Dynamics of HLA and angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Alloantibodies, especially anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies (HLA antibodies), and autoantibodies, as angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies (AT1R antibodies), may complicate the access and the course of transplantation. Pregnancy is a known source of HLA antibodies, with most studies evaluating pregnancy-induced sensitization by complement-dependent cytotoxicity assays, mainly after childbirth. AT1R antibodies have been evaluated in the context of preeclampsia. We aimed to evaluate pregnancy as a natural source of HLA antibodies and AT1R antibodies, their dynamics along gestation and the potential factors involved in antibody appearance. METHODS: Serum samples from pregnant women were collected during the three trimesters of pregnancy (1T, 2T, 3T). Presence of HLA antibodies was assessed by screening beads on Luminex and AT1R antibodies by ELISA. RESULTS: A cohort of 138 pregnant women were included. Samples from all were tested in 1T, 127 in 2T and 102 in 3T. HLA antibodies increased from 29.7 % (1T) to 38.2 % (3T). AT1R antibodies were stable around 30 % along pregnancy. Up to 43.2 % multiparous women had HLA antibodies, with a similar proportion of class I and class II antibodies. In primiparous women HLA antibodies increased along pregnancy (from 17.6 % to 34.1 %), with predominance of class II HLA antibodies. AT1R antibodies were not different in primiparous and multiparous women. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy is a relevant source of HLA antibodies sensitization, but not of AT1R antibodies. HLA antibodies increased clearly in primiparous women with predominance of class II. The use of newer solid-phase techniques on Luminex evidence a higher degree of HLA sensitization during pregnancy.

Management of immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19. A multicentre national study derived from the Spanish Society of Nephrology COVID registry.

INTRODUCTION: SARS CoV2 infection has had a major impact on renal transplant patients with a high mortality in the first months of the pandemic. Intentional reduction of immunosuppressive therapy has been postulated as one of the cornerstone in the management of the infection in the absence of targeted antiviral treatment. This has been modified according to the patient`s clinical situation and its effect on renal function or anti-HLA antibodies in the medium term has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the management of immunosuppressive therapy made during SARS-CoV2 infection, as well as renal function and anti-HLA antibodies in kidney transplant patients 6 months after COVID19 diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective, national multicentre, retrospective study (30 centres) of kidney transplant recipients with COVID19 from 01/02/20 to 31/12/20. Clinical variables were collected from medical records and included in an anonymised database. SPSS statistical software was used for data analysis. RESULTS: renal transplant recipients with COVID19 were included (62.6% male), with a mean age of 57.5 years. The predominant immunosuppressive treatment prior to COVID19 was triple therapy with prednisone, tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid (54.6%) followed by m-TOR inhibitor regimens (18.6%). After diagnosis of infection, mycophenolic acid was discontinued in 73.8% of patients, m-TOR inhibitor in 41.4%, tacrolimus in 10.5% and cyclosporin A in 10%. In turn, 26.9% received dexamethasone and 50.9% were started on or had their baseline prednisone dose increased. Mean creatinine before diagnosis of COVID19, at diagnosis and at 6 months was: 1.7 ±â€¯0.8, 2.1 ±â€¯1.2 and 1.8 ±â€¯1 mg/dl respectively (p < 0.001). 56.9% of the patients (N = 350) were monitored for anti-HLA antibodies. 94% (N = 329) had no anti-HLA changes, while 6% (N = 21) had positive anti-HLA antibodies. Among the patients with donor-specific antibodies post-COVID19 (N = 9), 7 patients (3.1%) had one immunosuppressant discontinued (5 patients had mycophenolic acid and 2 had tacrolimus), 1 patient had both immunosuppressants discontinued (3.4%) and 1 patient had no change in immunosuppression (1.1%), these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The management of immunosuppressive therapy after diagnosis of COVID19 was primarily based on discontinuation of mycophenolic acid with very discrete reductions or discontinuations of calcineurin inhibitors. This immunosuppression management did not influence renal function or changes in anti-HLA antibodies 6 months after diagnosis.

Immunosuppression of HLA identical living-donor kidney transplant recipients: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant (KT) recipients of HLA identical siblings (HLAid) have lower immunological risk, but there are no specific recommendations for immunosuppression. Our aim was to analyze evidence about results from HLAid living-donor recipients under different immunosuppression in the current era of immunological risk assessment. METHODS: Systematic review of studies describing associations between outcomes of HLAid living-donor KT recipients according to their immunological risk and applied immunosuppression. RESULTS: From 1351 studies, 16 (5636 KT recipients) were included in the analysis. All studies were retrospective, ten comparing immunosuppression strategies, and six immunological risk strata. Of those ten, six studies were published in 1990 or earlier and only three included tacrolimus. The evidence is poor, and the inclusion of calcineurin inhibitors does not demonstrate better results. Furthermore, only few studies describe different immunosuppression regimens according to the patient immunological risk and, in general, they do not include the assessment with new solid phase assays. CONCLUSIONS: There are no studies analyzing the association of outcomes of HLAid KT recipients with current immunological risk tools. In the absence of evidence, no decision or proposal of immunosuppression adapted to modern immunological risk assessment can be made currently by the Descartes Working Group.

