Non-Heart-Beating Donor Kidney Transplantation Survival Is Similar to Donation After Brain Death: Comparative Study With Controls in a Regional Program.

Non-heart-beating donors (NHBD) are an increasing source of organs for kidney transplantation (KT) compared with donation after brain death (DBD), but the results in each regional transplantation program require local analysis. We compared 164 KT from NHBD (83 Maastrich type II A-B [T2] and 81 type III [T3]) with 328 DBD controls. NHBD kidneys were implanted with less cold ischemia, mean time on renal replacement therapy for NHBD recipients before transplantation was less too, and a higher proportion of thymoglobulin was also used. Besides NHBD-T2 more frequently showing the A group and patients being younger (48.9 ± 11 vs DBD 55.2 ± 15 years old; P < .001), there was a lower proportion of retransplant recipients and HLA sensitization; HLA-DR compatibility was slightly worse. Proportion of nonfunctioning allograft and necessity of dialysis after transplantation for NHBD were 4.9 and 68.3% versus DBD 4.3 and 26.9% (P < .001); renal function after a year was significantly less in NHBD (serum creatinine 1.79 ± 0.9 mg/dL vs 1.46 ± 0.5 in DBD; P < .001). NHBD recipient survival rates were 96% and 96% for the 1st and 3rd years, respectively, versus 96% and 94% for DBD, respectively (not significant [NS]). Graft survival rates censored by death were 91% and 89% (1st and 3rd years, respectively) versus 95% and 94% for DBD, respectively (NS). We did not find significant differences about survival between NHBD-T2 and T3. In the multivariable survival study (Cox, covariables with statistical significance demonstrated previously in our region), NHBD is not a prognosis factor for recipient or graft survival. Regarding current criteria for choosing donors and the graft allocation applied in Andalusia, short-term survival for NHBD transplantation is similar to DBD. Renal function in the short term is slightly worse, which is why it is important to monitor results over a long term, especially those from NHBD-T2.

Survival of Kidney Allograft of Donors after Circulatory Death Is Similar to Donors after Brain Death: Experience in a Regional Program.

BACKGROUND: Donors after circulatory death (DCD) are an increasingly crucial source of organs to maintain deceased donor kidney transplant activity when faced with a standstill in donors after brain death (DBD). We analyzed the influence on graft survival since the use of DCD organs was implemented in Andalusia (2010-2014). METHODS: We compared 164 kidney transplants from DCD (83 Maastricht type II and 81 type III) and 1488 DBD transplants in recipients over the age of 18, excluding combined transplants. RESULTS: DCD were more frequently men from the A blood group who were younger (48.9 ± 11 vs 55.2 ± 15 years old for DBD, P < .001). Kidneys from DCD were implanted in younger recipients (51.2 ± 11 vs 53.5 ± 13 years old for DBD, P = .03), more frequently in men from blood group A who spent less time in renal replacement therapy (39.8 vs 51.5 months), in a lower proportion of immunized recipients and re-transplant patients, and had worse HLA-DR compatibility. DCD presented a proportion of primary nonfunctional allografts and an initial need for dialysis of 8.8% and 69.6% vs 5.5% and 29.6% for DBD (P < .001). DCD allograft recipient survival was 96% and 96% at the first and third year respectively, vs 96% and 93% with a DBD graft (NS). Survival of the graft was 91% and 86% at the 1(st) and 3(rd) years, vs 90% and 86% with a DBD allograft (NS). No significant difference was found between Maastricht type II and III. DCD were related to lower graft survival versus DBD under the age of 50 (n = 445), 86% vs 92% (P = .02) in the third year, but were similar to DBD from age 50 to 59 (n = 407) and higher than DBD over age 60 (n = 636), 80% at the 3(rd) year (NS). The survival of DCD recipients was not different than DBD in those under 60 and was significantly better than DBD at or over the age of 60 (96% vs 87% in the 3(rd) year, P = .036). In the multivariable survival study (Cox, covariates of influence previously demonstrated in our region) DCD are not a significant survival prognosis factor for the recipient or the allograft. CONCLUSIONS: With the current guidelines of donor selection and allocation of organs applied in Andalusia, the survival of kidney transplants from DCD overall is similar to DBD. The graft performance tends to be better than DBD over the age of 60, the main source of donors at present.

