Should VV ECMO be considered as treatment option in COVID-19 infection after kidney transplant? A word of caution.

Several reports have shown that hospitalized kidney transplant recipients (KTR) had high mortality rates when infected with COVID-19. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) has been shown to be an option for refractory respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients with variable rates of recovery. The outcome of ECMO in respiratory failure is highly related to cohort investigated and patient selection. Over a 10-month period in the height of COVID-19 pandemic 5 KTR patients were placed on ECMO with none of the patients surviving to discharge. All patients experienced multisystem organ failure (MSOF) and hematologic pathology while on ECMO. We concluded that COVID-19 in KTR patients presents with a refractory MSOF that is not well supported with ECMO in a traditional approach. Future work is needed to determine how to best support refractory respiratory failure in KTR patients with COVID-19.

A Pilot Single-Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing BNT162b2 vs. JNJ-78436735 Vaccine as the Third Dose After Two Doses of BNT162b2 Vaccine in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.

Solid Organ Transplant (SOT) recipients are at significant higher risk for COVID-19 and due to immunosuppressive medication, the immunogenicity after vaccination is suboptimal. In the previous studies, booster method showed significant benefit in this population. In the current study, we compared using a mix-and-match method vs. same vaccine as a third dose in SOT recipients. This was a patient-blinded, single center, randomized controlled trial comparing BNT162b2 vs. JNJ-78436735 vaccine as the third dose after two doses of BNT162b2 vaccine. We included adult SOT recipients with functional graft who had received two doses of BNT162b2 vaccine. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either BNT162b2 or JNJ-78436735 in one-to-one ratio. Primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 IgG positivity at 1 month after the third dose. Sixty SOT recipients, including 36 kidney, 12 liver, 2 lung, 3 heart, and 5 combined transplants, were enrolled, and 57 recipients were analyzed per protocol. There were no statistically significant differences between the two vaccine protocols for IgG positivity (83.3% vs. 85.2% for BNT162b2 and JNJ-78436735, respectively, p = 0.85, Odds Ratio 0.95, 95% Confidence Interval 0.23-4.00). Comparison of the geometric mean titer demonstrated a higher trend with BNT162b2 (p = 0.09). In this pilot randomized controlled trial comparing mix and match method vs. uniform vaccination in SOT recipients, both vaccines were safely used. Since this was a small sample sized study, there was no statistically significant difference in immunogenicity; though, the mix and match method showed relatively lower geometric mean titer, as compared to uniform vaccine. Further studies need to be conducted to determine duration of this immunogenicity. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05047640?term=20210641&draw=2&rank=1, identifier 20210641.

Difference between SARS-CoV-2, seasonal coronavirus, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus infection in solid organ transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has been raging since the end of 2019 and has shown worse outcomes in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. The clinical differences as well as outcomes between respiratory viruses have not been well defined in this population. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of adult SOT recipients with nasopharyngeal swab or bronchoalveolar lavage PCR positive for either SARS-CoV-2, seasonal coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or influenza virus from January 2017 to October 2020. The follow up period was 3 months. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 377 recipients including 157 SARS-CoV-2, 70 seasonal coronavirus, 50 RSV and 100 influenza infections were identified. The most common transplanted organ was kidney 224/377 (59.4%). Lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) was found in 210/377 (55.7%) and the risk factors identified with multivariable analysis were SARS-CoV-2 infection, steroid use, and older age. Co- and secondary infections were seen in 77/377 (20.4%) recipients with bacterial pathogens as dominant. Hospital admission was seen in 266/377 (67.7%) recipients without significant statistical difference among viruses, however, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation and mortality were higher with SARS-CoV-2 infection. In the multivariable model, the risk factors for mortality were SARS-CoV-2 infection and older age. CONCLUSIONS: We found higher incidence of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and mortality among SARS-CoV-2 infected recipients. Older age was found to be the risk factor for lower respiratory tract infection and mortality for SARS-CoV-2, coronaviruses, RSV and influenza virus groups.

Benefit of B7-1 staining and abatacept for treatment-resistant post-transplant focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in a predominantly pediatric cohort: time for a reappraisal.

