RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The medium cut-off Elisio HX dialyzer by Nipro became commercially available in Europe in 2021, but there are still no reports of in vivo data. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of it compared with previously evaluated hemodialysis (HD), expanded HD (HDx), and postdilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) treatments. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out on 18 patients who underwent 5 dialysis sessions: FX80 Cordiax in HD, Elisio H19 in HD, Elisio HX19 in HDx, Theranova 400 in HDx, and FX80 Cordiax in HDF. The reduction ratios of urea, creatinine, ß2-microglobulin, myoglobin, kappa FLC, prolactin, α1-microglobulin, α1-acid glycoprotein, lambda FLC, and albumin were compared. Dialysate albumin loss was measured. RESULTS: The comparison between the different dialysis modalities revealed no difference for small molecules, but HDx and HDF were significantly more efficient than HD for medium and large molecule removal. The efficacy of Elisio HX19 dialyzer in HDx was similar to the Theranova 400, superior to both dialyzers in HD, and slightly lower than HDF. Albumin losses in dialysate with HD dialyzers were less than 1 g, but between 1.5 and 2.5 g in HDx and HDF. The global removal score (GRS) values with HDx treatments were statistically significantly higher than those with HD. The highest GRS was obtained with the helixone dialyzer in HDF. CONCLUSIONS: The new MCO dialyzer, Elisio HX, performs with excellent behavior and tolerance. It represents an upgrade compared to their predecessor and is very close to the removal capacity of HDF treatment.
Assuntos
Hemodiafiltração , Diálise Renal , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Hemodiafiltração/efeitos adversos , Albuminas , Soluções para DiáliseRESUMO
Several organ allocation protocols give priority to wait-listed simultaneous kidney-pancreas (SPK) transplant recipients to mitigate the higher cardiovascular risk of patients with diabetes mellitus on dialysis. The available information regarding the impact of preemptive simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation on recipient and graft outcomes is nonetheless controversial. To help resolve this, we explored the influence of preemptive simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplants on patient and graft survival through a retrospective analysis of the OPTN/UNOS database, encompassing 9690 simultaneous transplant recipients between 2000 and 2017. Statistical analysis was performed applying a propensity score analysis to minimize bias. Of these patients, 1796 (19%) were transplanted preemptively. At ten years, recipient survival was significantly superior in the preemptive group when compared to the non-preemptive group (78.9% vs 71.8%). Dialysis at simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation was an independent significant risk for patient survival (hazard ratio 1.66 [95% confidence interval 1.32-2.09]), especially if the dialysis duration was 12 months or longer. Preemptive transplantation was also associated with significant superior kidney graft survival compared to those on dialysis (death-censored: 84.3% vs 75.4%, respectively; estimated half-life of 38.57 [38.33 -38.81] vs 22.35 [22.17 - 22.53] years, respectively). No differences were observed between both groups neither for pancreas graft survival nor for post-transplant surgical complications. Thus, our results sustain the relevance of early referral for pancreas transplantation and the importance of pancreas allocation priority in reducing patient mortality after simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1 , Transplante de Rim , Transplante de Pâncreas , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/cirurgia , Sobrevivência de Enxerto , Humanos , Transplante de Rim/métodos , Pâncreas , Transplante de Pâncreas/efeitos adversos , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
According to preliminary data, seroconversion after mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination might be unsatisfactory in Kidney Transplant Recipients (KTRs). However, it is unknown if seronegative patients develop at least a cellular response that could offer a certain grade of protection against SARS-CoV-2. To answer this question, we prospectively studied 148 recipients of either kidney (133) or kidney-pancreas (15) grafts with assessment of IgM/IgG spike (S) antibodies and ELISpot against the nucleocapside (N) and the S protein at baseline and 2 weeks after receiving the second dose of the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine. At baseline, 31 patients (20.9%) had either IgM/IgG or ELISpot positivity and were considered to be SARS-CoV-2-pre-immunized, while 117 (79.1%) patients had no signs of either cellular or humoral response and were considered SARS-CoV-2-naïve. After vaccination, naïve patients who developed either humoral or cellular response were finally 65.0%, of which 29.9% developed either IgG or IgM and 35.0% S-ELISpot positivity. Factors associated with vaccine unresponsiveness were diabetes and treatment with antithymocytes globulins during the last year. Side effects were consistent with that of the pivotal trial and no DSAs developed after vaccination. In conclusion, mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine elicits either cellular or humoral response in almost two thirds of KTRs.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transplante de Rim , Anticorpos Antivirais , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Humanos , Transplante de Rim/efeitos adversos , RNA Mensageiro/genética , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