Documento de consenso sobre el manejo de la patología renal en pacientes con infección por VIH / Consensus document on the management of renal disease in HIV-infected patients

OBJETIVO: Actualizar las recomendaciones sobre la evaluación y el manejo de la afectación renal en pacientes con infección por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH). MÉTODOS: Este documento ha sido consensuado por un panel de expertos del Grupo de Estudio de Sida (GESIDA) de la Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica (SEIMC), de la Sociedad Española de Nefrología (S.E.N.) y de la Sociedad Española de Química Clínica y Patología Molecular (SEQC). Para la valoración de la calidad de la evidencia y la graduación de las recomendaciones se ha utilizado el sistema Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTADOS: La evaluación renal debe incluir la medida de la concentración sérica de creatinina, la estimación del filtrado glomerular (ecuación chronic kidney disease epidemiological collaboration [CKD-EPI]), la medida del cociente proteína/creatinina en orina y un sedimento urinario. El estudio básico de la función tubular ha de incluir la concentración sérica de fosfato y la tira reactiva de orina (glucosuria). En ausencia de alteraciones, el cribado será anual. En pacientes tratados con tenofovir o con factores de riesgo para el desarrollo de enfermedad renal crónica (ERC), se recomienda una evaluación más frecuente. Se debe evitar el uso de antirretrovirales potencialmente nefrotóxicos en pacientes con ERC o factores de riesgo para evitar su progresión. En este documento se revisan las indicaciones de derivación del paciente a Nefrología y las de la biopsia renal, así como las indicaciones y la evaluación y el manejo del paciente en diálisis o del trasplante renal. CONCLUSIONES: La función renal debe monitorizarse en todos los pacientes con infección por el VIH y este documento pretende optimizar la evaluación y el manejo de la afectación renal.(AU)

OBJECTIVE: To update the 2010 recommendations on the evaluation and management of renal disease in HIV-infected patients. METHODS: This document was approved by a panel of experts from the AIDS Working Group (GESIDA) of the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC), the Spanish Society of Nephrology (S.E.N.), and the Spanish Society of Clinical Chemistry and Molecular Pathology (SEQC). The quality of evidence and the level of recommendation were evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS: The basic renal work-up should include measurements of serum creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate by CKD-EPI, Urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, and urinary sediment. Tubular function tests should include determination of serum phosphate levels and urine dipstick for glucosuria. In the absence of abnormal values, renal screening should be performed annually. In patients treated with tenofovir or with risk factors for chronic kidney disease (CKD), more frequent renal screening is recommended. In order to prevent disease progression, potentially nephrotoxic antiretroviral drugs are not recommended in patients with CKD or risk factors for CKD. The document advises on the optimal time for referral of a patient to the nephrologist and provides indications for renal biopsy. The indications for and evaluation and management of dialysis and renal transplantation are also addressed. CONCLUSIONS: Renal function should be monitored in all HIV-infected patients. The information provided in this document should enable clinicians to optimize the evaluation and management of HIV-infected patients with renal disease.(AU)

Renal Transplant Register of Andalusia, 2010 Report: survival in relation to the factors used in recipient selection.

Kidney transplantation is the best therapeutic alternative for patients suffering from end-stage renal disease (ESRD). In recent years a significant advance has been made in Andalusia in graft and recipient survival as seen in our 2009 publication. In the current work we analyzed 2989 kidney transplantations performed between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2009 based on data obtained from the Renal Transplant Registry of Andalusia. We studied the influence on graft and patient survival of factors, such as donor and recipient age, HLA matching, HLA immunization, and duration of previous renal replacement therapy. Patient survival was influenced by age at the time of transplantation and by donor age; the younger the donor, the more it was improved. Graft survival was determined by the donor age group, with no differences at each level according to the recipient age group. No significant differences were observed in patient survival or graft or death-censored graft survival according to HLA matching. Patient and graft survivals were significantly affected by the duration of the previous renal replacement therapy. Despite this being a preliminary study, we have shown the importance of nonmodifiable factors in transplant survival, such as donor and recipient age, with HLA matching having a limited effect. These latter findings should be confirmed in the future by multivariate analyses.