Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Transplantation: Foe or Common Innocent Bystander?

BACKGROUND: Heart transplantation (HT) is regarded as the treatment of choice for end-stage heart failure (ESHF) patients. Severe acute kidney injury (AKI) after HT is a frequent clinical problem with devastating consequences for HT recipients. METHODS: Data from 112 ESHF patients undergoing HT in 2010-2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary end point was the development of AKI stage III, and secondary outcomes were in-hospital and 1-year mortality according to Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria. RESULTS: In total, 81 patients (72.3%) developed AKI, of which 33 (29.4%) developed AKI stage I, 18 (16%) stage II, and 30 (26.7%) stage III; within this group, 27 recipients (24%) required renal replacement therapy (RRT). Overall hospital mortality was 14%. However, when stratifying by AKI stage, hospital mortality increased from 0% to 46% comparing recipients without AKI and those with AKI stage III, respectively (P = .001). In the same way, 1-year mortality increased from 6% to 53% for recipients without AKI compared with those who developed AKI stage III (log-rank test for trend: P = .001). Recipients that required RRT had a 1-year mortality of 59.2% compared with 5.8% in those without RRT requirement. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that AKI stage III is common after HT and adversely affects early and late mortality. Clinical variables together with perioperative hemodynamic assessment could add more powerful prognostic information to predict severe AKI before HT and therefore evaluate potential heart-kidney recipients.

Single-Center Long-Term Follow-Up of Kidney Donors in Argentina (Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires).

INTRODUCTION: Living kidney donor (LKD) transplantation is increasing due to organ shortage. Clinical studies have shown that the risk of developing end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in donors is similar to that in the general population. Our goal was to evaluate postdonation renal outcomes assessed by glomerular filtration rate (GFR), proteinuria, and blood pressure. METHODS: A total of 210 LKD transplants were performed at Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires between 2000 and 2014. Postdonation outcomes were analyzed in 109 donors. GFR was assessed by 24-hour creatinine clearance (as 24-hour ClCr) and estimated using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations. Additionally, we correlated the predonation renal functional reserve (RFR) with postdonation GFR. Donor results were compared to the expected GFR (adjusted to age and single kidney). Other renal outcome indicators measured were albuminuria and blood pressure, and they were compared (predonation and postdonation) using univariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients were followed up for 47 ± 34 months (range, 12-168): 70% were female, age at donation was 48.58 years (range, 25-70), and predonation serum creatinine was 0.85 ± 0.17 mg/dL. Postnephrectomy GFR (24-hour ClCr) was significantly lower compared to predonation GFR (105.38 ± 21.78 mL/min/1.73 m2 vs 90.14 ± 17.78 mL/min/1.73 m2). However, postdonation GFR was not significantly different compared to the expected GFR. No differences were found for blood pressure or albuminuria. Age >50 and an RFR (<20%) was associated with a lower GFR. CONCLUSIONS: In this population of LKD, renal outcome (24-hour CrCl, albuminuria, and blood pressure) was within the expected outcome for healthy individuals after uninephrectomy.

Comparison Between CKD-EPI Creatinine and MDRD Equations to Estimate Glomerular Filtration Rate in Kidney Transplant Patients.

BACKGROUND: The Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation is widely used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in kidney transplant (KT) patients. The novel Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration equation (CKD-EPI) could improve accuracy of GFR estimation. Our aim was to compare both equations for staging of CKD in KT patients. METHODS: In a cohort of KT patients, correlation of eGFR according to MDRD and CKD-EPI with 24-hour creatinine clearance (24h-CrCl) was evaluated. Concordance between both equations for CKD staging was performed. MDRD was used for initial CKD staging. The mean difference of GFR between 24h-CrCl and each equation was calculated and Bland-Altman analysis applied. RESULTS: A cohort of 463 KT patients were studied: 67% female, overall average age 46 ± 14 years, 41% living donor, mean time of transplantation 71 months (3-95), and mean serum creatinine 1.68 ± 1.03 mg/dL. For the whole cohort (all CKD stages), eGFR by CKD-EPI was 5.33 mL/min/1.73 m(2) higher than by MDRD (P < .01). For CKD stages 1, 2, and 3A, the mean eGFR differences (CKD-EPI - MDRD) were 13.98 ± 3.27, 8.2 ± 1.98, and 5.34 ± 1.32 mL/min/1,73 m(2), respectively. The percentage of patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) decreased from 63.8% according to MDRD to 53.9% with the use of CKD-EPI. In women and patients ≤65 years old, eGFR by CKD-EPI was 5.98 and 5.81 mL/min/1.73 m(2) higher, respectively, than by MDRD (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The novel CKD-EPI reduces the number of patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and consequently assigns lower CKD stages to our KT population.

Value of repeat biopsy in lupus nephritis flares.