Contrast-induced encephalopathy is a neurological complication related to contrast used in endovascular procedures or computed tomography (CT). The main risk factors are arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease (CKD), hyperosmolar contrasts, the amount of infused contrast and its direct infusion in the posterior cerebral territory, or pathologies with blood-brain barrier damage. Symptomatology is non-specific and may present as altered level of consciousness, neurological focality or seizures. Diagnosis is done by exclusion after ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke has been ruled out; CT or MRI are useful for differentiation. Generally, it appears shortly after exposure and the symptoms lasts 48-72h with complete recovery, although cases with persistence of symptoms or longer duration have been described. Treatment consists of monitoring, supportive measures and kidney replacement therapy (KRT) with hemodialysis (HD) in patients in chronic KRT program. It is important for the nephrologist to be aware of this entity given the susceptibility of the patient on HD as well as its potential therapeutic role in these patients.
Assuntos
Encefalopatias , Meios de Contraste , Insuficiência Renal Crônica , Humanos , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/complicações , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/terapia , Meios de Contraste/efeitos adversos , Encefalopatias/induzido quimicamente , Nefrologia , Fatores de Risco , Diálise RenalRESUMO
Renal replacement therapy (RRT) in cirrhotic patients encompasses a number of issues related to the particular characteristics of this population, especially in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. The short-term prognosis of cirrhotic patients with acute kidney injury is poor, with a mortality rate higher than 65% in patients with RRT requirement, raising questions about the futility of its initiation. Regarding the management of the RRT itself, there is still no consensus with respect to the modality (continuous versus intermittent) or the anticoagulation required to improve the circuit life, which is shorter than similar at-risk populations, despite the altered haemostasis in traditional coagulation tests frequently found in these patients. Furthermore, volume management is one of the most complex issues in this cohort, where tools used for ambulatory dialysis have not yet been successfully reproducible in the ICU setting. This review attempts to shed light on the management of acute RRT in the critically ill cirrhotic population based on the current evidence and the newly available tools. We will discuss the timing of RRT initiation and cessation, the modality, anticoagulation and fluid management, as well as the outcomes of the RRT in this population, and provide a brief review of the albumin extracorporeal dialysis from the point of view of a nephrologist.
RESUMO
Background: The age of patients referred for kidney transplantation has increased progressively. However, the precise influence of age on transplant outcomes is controversial. Methods: Etrospective study in which graft and recipient survival were assessed in a cohort of ≥75 years old kidney recipients and compared with a contemporary younger one aged 60-65 years through a propensity score analysis. Results: We included 106 recipients between 60-65 and 57 patients of ≥75 years old with a median follow-up of 31 [13-54] months. Unadjusted one- and five-year recipient survival did not significantly differ between the older (91% and 74%) and the younger group (95% and 82%, P=0.06). In the IPTW weighted Cox regression analysis, recipient age was not associated with an increased risk of death (HR 1.88 95%CI [0.81-4.37], P=0.14). Unadjusted one- and five-year death-censored graft survival did not significantly differ between both groups (96% and 83% for the older and 99% and 89% for the younger group, respectively, P=0.08). After IPTW weighted Cox Regression analysis, recipient age ≥75 years was no associated with an increased risk of graft loss (HR 1.95, 95%CI [0.65-5.82], P=0.23). Conclusions: These results suggest that recipient age should not be considered itself as an absolute contraindication for kidney transplant.