BACKGROUND: Primary FSGS manifests with nephrotic syndrome and may recur following KT. Failure to respond to conventional therapy after recurrence results in poor outcomes. Evaluation of podocyte B7-1 expression and treatment with abatacept (a B7-1 antagonist) has shown promise but remains controversial. METHODS: From 2012 to 2020, twelve patients developed post-KT FSGS with nephrotic range proteinuria, failed conventional therapy, and were treated with abatacept. Nine/twelve (< 21 years old) experienced recurrent FSGS; three adults developed de novo FSGS, occurring from immediately, up to 8 years after KT. KT biopsies were stained for B7-1. RESULTS: Nine KTRs (75%) responded to abatacept. Seven of nine KTRs were B7-1 positive and responded with improvement/resolution of proteinuria. Two patients with rFSGS without biopsies resolved proteinuria after abatacept. Pre-treatment UPCR was 27.0 ± 20.4 (median 13, range 8-56); follow-up UPCR was 0.8 ± 1.3 (median 0.2, range 0.07-3.9, p < 0.004). Two patients who were B7-1 negative on multiple KT biopsies did not respond to abatacept and lost graft function. One patient developed proteinuria while receiving belatacept, stained B7-1 positive, but did not respond to abatacept. CONCLUSIONS: Podocyte B7-1 staining in biopsies of KTRs with post-transplant FSGS identifies a subset of patients who may benefit from abatacept. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Delayed mortality among solid organ transplant recipients hospitalized for COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Most studies of solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with COVID-19 focus on outcomes within one month of illness onset. Delayed mortality in SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 has not been fully examined. METHODS: We used data from a multicenter registry to calculate mortality by 90 days following initial SARS-CoV-2 detection in SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 and developed multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models to compare risk factors for death by days 28 and 90. RESULTS: Vital status at day 90 was available for 936 of 1117 (84%) SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19: 190 of 936 (20%) died by 28 days and an additional 56 of 246 deaths (23%) occurred between days 29 and 90. Factors associated with mortality by day 90 included: age > 65 years [aHR 1.8 (1.3-2.4), p =<0.001], lung transplant (vs. non-lung transplant) [aHR 1.5 (1.0-2.3), p=0.05], heart failure [aHR 1.9 (1.2-2.9), p=0.006], chronic lung disease [aHR 2.3 (1.5-3.6), p<0.001] and body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m 2 [aHR 1.5 (1.1-2.0), p=0.02]. These associations were similar for mortality by day 28. Compared to diagnosis during early 2020 (March 1-June 19, 2020), diagnosis during late 2020 (June 20-December 31, 2020) was associated with lower mortality by day 28 [aHR 0.7 (0.5-1.0, p=0.04] but not by day 90 [aHR 0.9 (0.7-1.3), p=0.61]. CONCLUSIONS: In SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19, >20% of deaths occurred between 28 and 90 days following SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Future investigations should consider extending follow-up duration to 90 days for more complete mortality assessment.

Changing trends in mortality among solid organ transplant recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 during the course of the pandemic.

Mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 has declined over the course of the pandemic. Mortality trends specifically in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) are unknown. Using data from a multicenter registry of SOTR hospitalized for COVID-19, we compared 28-day mortality between early 2020 (March 1, 2020-June 19, 2020) and late 2020 (June 20, 2020-December 31, 2020). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess comorbidity-adjusted mortality. Time period of diagnosis was available for 1435/1616 (88.8%) SOTR and 971/1435 (67.7%) were hospitalized: 571/753 (75.8%) in early 2020 and 402/682 (58.9%) in late 2020 (p < .001). Crude 28-day mortality decreased between the early and late periods (112/571 [19.6%] vs. 55/402 [13.7%]) and remained lower in the late period even after adjusting for baseline comorbidities (aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98, p = .016). Between the early and late periods, the use of corticosteroids (≥6 mg dexamethasone/day) and remdesivir increased (62/571 [10.9%] vs. 243/402 [61.5%], p < .001 and 50/571 [8.8%] vs. 213/402 [52.2%], p < .001, respectively), and the use of hydroxychloroquine and IL-6/IL-6 receptor inhibitor decreased (329/571 [60.0%] vs. 4/492 [1.0%], p < .001 and 73/571 [12.8%] vs. 5/402 [1.2%], p < .001, respectively). Mortality among SOTR hospitalized for COVID-19 declined between early and late 2020, consistent with trends reported in the general population. The mechanism(s) underlying improved survival require further study.

Creating a Single Inflow Orifice From Living Donor Kidney Allografts With Multiple Renal Arteries.

