Human cytomegalovirus-related gastrointestinal disease after kidney transplantation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Human-cytomegalovirus (hCMV) infection involving the gastrointestinal tract represents a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among kidney transplant (KT) recipients (KTRs). Signs and symptoms of the disease are extremely variable. Prompt anti-viral therapy administration and immunosuppression modification are key factors for optimizing management. However, complex work-up strategies are generally required to confirm the preliminary diagnosis. Unfortunately, solid evidence and guidelines on this specific topic are not available. We consequently aimed to summarize current knowledge on post-KT hCMV-related gastrointestinal disease (hCMV-GID). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023399363) about hCMV-GID in KTRs. RESULTS: Our systematic review includes 52 case-reports and ten case-series, published between 1985 and 2022, collectively reporting 311 cases. The most frequently reported signs and symptoms of hCMV-GID were abdominal pain, diarrhea, epigastric pain, vomiting, fever, and GI bleeding. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy were the primary diagnostic techniques. In most cases, the preliminary diagnosis was confirmed by histology. Information on anti-viral prophylaxis were extremely limited as much as data on induction or maintenance immunosuppression. Treatment included ganciclovir and/or valganciclovir administration. Immunosuppression modification mainly consisted of mycophenolate mofetil or calcineurin inhibitor minimization and withdrawal. In total, 21 deaths were recorded. Renal allograft-related outcomes were described for 26 patients only. Specifically, reported events were acute kidney injury (n = 17), transplant failure (n = 5), allograft rejection (n = 4), and irreversible allograft dysfunction (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: The development of local and national registries is strongly recommended to improve our understanding of hCMV-GID. Future clinical guidelines should consider the implementation of dedicated diagnostic and treatment strategies.

Effects of Anti-COVID-19 Vaccination and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis with Tixagevimab-Cilgavimab in Kidney and Liver Transplant Recipients.

Background and Objectives: Underpowered immune response to vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 was observed in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. A novel combination of monoclonal antibodies tixagevimab-cilgavimab (TGM/CGM) received authorization as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in those with reduced response to vaccine. We aimed to evaluate the response rate to COVID-19 vaccination in kidney transplant (KT), compared to liver transplant (LT) recipients, and the efficacy and safety of PrEP with TGM/CGM. Material and Methods: Between March and November 2022, adult KT and LT recipients who had completed the vaccination schedule (3 doses) were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies titer. SOT recipients with anti-SARS-CoV-2 titer ≥ 100 IU/mL were considered protected against infection, while those with titer < 100 UI/mL were defined non-protected. Patients with inadequate response were invited to PrEP. Results: In total, 306 patients were enrolled [KT:197 (64.4%), LT:109 (35.6%)]. After the complete scheme of vaccination, 246 (80.3%) patients developed a protective titer, while 60 (19.6%) did not have a protective titer. KT recipients had a lower rate of protective anti-COVID-19 titer compared to LT patients [149 (75.6%) vs. 97 (89.0%), p = 0.004]. Recipients with non-protective anti-COVID-19 titer received mainly tacrolimus-based regimen associated with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (70%) e steroids (46.7%) as maintenance immunosuppression, while those treated with everolimus were associated with higher protective titer. Of 35 (58.3%) patients who received PrEP, within 12 months, 6 (17.1%) (all KT) developed pauci-symptomatic COVID-19 disease, while 15/25 (60%) of non-responders, who did not receive the prophylaxis, developed COVID-19 disease. After PrEP, hospitalization rate was lower (2.8% vs. 16%), and no adverse events, neither graft loss nor rejection, were observed. Conclusions: Despite complete COVID-19 vaccination, SOT recipients might be not protected from the SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially after KT. In non-protected SOT patients, the subsequent pre-exposure prophylaxis with combination of monoclonal antibodies (TGM/CGM) might be an efficacy and safe strategy to prevent COVID-19 severe disease and hospitalization.

Managing the "Sword of Damocles" of Immunosuppression: Prevention, Early Diagnosis, and Treatment of Infectious Diseases in Kidney Transplantation.

The careful tailoring of the most appropriate immunosuppressive strategy for recipients of a kidney transplant (KT) regularly faces a risk of complications that may harm the actual graft and affect patient survival [...].

A Keynesian perspective on the health economics of kidney transplantation would strengthen the value of the whole organ donation and transplantation service.

