluate DGF‐ON with DGF controls without ON. Although limited by small sample size, DGF‐ON was not associated with adverse outcomes when compared with controls. Late ON predicted worse allograft outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Avascular necrosis is a debilitating osseous complication in transplant recipients. Project Aim: This program evaluation sought to describe risk factors and adverse outcomes of avascular necrosis in kidney transplant recipients. Design: This was a retrospective evaluation of all recipients of kidneys and simultaneous pancreas and kidneys between 2001 and 2018 from a single center. Controls were selected based on the incidence density, sampling at a 1:3 ratio based on the post-transplant interval. Outcomes of interest were acute rejection, death-censored graft failure, and patient mortality. Results: A total of 88 kidney recipients had avascular necrosis and were compared with 257 controls. Most of the recipient's and donors' baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, except calcineurin inhibitor-based immunosuppression was more prevalent, and non-white donors were less prevalent in the control group. Looking for risk factors for avascular necrosis, calcineurin inhibitor-based immunosuppression was associated with a lower risk for avascular necrosis in the univariate analysis, but this was not found after adjustment of multiple variables. In multivariate analysis, avascular necrosis was associated with an increased risk for patient death (hazard ratio: 1.68; 95% confidence interval: 1.16-2.44; P =.008) but not for acute rejection or death censored graft failure. Conclusion: Although limited by small sample size, this evaluation found avascular necrosis to be associated with an increased risk of patient death. This finding may be useful for the provider taking care of the patients and discussing the various outcomes after the transplant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]