Background: Multiple renal arteries (MRA) are often encountered during living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), requiring surgeons to pursue complex renovascular reconstructions prior to graft implantation. With improvements in reconstruction and anastomosis techniques, allografts with MRA can be successfully transplanted with similar outcomes to allografts with a single renal artery. Here, we describe in detail various surgical techniques for reconstruction of MRA grafts with the intent of creating a single arterial inflow. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all LDKT recipients with laparoscopically procured MRA kidneys between March 2008 and July 2021. Recipient and donor characteristics, operative data, type of reconstruction, and recipient outcomes were analyzed. The primary outcomes were the incidence of developing delayed graft function (DGF) and/or a vascular or urological complication within 12 months post-transplant. Results: Seventy-three LDKT recipients of MRA donor allografts were evaluated. Two renal arteries (RA) were encountered in 62 allografts (84.9%) and three RA in 11 allografts (15.1%). Renal artery reconstruction was performed in 95.8% (70/73) of patients. Eighteen different reconstruction techniques of MRA were utilized, the most common being side-to-side anastomosis in allografts with two RA (N = 44) and side-to-side-to-side anastomosis in allografts with three RA (N = 4). Interposition grafting was performed in seven cases (9.6%). A single ostium was created in 69 cases (94.5%), and the median warm ischemia time was 27 (range 20-42) minutes. None of the patients developed DGF or post-operative vascular or urological complications. Median creatinine at 3, 6, and 12 months post-transplant remained stable at 1.1 mg/dl. With a median follow-up of 30.4 months post-transplant, only one graft failure has been observed-death-censored graft survival was 98.6%. Conclusion: Complex reconstruction techniques to create a single renal artery ostium for graft implantation anastomosis in allografts with MRA show acceptable warm ischemic times, with no increased risk of post-operative vascular or urological complications.

Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 in solid-organ transplant recipients: Incidence density and convalescent immunity prior to reinfection.

BACKGROUND: Long-term protective immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains poorly characterized, particularly in solid organ transplant (SOT) patients. METHOD: We determined the incidence density of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in a cohort of adult SOT recipients initially infected between March 1st, 2020 and March 30th, 2021 and included those with initial infection before or after transplantation. Incidence density was the total cases divided by total days after initial diagnosis with active graft. RESULTS: Of 210 infected recipients, five (2.4%) developed reinfection, including two who had received full mRNA vaccination, but none developed hypoxia. The incidence density for reinfection was 9.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-22.6) and for primary infection the density was 9.1 (95% CI 7.9-10.5) cases/100,000 patient days. Two recipients had immunity evaluated in the weeks prior to reinfection, by measuring immunoglobulin-G (IgG) antibody titer to the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain and virus-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell reactivity following stimulation with SARS-CoV-2 peptide pools. Both mounted virus specific CD4 T-cell responses prior to reinfection (1.19% and 0.28% of total CD4 T cells) and both had reactive IgG testing (1.30 and 4.99 signal/cut off ratio). CONCLUSIONS: This suggests that SOT recipients infected with SARS-CoV-2 remain at high risk for reinfection even after generating cellular and humoral immune responses.

Is the Omicron variant truly less virulent in solid organ transplant recipients?

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at high risk for severe disease with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Emerging variants of concern have disproportionately affected this population. Data on severity and outcomes with the Omicron variant in SOT recipients are limited. Thus we conducted this single-center, retrospective cohort study of SOT recipients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection from December 18, 2021 to January 18, 2022, when prevalence of the Omicron variant was more than 80%-95% in the community. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for hospital admission. We identified 166 SOT patients: 112 (67.5%) kidney, 22 (13.3%) liver, 10 (6.0%) lung, seven (4.2%) heart, and 15 (9.0%) combined transplants. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine series was completed in 59 (35.5%) recipients. Ninety-nine (59.6%) and 13 (7.8%) recipients received casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab, respectively. Fifty-three (32%) recipients required hospital admission, of which 19 (35.8%) required intensive care unit level of care. Median follow-up was 50 (interquartile range, 25-59) days, with mortality reported in six (3.6%) patients. Risk factors identified for hospital admission were African American race (p < .001, odds ratio [OR] 4.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.84-8.70), history of coronary artery disease (p = .031, OR 3.50, 95% CI 1.12-10.87), and maintenance immunosuppression with corticosteroids (p = .048, OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.01-4.00). In conclusion, contrary to that in the general population, we found a higher hospital admission rate in SOT recipients with omicron variant infection. Further studies to investigate the efficacy of newer treatments are necessary, even as outcomes continue to improve.

