[Karyomegalic interstitial nephritis: an atypical case]. / La nefrite interstiziale cariomegalica: descrizione di un caso clinico atipico.

Karyomegalic interstitial nephritis (KIN) is a rare disease entity that was first described by Burry in 1974. The prevalence of this disease is less than 1% and its pathogenesis is unclear. KIN is characterized by chronic tubulointerstitial nephritis associated with enlarged tubular epithelial cell nuclei, which leads to progressive decline of renal function. The disease has no known treatment. Here, we report on a 50-year-old female patient who presented with asymptomatic progressive decline of renal function. Renal biopsy demonstrated chronic tubulointerstitial nephritis with markedly enlarged and hyperchromic nuclei of tubule epithelial cells the hallmark of karyomegalic nephritis. Clinical and pathologic findings of this case are discussed in light of the available literature.

[Ultrasound-guided renal biopsy: evaluation of different models of biological simulator]. / La biopsia renale-ecoguidata: valutazione di diversi modelli di simulatore biologico.

Percutaneous ultrasound-guided renal biopsy is the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of renal diseases. Recently, many studies strongly support the role of renal biopsy for the management of small renal mass. The experience of the operator is crucial in reducing the incidence of major complications. The use of simulators can accelerate the learning curve in those individuals who train in renal biopsy. We describe four simple and affordable phantoms for renal biopsy. The first two simulators were constructed by a porcine kidney wrapped in perirenal fat or covered by a flap of abdominal skin. The third simulator was constructed by embedding a porcine kidney in a turkey breast and olives to simulate the presence of small tumors. For the fourth model, we used the loin of a pork. Given the encouraging results of our in vitro study, we believe that simulators allow trainees to familiarize themselves with the handling of the equipment in an environment that is risk-free when compared to the clinical scenario.

Are the baseline chances of survival comparable between the candidates for kidney transplantation who actually receive a graft and those who never get one?

BACKGROUND: The superiority of kidney transplantation over dialysis for patient survival often is assessed by comparing the survival rate of candidates who get a graft to that of those on the waiting list who do not. This study tries to ascertain if the two groups are comparable in terms of their chances of surviving. METHODS: Of the 187 non-diabetic patients who entered our waiting list during 1998 and 1999 for first cadaveric kidney transplants, 81 received a graft and 106 did not. We compared the two groups for factors which could affect survival and that were present at the moment of acceptance on the list. As one of those factors was the clinical score quantifying health status, as given by the transplant team and rated from 1 (high risk) to 4 (very good), we assessed its reliability by evaluating the survival of the patients we transplanted between 1988 and 1996, grouped according to that score. RESULTS: Transplanted patients had been immunized less frequently (2 vs 13%; P=0.02), had a lower dialytic age (16.9+/-2.1 vs 22.9+/-2.1 months; P<0.05), and better clinical scores (2.9+/-0.1 vs 2.6+/-0.1; P<0.05). The two groups did not differ in age, gender, or the presence of single specific diseases. Logistic regression analysis confirmed the results of univariate analysis. The clinical score was a very strong predictor of patient survival, as the survival of patients transplanted from 1988 to 1996 progressively improved with better scores (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Transplanted patients actually differ from non-transplanted candidates with respect to various factors potentially affecting survival. The difference is highly relevant clinically, yet it is not easily detected when considering mainly the presence or absence of specific diseases. A global quantitative clinical parameter based on a thorough medical evaluation is required to identify differences.