Background: In this study, the Keynesian principle "savings may be used as investments in resources" is applied to Kidney Transplantation (KT), contextualizing the whole Organs Donation and Transplantation (ODT) service as a unique healthcare entity. Our aim was to define the financial resources that may be acquired in the form of savings from the KT activity. Methods: We analyzed registry and funding data for ODT in our region, between 2015 and 2019. Our hypotheses aimed to evaluate whether the savings would offset the Organ Donation (OD) costs, define the scope for growth, and estimate what savings could be generated by higher KT activity. To facilitate the evaluation of the resources produced by KT, we defined a coefficient generated from the combination of clinical outcomes, activity, and costs. Results: The ODT activity reached a peak in 2017, declining through 2018-2019. The savings matured in 2019 from the KT activity exceeded €15 million while the OD costs were less than €9 million. The regional KT activity was superior to the national average but inferior to international benchmarks. The estimated higher KT activity would produce savings between €16 and 20 million. Conclusion: The financial resources produced by KT contribute to defining a comprehensive perspective of ODT finance. The optimization of the funding process may lead to the financial self-sufficiency of the ODT service. The reproducible coefficient allows a reliable estimate of savings, subsequently enabling adequate investments and budgeting. Applying such a perspective jointly with reliable estimates would establish the basis for an in-hospital fee-for-value funding methodology for ODT.

Health economics aspects of kidney transplantation in Sicily: a benchmark analysis on activity and estimated savings.

Background: International and national registries consistently report substantial differences in kidney transplant (KT) activity despite demonstrable clinical and financial benefits. The study aims to estimate the financial resources gained by KT and produce a benchmark analysis that would inform adequate strategies for the growth of the service. Methods: We analyzed the KT activity in our region between 2017 and 2019. The benchmark analysis was conducted with programs identified from national and international registries. The estimate of financial resources was obtained by applying the kidney transplant coefficient of value; subsequently, we compared the different activity levels and savings generated by the three KT programs. Findings: The KT activity in the region progressively declined in the study years, producing a parallel reduction of the estimated savings. Such savings were substantially inferior when compared to those generated by benchmark programs (range €18-22 million less). Interpretation: The factors influencing the reduced KT activity in the study period with the related "foregone savings" are multiple, as well as interdependent. Organ donation, access to the transplant waiting list, and KT from living donors appear to be the most prominent determinants of the observed different levels of activities. International experience suggests that a comprehensive strategy in the form of a "task force" may successfully address the critical areas of the service reversing the observed trend. The financial impact of a progressively reduced KT activity may be as critical as its clinical implications, jeopardizing the actual sustainability of services for patients with end-stage kidney disease.

Outcomes of Patients Receiving a Kidney Transplant or Remaining on the Transplant Waiting List at the Epicentre of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Europe: An Observational Comparative Study.

Since the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of kidney transplants (KT) performed worldwide has plummeted. Besides the generalised healthcare crisis, this unprecedented drop has multiple explanations such as the risk of viral transmission through the allograft, the perceived increase in SARS-CoV-2-related morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised hosts, and the virtual "safety" of dialysis while awaiting effective antiviral prophylaxis or treatment. Our institution, operating at the epicentre of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy, has continued the KT programme without pre-set limitations. In this single-centre retrospective observational study with one-year follow-up, we assessed the outcomes of patients who had undergone KT (KTR) or remained on the transplant waiting list (TWL), before (Pre-COV) or during (COV) the pandemic. The main demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients on the TWL or receiving a KT were very similar in the two periods. The pandemic did not affect post-transplant recipient and allograft loss rates. On the contrary, there was a trend toward higher mortality among COV-TWL patients compared to Pre-COV-TWL subjects. Such a discrepancy was primarily due to SARS-CoV-2 infections. Chronic exposure to immunosuppression, incidence of delayed allograft function, and rejection rates were comparable. However, after one year, COV-KTR showed significantly higher median serum creatinine than Pre-COV-KTR. Our data confirm that KT practice could be safely maintained during the COVID-19 pandemic, with excellent patient- and allograft-related outcomes. Strict infection control strategies, aggressive follow-up monitoring, and preservation of dedicated personnel and resources are key factors for the optimisation of the results in case of future pandemics.

The Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Pathway Is a Safe Journey for Kidney Transplant Recipients during the "Extended Criteria Donor" Era.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are still underused in kidney transplantation (KT) due to recipients' "frailty" and risk of postoperative complications. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of ERAS in KT during the "extended-criteria donor" era, and to identify the predictive factors of prolonged hospitalization. In 2010−2019, all patients receiving KT were included in ERAS program targeting a discharge home within 5 days of surgery. Recipient, transplant, and outcomes data were analyzed. Of 454 KT [male: 280, 63.9%; age: 57 (19−77) years], 212 (46.7%) recipients were discharged within the ERAS target (≤5 days), while 242 (53.3%) were discharged later. Patients within the ERAS target (≤5 days) had comparable recipient and transplant characteristics to those with longer hospital stays, and they had similar post-operative complications, readmission rates, and 5 year graft/patient survival. In the multivariate analysis, DGF (HR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.08−4.34, p < 0.030) and in-hospital dialysis (HR: 3.68, 95% CI: 1.73−7.85, p < 0.001) were the only predictive factors for late discharge. The ERAS approach is feasible and safe in all KT candidates, and its failure is primarily related to the postoperative graft function, rather than the recipient's clinical status. ERAS pathways, integrated with strict collaboration with local nephrologists, allow early discharge after KT, with clinical benefits.

Epidemiology, Clinical Characteristics, Diagnostic Work Up, and Treatment Options of Leishmania Infection in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review.

Current knowledge on Leishmania infection after kidney transplantation (KT) is limited. In order to offer a comprehensive guide for the management of post-transplant Leishmaniasis, we performed a systematic review following the latest PRISMA Checklist and using PubMed, Scopus, and Embase as databases. No time restrictions were applied, including all English-edited articles on Leishmaniasis in KT recipients. Selected items were assessed for methodological quality using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Given the nature and quality of the studies (case reports and retrospective uncontrolled case series), data could not be meta-analyzed. A descriptive summary was therefore provided. Eventually, we selected 70 studies, describing a total of 159 cases of Leishmaniasis. Most of the patients were adult, male, and Caucasian. Furthermore, they were frequently living or travelling to endemic regions. The onset of the disease was variable, but more often in the late transplant course. The clinical features were basically similar to those reported in the general population. However, a generalized delay in diagnosis and treatment could be detected. Bone marrow aspiration was the preferred diagnostic modality. The main treatment options included pentavalent antimonial and liposomal amphotericin B, both showing mixed results. Overall, the outcomes appeared as concerning, with several patients dying or losing their transplant.

Improving Clinical Governance of Kidney Transplantation: Review of a Ruling and of the Clinical Governance Process in the United Kingdom.

The presentation of adverse events and negative outcomes is uncommon in scientific publications, particularly in a highly regulated and scrutinized practice such as solid organ transplantation. A ruling of a regulatory body of the pharmaceutical industry in the United Kingdom generates several considerations, in particular, regarding the governance process of kidney transplantation, as the events reported in the ruling are linked with high rejection rates and negative patient outcomes. This analysis offered a review of the current governance processes, while recognizing the relevant limitations of the system regulating kidney transplantation outcomes in the United Kingdom. The article identified some of the potential interventions that may contribute to delivering an improved governance, harmonizing contemporary practice, modern health care system, and establishing scientific knowledge.

Clinical and Surgical Challenges in Kidney Transplantation: Toward a Personalized Approach?

The continuously evolving practice of solid organ transplantation (SOT) in general and kidney transplantation (KT) in particular embodies the complexity of a composite, multi-step healthcare service [...].

Peritoneal Dialysis for Potential Kidney Transplant Recipients: Pride or Prejudice?

Kidney transplantation (KT) is recognized as the gold-standard of treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that receiving a pre-emptive KT ensures the best recipient and graft survivals. However, due to an overwhelming discrepancy between the organs available and the patients on the transplant waiting list, the vast majority of transplant candidates require prolonged periods of dialysis before being transplanted. For many years, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) have been considered competitive renal replacement therapies (RRT). This dualistic vision has recently been questioned by evidence suggesting that an individualized and flexible approach may be more appropriate. In fact, tailored and cleverly planned changes between different RRT modalities, according to the patient's needs and characteristics, are often needed in order to achieve the best results. While home HD is still under scrutiny in this particular setting, current data seems to favor the use of PD over in-center HD in patients awaiting a KT. In this specific population, the demonstrated advantages of PD are superior quality of life, longer preservation of residual renal function, lower incidence of delayed graft function, better recipient survival, and reduced cost.