COVID-19 in hospitalized lung and non-lung solid organ transplant recipients: A comparative analysis from a multicenter study.

Lung transplant recipients (LTR) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may have higher mortality than non-lung solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR), but direct comparisons are limited. Risk factors for mortality specifically in LTR have not been explored. We performed a multicenter cohort study of adult SOTR with COVID-19 to compare mortality by 28 days between hospitalized LTR and non-lung SOTR. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess comorbidity-adjusted mortality among LTR vs. non-lung SOTR and to determine risk factors for death in LTR. Of 1,616 SOTR with COVID-19, 1,081 (66%) were hospitalized including 120/159 (75%) LTR and 961/1457 (66%) non-lung SOTR (p = .02). Mortality was higher among LTR compared to non-lung SOTR (24% vs. 16%, respectively, p = .032), and lung transplant was independently associated with death after adjusting for age and comorbidities (aOR 1.7, 95% CI 1.0-2.6, p = .04). Among LTR, chronic lung allograft dysfunction (aOR 3.3, 95% CI 1.0-11.3, p = .05) was the only independent risk factor for mortality and age >65 years, heart failure and obesity were not independently associated with death. Among SOTR hospitalized for COVID-19, LTR had higher mortality than non-lung SOTR. In LTR, chronic allograft dysfunction was independently associated with mortality.

When is it safe to perform abdominal transplantation in patients with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection: A case series.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) pandemic has negatively impacted worldwide organ transplantation. However, there is limited information on recipients transplanted after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A full understanding of this scenario is required, as transplantation is a life-saving procedure and COVID-19 remains an ongoing threat. METHODS: Abdominal organ transplant recipients diagnosed with COVID-19 prior to transplantation were identified by chart review and clinical data were collected. The primary outcome was the transplant outcome including graft loss, rejection and death, and reactivation of infection post-transplant. RESULTS: We identified 14 patients who received abdominal organ transplants after symptomatic PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection; four patients had a positive PCR at the time of admission for transplantation. The median time of follow-up was 79 (22-190) days. One recipient with negative PCR before transplant tested positive 9 days after transplant. One of 14 transplanted patients developed disseminated mold infection and died 86 days after transplant. During the follow-up, only one patient developed rejection; thirteen patients had favorable graft outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We were able to perform abdominal transplantation for patients with COVID-19 before transplant, even with positive PCR at the time of transplant. Larger studies are needed to determine the time to safe transplant after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Randomized trial of 3 maintenance regimens (TAC/SRL vs. TAC/MMF vs. CSA/SRL) with low-dose corticosteroids in primary kidney transplantation: 18-year results.

A randomized trial of 150 primary kidney transplant recipients, initiated in May 2000, compared tacrolimus (TAC)/sirolimus (SRL) vs. TAC/mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) vs. cyclosporine microemulsion (CSA)/SRL (N = 50/group). All patients received daclizumab induction and maintenance corticosteroids. With current median follow-up of 18 years post-transplant, biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) occurred less often in TAC/MMF (26% (13/50)), vs. the TAC/SRL (36% (18/50)) and CSA/SRL (34% (17/50)) arms combined (p = .23), with statistical significance favoring TAC/MMF (p = .05) after controlling for the multivariable (Cox model) effects of recipient age, recipient race/ethnicity, and donor age. First BPAR rate was clearly more favorable for TAC/MMF after stratifying patients by having 0-1 (N = 72) vs. 2-3 (N = 78) unfavorable baseline characteristics (recipient age <50 years, African American or Hispanic recipient, and donor age ≥50 years) (p = .02). Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), using the CKD-EPI formula, was consistently higher for TAC/MMF, particularly after controlling for the multivariable effect of donor age, throughout the first 96 months post-transplant (p ≤ .008). These differences were translated into an observed more favorable graft failure due to immunologic cause (CAI/TG) rate for TAC/MMF (p = .06), although no significant differences in overall death-uncensored graft loss were observed. Previously reported significantly higher study drug discontinuation and requirement for antilipid therapy rates in the SRL-assigned arms were maintained over time. Overall, these results at 18 years post-transplant more definitively show that TAC/MMF should be the gold standard for achieving optimal, long-term maintenance immunosuppression in kidney transplantation.