OBJECTIVES: Renal flares are common in lupus nephritis (LN), and class switch is thought to be characteristic. There is no agreement on indications for performing a repeat renal biopsy. Our objective was to retrospectively review patients who had more than one renal biopsy performed on clinical indications, and analyse clinical, pathological and treatment changes after successive biopsies. METHODS: Forty-five patients with LN and one or more repeat renal biopsies were included, with a total of 116 biopsies. RESULTS: Of the 71 repeat biopsies, pathological transition occurred in 39 (54.9%). When having a previous biopsy with a proliferative lesion, class switch occurred in 55.6%, with 24.4% evolving into non-proliferative classes. When previous biopsy was class V, transition to other classes occurred in 58.3% and changes were all into proliferative classes. Conversion from one pure proliferative form to another (class III to class IV or vice versa) happened in 11.3% of the rebiopsies, with 62 rebiopsies (87.3%) leading to a change in the treatment regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Histological transformations were common, and they occurred when the previous biopsy had non-proliferative lesions as well as when lesions were proliferative. Treatments were modified after repeat renal biopsy in the majority of patients. In this experience, kidney repeat biopsies were useful in guiding treatment of LN flares.

[Measuring Kt by ionic dialysance is a useful tool for assessing dialysis dose in critical patients]. / La determinación del Kt por dialisancia iónica es una herramienta útil para la evaluación de la dosis de diálisis en pacientes críticos.

AIM: To evaluate the Kt assessed through ionic dializance (KtOCM) in UCI patients undergoing renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury, comparing the results with those obtained through the urea removal rate method determined by dialyzate collection (Kturea). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 18 adult UCI staying individuals suffering from renal replacement therapy requiring oliguric acute kidney injury were included in this study. RRT consisted in intermittent or extended hemodialysis performed through a Fresenius 4008E dialysis machine equipped with an on-line clearance monitor (OCM Fresenius). The KtOCM results were provided automatically. The Spearman correlation test was used to assess the relationship between the two exploratory methods and the Student s t test to compare the results obtained by the KtOCM and the Kturea. RESULTS: 35 treatments were analyzed. There were not statistically significant differences between the results form the KtOCM and the Kturea (34.9 +/- 10.69 vs 32.78 +/- 11.31, p = NS). A remarkable association was find between both methods (r = 0.87; 95CI, 0.76-0.94; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of Kt through ionic dialyzance is a simple method to estimate the dose of dialysis in critically ill patients and is and useful tool to monitor and adjust the RRT in real time according to a target dose.

La determinación del Kt por dialisancia iónica es una herramienta útil para la evaluación de la dosisde diálisis en pacientes críticos / Measuring Kt by ionic dialysance is a useful tool for assessing dialysis dose in critical patients

Objetivo: Evaluar la determinación de Kt (KtOCM) por dialisancia iónica en los pacientes sometidos a terapia de reemplazo renal (TRR) por insuficiencia renal aguda (IRA) atendidos en una unidad de cuidados intensivos (UCI), comparándola con el Kt obtenido mediante el cálculo del índice de remoción de urea obtenido por recogida del dializado (Kturea). Materiales y métodos: Se incluyeron 18 pacientes adultos, con IRA oligúrica ingresados en la UCI, con requerimiento de TRR, tratados con hemodiálisis intermitente y/o diálisis extendida. Las TRR fueron realizadas con equipos Fresenius 4008E equipados con un monitor de aclaramiento «on-line» (OCM Fresenius). La determinación de KtOCM fue realizada automáticamente por el monitor. Se efectuaron la correlación y la comparación entre KtOCM y Kturea utilizando el análisis de correlación de Spearman y el test de la t, respectivamente. Resultados: Sobre 35 tratamientos efectuados, la media de KtOCM no fue estadísticamente diferente de la del Kturea (34,9 ± 10,69 frente a 32,78 ± 11,31; NS). Se obtuvo una importante correlación y una relación lineal significativa entre los dos métodos (r = 0,87; p <0,001; intervalo de confianza [IC] 95%, 0,76-0,94%). Conclusiones: La determinación del Kt por dialisancia iónica es un método simple para estimar la dosis de diálisis en pacientes críticos y es una herramienta útil para monitorizar y ajustar las TRR en tiempo real de acuerdo con una dosis objetivo (AU)

Aim: To evaluate the Kt assessed through ionic dializance (KtOCM) in UCI patients undergoing renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury, comparing the results with those obtained through the urea removal rate method determined by dialyzate collection (Kturea). Material and methods: 18 adult UCI staying individuals suffering from renal replacement therapy requiring oliguric acute kidney injury were included in this study. RRT consisted in intermitent or extended hemodialysis performed through a Fresenius 4008E dialysis machine equiped with an on-line clearance monitor (OCM Fresenius). The KtOCM results were provided automatically. The Spearman correlation test was used to assess the relationship between the two exploratory methods and the Student´s t test to compare the results obtained by the KtOCM and the Kturea. Results: 35 treatments were analyzed. There were not statistically significant differences between the results form the KtOCM and the Kturea (34.9 ± 10.69 vs 32.78 ± 11.31, p = NS). A remarkable association was find between both methods (r = 0.87; 95CI, 0.76-0.94; p <0.001). Conclusions: The assessment of Kt through ionic dialyzance is a simple method to estimate the dose of dialysis in critically ill patients and is and useful tool to monitor and adjust the RRT in real time according to a target dose (AU)