Safety and Vascular Impact of Perforator Propeller Flaps during Distal Lower Limb Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: In distal lower limb defects, the paucity of local tissues dictates a free-flap (FF)-based reconstruction frequently. The propeller perforator flap (PPF) offers a good alternative when the patient or the limb or both are not fit for FF-based reconstruction. Also, in contexts of restricted healthcare resources, armed conflict scenarios, or during pandemics like the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, PPF is considered a valuable alternative to free-flap-based reconstruction. Additionally, PPFs are less sacrificing in terms of major limb vessels and distal limb vascularity. Yet, the distal lower limb vascular impact for PPF-based reconstruction has not been studied before. METHODS: In total, 23 patients with distal lower limb defects were reconstructed with PPFs. By using U/S arterial duplex, the peak arterial velocity (PA velocity) was measured pre and postoperatively in 15 (65.2%) out of the 23 patients. This measurement was done to the vessel segment distal to the used perforator. RESULTS: An estimated 21 out of 23 flaps succeeded to reconstruct the patients' defects safely and to give all patients stable coverage without further surgeries. Only two patients had flap failure, which was managed successfully through additional reconstruction sessions. The difference between pre- and postoperative PA velocity was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: PPFs are a safe cost-effective reconstruction modality for distal lower limb defects. This advantage is very valuable in cases of restricted healthcare resources, wars, and during pandemics. In terms of distal limb vascularity, PPFs have no significant impact and can be used safely.

"Salus Populi Suprema Lex": Considerations on the Initial Response of the United Kingdom to the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.

In several countries worldwide, the initial response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been heavily criticized by general public, media, and healthcare professionals, as well as being an acrimonious topic in the political debate. The present article elaborates on some aspects of the United Kingdom (UK) primary reaction to SARS-CoV-2 pandemic; specifically, from February to July 2020. The fact that the UK showed the highest mortality rate in Western Europe following the first wave of COVID-19 certainly has many contributing causes; each deserves an accurate analysis. We focused on three specific points that have been insofar not fully discussed in the UK and not very well known outside the British border: clinical governance, access to hospital care or intensive care unit, and implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions. The considerations herein presented on these fundamental matters will likely contribute to a wider and positive discussion on public health, in the context of an unprecedented crisis.

The Management of Immunosuppression in Kidney Transplant Recipients with COVID-19 Disease: An Update and Systematic Review of the Literature.

Background and Objectives: In the era of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the management of immunosuppressive (IS) therapy in kidney transplant (KT) recipients affected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) requires attention. It is not yet understood whether IS therapy may protect from the cytokine storm induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection or a temporary adjustment/withdrawal of IS therapy to restore the immune system may be necessary. We performed a systematic literature review to investigate the current management of IS therapy in KT recipients with COVID-1. Materials and Methods: Out of 71 articles published from 1 February 2020 until 30 October 2020, 554 KT recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified. Results: Modifications of IS therapy were based on the clinical conditions. For asymptomatic patients or those with mild COVID-19 symptoms, a "wait and see approach" was mostly used; a suspension of antimetabolites drugs (347/461, 75.27%) or mTOR inhibitors (38/48, 79.2%) was adopted in the majority of patients with symptomatic COVID-19 infections. For CNIs, the most frequent attitude was their maintenance (243/502, 48.4%) or dose-reduction (99/502, 19.72%) in patients asymptomatic or with mild COVID-19 symptoms, while drug withdrawal was the preferred choice in severely symptomatic patients (160/450, 31.87%). A discontinuation of all IS drugs was used only in severely symptomatic COVID-19 patients on invasive mechanical ventilation. Renal function remained stable in 422(76.17%) recipients, while 49(8.84%) patients experienced graft loss. Eight (1.44%) patients experienced a worsening of renal function. The overall mortality was 21.84%, and 53(9.56%) patients died with functioning grafts. Conclusion: A tailored approach to the patient has been the preferred strategy for the management of IS therapy in KT recipients, taking into account the clinical conditions of patients and the potential interactions between IS and antiviral drugs, in the attempt to balance the risks of COVID-19-related complications and those due to rejection or graft loss.

The hamletic dilemma of patients waiting for kidney transplantation during the COVID-19 pandemic: To accept or not to accept (an organ offer)?

The outbreak of COVID-19 led to a reduction in the number of organ transplant interventions in most Countries. In April 2020, at the Tor Vergata University in Rome, Italy, two patients on the waiting list for kidney transplantation (KT) declined a deceased donor's kidney offer. Therefore, between April 20 and 25, 2020, we conducted a telephone survey among our 247 KT waitlist patients. Our aim was to explore: (a) the COVID-19 diffusion among them and (b) their current willingness to be transplanted in case of a kidney offer from a deceased donor. Two hundred and forty-three patients participated in a phone interview. One patient had died from COVID-19. Eighty-five (35%) KT candidates would decline any kidney offer, in most cases until the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. Upon a multivariate analysis, female gender (OR = 2.25, 95% CI = 1.26-4.03, P = .006), high cardiovascular risk (OR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.06-5.08, P = .034), a waiting list time <3 years (OR = 0.375, 95% CI = 0.15-0.95, P = .04), and the need to be transferred to another hospital for HD (OR = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.10-5.9, P = .03) were associated with such refusal. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a fear of transplantation in a third of the KT candidates. Proactive educational webinars could be a useful tool to remove, or at least lessen, any doubts on the part of KT candidates and to avoid losing the opportunity to quit dialysis.