Treatment of latent tuberculosis infection with short-course regimens in potential living kidney donors.

BACKGROUND: Treatment data for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) among potential living kidney donors are scarce. METHODS: This retrospective study was performed to evaluate the prevalence of positive QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT) among potential living kidney donors that were screened from 2009 to 2017. We investigated if there was any difference in the time to donation between QFT-GIT-positive and QFT-GIT-negative donors. We assessed the regimens used to treat LTBI and whether the recipients of QFT-GIT-positive donors developed active tuberculosis (TB). RESULTS: Forty out of 427 (9%) potential living kidney donors had a positive QFT-GIT. QFT-GIT-positive donors were as likely as negative donors to undergo donation (30 [75%] vs 315 [81%], P = .33). The time from QFT-GIT testing to donation was longer among QFT-GIT-positive donors (median 221 days [range: 4-1139] vs 86 days [range: 3-1887], P = .001). Twelve-week rifapentine (RPT)/Isoniazid (INH) was the most common treatment used and was not associated with significant adverse reactions. There was a trend toward longer time to donation among QFT-GIT-positive donors who were treated for LTBI compared with QFT-GIT-positive donors who were not (252 days [range: 88-1139] vs 95 days [range: 4-802], P = .05). Twenty-nine recipients of QFT-GIT-positive living kidney donors were evaluated. Eleven of these recipients received kidneys from donors that were not treated for LTBI. Two of these recipients were treated with INH post-transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: The time from QFT-GIT testing to donation was longer among QFT-GIT-positive donors. The short-course regimens appear to be excellent options for LTBI treatment among living kidney donors and avoid delaying organ donation further.

Kidney transplantation during coronavirus 2019 pandemic at a large hospital in Miami.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in more than 350 000 deaths worldwide. The number of kidney transplants has declined during the pandemic. We describe our deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) experience during the pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the safety of DDKT during the COVID-19 pandemic. Multiple preventive measures were implemented. Adult patients that underwent DDKT from 3/1/20 to 4/30/20 were included. COVID-19 clinical manifestations from donors and recipients, and post-transplant outcomes (COVID-19 infections, readmissions, allograft rejection, and mortality) were obtained. The kidney transplant (KT) recipients were followed until 5/31/20. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients received kidneys from 57 donors. Fever, dyspnea, and cough were reported in 1, 2, and 1 donor, respectively. Thirty-eight (66.6%) donors were tested for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) prior to donation (mainly by nasopharyngeal or bronchoalveolar lavage polymerase chain reaction [PCR]) and 36 (47.3%) KT recipients were tested at the time of DDKT by nasopharyngeal PCR; all of these were negative. Our recipients were followed for a median of 63 (range: 33-91) days. A total of 42 (55.3%) recipients were tested post-transplant for SARS-CoV2 by nasopharyngeal PCR including 12 patients that became symptomatic; all tests were negative except for one that was inconclusive, but it was repeated and came back negative. Forty (52.6%) KT recipients were readmitted, and 7 (9.2%) had biopsy-proven rejection during the follow-up. None of the KT recipients transplanted during this period died. CONCLUSIONS: Our cohort demonstrated that DDKT can be safely performed during the COVID-19 pandemic when preventive measures are implemented.

Antimicrobial resistance and recurrent bacterial urinary tract infections in hospitalized patients following kidney transplantation: A single-center experience.

PURPOSE: The burden of urinary tract infections (UTIs) and risk factors for developing infections with multidrug resistant organisms (MDROs) post-kidney transplantation (KT) are poorly understood. METHODS: Single-center retrospective cohort study (January 2015-December 2017) evaluating first and recurrent episodes of bacteriuria and subsequent analysis of episodes caused by MDROs up to 6 months post-KT. Donor and recipient variables were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 743 adults underwent single KT during the study period, and 106 patients were hospitalized with bacteriuria. 45% were asymptomatic in their first episode. 73.6% had a single episode, and 26.4% had 2 or more episodes. A total of 28 patients had recurrent episodes; 64.3% had an MDRO on the first episode and 78.6% on the second episode. Escherichia coli was the most common organism isolated, 88.5% were resistant to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), 9.3% were extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producers, and 38.1% were MDROs. Body mass index ≥30 was significantly associated with the presence of MDROs in both univariate and multivariate analyses (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.01-1.88; OR 3.26, CI 1.29-8.25). A total of 12 donors had bacteremia or bacteriuria and 6 (50%) with E coli. A total of 10 KT recipients received antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent donor-derived infections. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that a significant proportion of patients develop recurrent bacteriuria post-transplantation; of those, more than half caused by MDROs. There is a possible association between obesity and MDROs in KT recipients that merits further investigation. With the global crisis in antimicrobial resistance, innovative strategies are needed to prevent and treat UTIs in KT patients.