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Given the increased COVID-19 observed in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) and haemodialysis patients, several studies have tried to establish the efficacy of mRNA vaccines in these populations by evaluating their humoral and cellular responses. However, there is currently no information on clinical protection (deaths and hospitalizations), a gap that this study aims to fill. METHODS: Observational prospective study involving 1,336 KTRs and haemodialysis patients from three dialysis units affiliated to Hospital Clínic of Barcelona, Spain, vaccinated with two doses of mRNA-1273 (Moderna) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines. The outcomes measured were SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosed by a positive RT-PCR fourteen days after the second vaccine dose, hospital admissions derived from infection, and a severe COVID-19 composite outcome, defined as either ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. RESULTS: Six per cent (18/302) of patients on haemodialysis were infected, of whom four required hospital admission (1.3%), only one (0.3%) had severe COVID-19, and none of them died. In contrast, 4.3% (44/1034) of KTRs were infected, and presented more hospital admissions (26 patients, 2.5%), severe COVID-19 (11 patients, 1.1%) or death (4 patients, 0.4%). KTRs had a significantly higher risk of hospital admission than HD patients, and this risk increased with age and male sex (HR 3.37 and 4.74, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the need for booster doses in KTRs. In contrast, the haemodialysis population appears to have an adequate clinical response to vaccination, at least up to four months from its administration.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transplante de Rim , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Incidência , Transplante de Rim/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Estudos Prospectivos , Diálise Renal/efeitos adversos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
In kidney transplant recipients, there is discordance between the development of cellular and humoral response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. We sought to determine the interplay between the 2 arms of adaptive immunity in a 3-dose course of mRNA-1273 100 µg vaccine. Methods: Humoral (IgG/IgM) and cellular (N- and S-ELISpot) responses were studied in 117 kidney and 12 kidney-pancreas transplant recipients at the following time points: before the first dose, 14 d after the second dose' and before and after the third dose, with a median of 203 and 232 d after the start of the vaccination cycle, respectively. Results: After the second dose, 26.7% of naive cases experienced seroconversion. Before the third dose and in the absence of COVID-19, this percentage increased to 61.9%. After the third dose, seroconversion occurred in 80.0% of patients. Naive patients who had at any time point a detectable positivity for S-ELISpot were 75.2% of the population, whereas patients who maintained S-ELISpot positivity throughout the study were 34.3%. S-ELISpot positivity at 42 d was associated with final seroconversion (odds ratio' 3.14; 95% confidence interval' 1.10-8.96; P = 0.032). Final IgG titer was significantly higher in patients with constant S-ELISpot positivity (P < 0.001). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of kidney transplant recipients developed late seroconversion after 2 doses. Cellular immunity was associated with the development of a stronger humoral response.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The number of octogenarians or older patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) has been growing over the past several years. The aim of this study is to assess factors associated with acute renal replacement therapy (ARRT) requirement in these patients and the impact of this therapy on 90-day mortality. We also aimed to identify prognostic factors associated with mortality risk in the group of patients that required ARRT. METHODS: Retrospective study of octogenarian or older patients admitted to the ICU at Hospital Clínic de Barcelona from June 2007 to April 2019. Patients on chronic dialysis treatment or with a kidney transplant, and patients with limitation of therapeutic support or admitted for less than 48 h were excluded. RESULTS: 217 patients were included in the study, of whom 36.4% required ARRT. Use of vasoactive drugs (VAD) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score on admission were higher in ARRT patients (P = 0.009 and < 0.001, respectively). Basal estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower in the ARRT cohort (P < 0.001). Hospital and ICU length of stay were longer in the ARRT cohort (P < 0.001). Ninety-day mortality was 58.2% in the ARRT cohort compared to 55.8% in the non-ARRT control cohort (P = NS). In the survival analysis, only female sex, sepsis and non-renal SOFA ≥ 6.5 were significantly associated with mortality (P = 0.002, 0.028 and 0.009, respectively) in the ARRT cohort. CONCLUSION: Mortality was not significantly increased in the octogenarian or older population that required and received ARRT compared to control patients who did not require it. Severity scores like SOFA could help in the process of decision making about initiation of ARRT in this population.