Outcomes and surgical complications following living-donor renal transplantation using kidneys retrieved with trans-peritoneal or retro-peritoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy.

The best minimally invasive procedure for living-donor kidney retrieval remains debated. Our objective was to assess trans-peritoneal (TP) and retro-peritoneal (RP) hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN). In this single-center retrospective study, we analyzed results from 317 living-donor renal transplants (RT) performed between 2008 and 2016. Donor and recipient outcomes were compared between TP-HALDN (n = 235) and RP-HALDN (n = 82). Conversion to open nephrectomy (0.4% vs 0%; P = 1.000), intra-operative complications (1.7% vs 1.2%; P = 1.000), and 1-year overall post-operative complications (11.9% vs 17.1%; P = .258) rates were similar in TP-HALDN and RP-HALDN. Overall surgical site infections were higher in RP-HALDN (6.1% vs 1.7%; P = .053), whereas incisional hernias were only recorded following TP-HALDN (3.4% vs 0%; P = .118). The duration of the procedure was 11-minute shorter for TP-HALDN than RP-HALDN (P < .001) but extraction time was equivalent (2, IQR 1.5-2.5 minutes; P = 1.000). RT following TP-HALDN and RP-HALDN showed comparable one-year death-censored allograft survival (97% vs 98.8%; P = .685), primary non-function (0.4% vs 0%; P = .290), delayed graft function (1.3% vs 4.9%; P = .077), and urological complications (2.6% vs 4.9%; P = .290) rates. In our series, donor and recipient outcomes were not substantially affected by the approach used for donor nephrectomy. TP-HALDN and RP-HALDN were both safe and effective.

Outcomes of Patients Suspended From the National Kidney Transplant Waiting List in the United Kingdom Between 2000 and 2010.

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, 1 in 3 patients on the National Kidney Transplant Waiting List (NKTWL) is suspended from the list at least once during their wait. The mortality of this large cohort of patients remains underreported and poorly described. METHODS: We linked patient records from the UK transplant registry to mortality data from the Office of National Statistics and evaluated the impact of a clinically induced suspension event by estimating hazard ratios (HRs) that compared mortality and graft survival between those who had experienced a suspension event and those who had not. RESULTS: Between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2010, 16.7% (2221/13 322) of all patients registered on the NKTWL were suspended. Forty-eight percent (588/1225) of those who were suspended and who were never transplanted died, most often from cardiothoracic causes. A suspension event was associated with increased mortality from the time of listing (adjusted HR [aHR], 1.79; 1.64-1.95) and from the time of transplantation (aHR, 1.20; 1.06-1.37; P = 0.005). Graft survival was also poorer in those who had been suspended (aHR, 1.13; 1.01-1.28; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Patients suspended on the NKTWL have a significantly higher rate of mortality both on the waiting list and following transplantation. Earlier prioritization of patients at risk of experiencing a suspension event may improve their outcomes.

Awareness and Impact of Non-pharmaceutical Interventions During Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic in Renal Transplant Recipients.

The concerns generated by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are having profound impact on solid organ transplantation (SOT). Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) are currently the only measures available to contain COVID-19 in the general population and in more vulnerable recipients of any organ transplant. In this cross-sectional case control study from a patient survey undertaken in 2 transplant centers (TxC) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Italy, we aimed to appraise awareness of the NPI implemented by respective these governments. We have also evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on our kidney transplant (KT) recipients and a control group of kidney living donors (KLD). In our series, there were zero cases of COVID-19 among 111 KT recipients and 70 KLD of the control group. Demography, transplant type, immunosuppression regimes, and, importantly, the different COVID-19 prevalence in the 2 regions of the TxC did not appear to influence incidence of COVID-19 in our KT recipients. The absence of COVID-19 cases in our series was unexpected. Our findings suggest that awareness of NPI is associated with a successful containment of COVID-19 in vulnerable, immunosuppressed KT recipients.