Linezolid- and Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: Infection Control and Antimicrobial Stewardship Using Whole Genome Sequencing.

BACKGROUND: Vancomycin-resistant enterococci are an important cause of healthcare-associated infections and are inherently resistant to many commonly used antibiotics. Linezolid is the only drug currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat vancomycin-resistant enterococci; however, resistance to this antibiotic appears to be increasing. Although outbreaks of linezolid- and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (LR-VRE) in solid organ transplant recipients remain uncommon, they represent a major challenge for infection control and hospital epidemiology. METHODS: We describe a cluster of 4 LR-VRE infections among a group of liver and multivisceral transplant recipients in a single intensive care unit. Failure of treatment with linezolid in 2 cases led to a review of standard clinical laboratory methods for susceptibility determination. Testing by alternative methods including whole genome sequencing (WGS) and a comprehensive outbreak investigation including sampling of staff members and surfaces was performed. RESULTS: Review of laboratory testing methods revealed a limitation in the VITEK 2 system with regard to reporting resistance to linezolid. Linezolid resistance in all cases was confirmed by E-test method. The use of WGS identified a resistant subpopulation with the G2376C mutation in the 23S ribosomal RNA. Sampling of staff members' dominant hands as well as sampling of surfaces in the unit identified no contaminated sources for transmission. CONCLUSIONS: This cluster of LR-VRE in transplant recipients highlights the possible shortcomings of standard microbiology laboratory methods and underscores the importance of WGS to identify resistance mechanisms that can inform patient care, as well as infection control and antibiotic stewardship measures.

Implementation of a Strongyloides screening strategy in solid organ transplant donors and recipients.

BACKGROUND: Strongyloides stercoralis infects 100 million people worldwide. Mortality rates in hyperinfection syndrome exceed 50%. Donor-derived Strongyloides infection has occurred after heart, kidney, kidney-pancreas and liver transplantation; yet, only 10% of the US organ procurement organizations currently screen donors for strongyloidiasis. METHODS: We report a fatal case of donor-derived disseminated Strongyloides infection in a liver transplant recipient. Following this case, we implemented universal screening and treatment of donors and recipients. We reviewed our local epidemiology and outcomes after protocol implementation. RESULTS: From a total of 355 deceased donors accepted at our center between January 2016, and March 2018, 14 (3.9%) had positive Strongyloides serology. Except for the index case, all other recipients of Strongyloides antibody-positive donors within that period (including 10 kidneys, 3 livers, one combined liver/kidney, and one kidney/pancreas from eight seropositive donors) received post-transplant prophylaxis with ivermectin, and to date are alive and doing well without signs of infection. Between October 2015, and September 2016, a total of 441 deceased donor solid organ transplants were performed at our center. 220 of these recipients had pretransplant Strongyloides serology available, and 23 of them were seropositive (10.5%). Within the first two years after the implementation of universal screening and treatment of donors and recipients, we had no cases of Strongyloides reactivation in our center. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a Strongyloides screening and treatment protocol in our center was an effective strategy to prevent both recipient- and donor-derived strongyloidiasis. Transplant centers should consider implementation of Strongyloides preventive strategies.

Clinical outcomes in HIV+/HCV+ coinfected kidney transplant recipients in the pre- and post-direct-acting antiviral therapy eras: 10-Year single center experience.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated inferior patient and graft survival following kidney transplant (KT) in HIV+/HCV+ coinfected patients compared to HIV+/HCV- recipients. However, these studies were conducted prior to the availability of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents and data in the modern era are lacking. METHODS: Single center retrospective study of HIV+/HCV+ coinfected KT recipients (2007-2017). Outcomes were assessed for the pre-DAA and post-DAA (ie, after December 2013) eras including 1-year patient survival, death-censored graft survival, and acute rejection; and serious infections (defined as infections requiring admission to the intensive care unit during initial transplant hospitalization or re-admission to the hospital after discharge) within the first 6 months post-transplant. RESULTS: A total of 13 consecutive HIV+/HCV+ recipients were identified. Median time of post-transplant follow-up was 722 days. Seven patients were transplanted in the DAA era; five of them had anti-HCV Ab+ donors, with two donors being HCV NAT positive; all received DAA therapy, six of them post-transplant (median time from KT to DAA: 83 days; IQR, 54-300). All the patients in the pre-DAA era were on a protease inhibitor-containing ART regimen. One-year patient and death-censored graft survivals were 83% and 67%, respectively, for the patients transplanted in the pre-DAA era, and 100% for both outcomes in the subgroup of patients transplanted in the post-DAA era (P > 0.05). Compared to patients in the post-DAA era, those in the pre-DAA era had higher incidence of serious infections (0 vs 67%; P = 0.02). Acute rejection exclusively occurred in the pre-DAA group (n = 1; 17%). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of HIV+/HCV+ KT recipients, including HIV-/HCV+ to HIV+/HCV+ transplants, in the DAA era were excellent in this small cohort. Larger studies are needed.

Antibody-mediated rejection implies a poor prognosis in kidney transplantation: Results from a single center.

Two major barriers to achieving long-term graft survival include patient nonadherence in taking the prescribed immunosuppression and antibody-mediated rejection(AMR). We were therefore interested in determining the prognostic impact of developing an AMR component to rejection in a prospective randomized trial of 200 kidney transplant recipients who received dual induction therapy (rATG combined with either daclizumab or alemtuzumab) and planned early corticosteroid withdrawal. With a median follow-up of 96 months post-transplant, 40/200 developed a first BPAR; 9/200 developed a second BPAR. An AMR component to rejection was observed in 70% (28/40) of cases. Percentages having C4d deposition, histopathologic evidence of acute AMR, and presence of DSAs/non-DSAs at the time of first developing the AMR component were 64.3% (18/28), 60.7% (17/28), and 53.6% (15/28), respectively. Development of an AMR component was associated with a significantly higher death-censored graft failure rate following rejection in comparison with the patient state of experiencing BPAR but without developing an AMR component (estimated hazard ratio: 4.52, P = 0.01). The observed percentage developing graft failure following development of an AMR component was 53.6% (15/28) vs only 20.0%(3/15) if it was not observed. Actuarial death-censored graft survival at 60 months following development of an AMR component was 28.3 ± 11.9%. In summary, it appears that more effective AMR prevention/treatment strategies are warranted.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is an effective bridge to kidney transplantation: Results from a single center.

Body mass index (BMI) > 35-40 kg/m2 is often a contraindication, while Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is performed to enable kidney transplantation. This single-center retrospective study evaluated pre- and post-transplant outcomes of 31 morbidly obese patients with end-stage renal disease having RYGB before kidney transplantation between July 2009 and June 2014. Fourteen RYGB patients were subsequently transplanted. Nineteen recipients not having GB with a BMI ≥ 36 kg/m2 at transplantation were used as historical controls. Mean BMI (±SE) before RYGB was 43.5 ± 0.7 kg/m2 (range: 35.4-50.5 kg/m2 ); 87.1% (27/31) achieved a BMI < 35 kg/m2 . The percentage having improved diabetes/hypertension control was 29.0% (9/31); 25.8% (8/31) had complications (mostly minor) after RYGB. Among transplanted patients, blacks/Hispanics comprised 78.6% (11/14) and 84.2% (16/19) of RYGB and controls; 57.1% (8/14) and 63.2% (12/19) had a (mostly long-standing) pretransplant history of diabetes. While biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) occurred significantly higher among RYGB vs control patients (6/14 vs 3/19, P = .03), patients developing T-cell BPAR were also significantly more likely to have a tacrolimus (TAC) trough level < 4.0 ng/mL within 3 weeks of T-cell BPAR (P = .0007). In Cox's model, the impact of having a TAC level < 4.0 ng/mg remained significant (P = .007) while the effect of RYGB was no longer significant (P = .13). Infections, graft, and patient survival were not significantly different. Despite obvious effectiveness in achieving weight loss, RYGB will need more careful post-transplant monitoring given the observed higher BPAR rate.