Manejo de la inmunosupresión en pacientes trasplantados de riñón con COVID19. Estudio multicéntrico nacional derivado del registro COVID de la Sociedad Española de Nefrología / Management of immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19. A multicentre national study derived from the Spanish Society of Nephrology. COVID registry

Introducción: La infección por SARS-CoV2 ha impactado de forma importante en los pacientes con trasplante renal causando una elevada mortalidad en los primeros meses de la pandemia. La reducción intencionada de la inmunosupresión se ha postulado como uno de los pilares en el manejo de la infección ante la falta de un tratamiento antiviral dirigido. Esta se ha modificado de acuerdo con la situación clínica de los pacientes, y su efecto sobre la función renal o los anticuerpos anti-HLA a medio plazo no ha sido evaluado. Objetivos: Evaluar los cambios de inmunosupresión realizados durante la infección por SARS-CoV2, así como la función renal y los anticuerpos anti-HLA de los pacientes trasplantados de riñón a los 6 meses del diagnóstico de COVID19. Material y métodos: Estudio retrospectivo, multicéntrico nacional (30 centros) de pacientes trasplantados de riñón con COVID19 desde el 01/02/20 al 31/12/20. Se recogieron las variables de la historia clínica y se incluyeron en una base de datos anonimizada. Se utilizó el programa estadístico SPSS para el análisis de resultados. (AU)

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 infection has had a major impact on renal transplant patients with a high mortality in the first months of the pandemic. Intentional reduction of immunosuppressive therapy has been postulated as one of the cornerstone in the management of the infection in the absence of targeted antiviral treatment. This has been modified according to the patient's clinical situation and its effect on renal function or anti-HLA antibodies in the medium term has not been evaluated. Objectives: Evaluate the management of immunosuppressive therapy made during SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as renal function and anti-HLA antibodies in kidney transplant patients 6 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. Material and methods: Retrospective, national multicentre, retrospective study (30 centres) of kidney transplant recipients with COVID19 from 01/02/20 to 31/12/20. Clinical variables were collected from medical records and included in an anonymised database. SPSS statistical software was used for data analysis. (AU)

Creating the nursing care map in the evaluation of kidney transplant candidates: A scoping review and narrative synthesis.

AIMS: To analyse the aspects involved in the care of individuals assessed as kidney transplant candidates and to identify the role of nurses in providing specialised care for this population. DESIGN: Scoping review. The results were summarised using a narrative synthesis technique. DATA SOURCES: A review of the literature published between 2001 and 2021 was conducted between October and November 2021 using PubMed, CINAHL and SciELO. REVIEW METHODS: The research team agreed on a search strategy based on clinical practice guidelines for assessing kidney transplantation candidates. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies published in peer-reviewed journals in English, Spanish, French and Portuguese were included. RESULTS: A total of 377 studies were identified, and 49 articles were included after the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. The narrative synthesis was structured into four themes: Physical needs; Psychological and quality of life needs; Education and adherence needs; and Nurses' role. CONCLUSION: Nursing assessment of kidney transplantation candidates should encompass physical, psychosocial and adherence aspects. A variety of methodologies and resources are available for this assessment. Nurses contribute to coordinating access to kidney transplantation, aiming to improve adherence to an appropriate lifestyle to prevent patients from being excluded from kidney transplantation or suffering from kidney transplantation-related complications. IMPACT: Based on our findings, we managed to design a nursing care map for kidney transplantation candidates combining the main elements of nursing care that should be incorporated into this process. Advanced practice nursing professionals play a crucial role in accessing renal transplant care.

Evolution of kidney allograft loss causes over 40 years (1979-2019).

INTRODUCTION: The improvement of kidney allograft recipient and graft survival showed a decrease over the last 40 years. Long-term graft loss rate remained stable during a 25-year time span. Knowing the changing causes and the risk factors associated with graft loss requires special attention. The present study aimed to assess the causes of graft loss and kidney allograft recipient death. Also, we aimed to compare two different periods (1979-1999 and 2000-2019) to identify changes in the characteristics of the failed allografts and recipient and donors profile. METHODS AND PATIENTS: We performed a single-center cohort study. We included all the kidney transplant recipients at the Hospital del Mar (Barcelona) between May 1979 and December 2019. Graft loss was defined as recipient death with functioning graft and as loss of graft function (return to dialysis or retransplantation). We assessed the causes of graft loss using clinical and histological information. We also analyzed the results of the two different transplant periods (1979-1999 and 2000-2019). RESULTS: Between 1979 and 2019, 1522 transplants were performed. The median follow-up time was 56 (IQR 8-123) months. During follow-up, 722 (47.5%) grafts were lost: 483 (66.9%) due to graft failure and 239 (33.1%) due to death with functioning graft. The main causes of death were cardiovascular (25.1%), neoplasms (25.1%), and infectious diseases (21.8%). These causes were stable between the two periods of time. Only the unknown cause of death has decreased in the last period. The main cause of graft failure (loss of graft function) was the allograft chronic dysfunction (75%). When histologic information was available, antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) and interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy (IF/TA) were the most frequent specific causes (15.9% and 12.6%). Of the graft failures, 213 (29.5%) were early (<1 year of transplantation). Vascular thrombosis was the main cause of early graft failure in the second period (2000-2019) (46.7%) and T-cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) was the main cause (31.3%) in the first period (1979-1999). The causes of late graft loss were similar between the two periods. CONCLUSIONS: The causes of kidney allograft recipient death are still due to cardiovascular and malignant diseases. Vascular thrombosis has emerged as a frequent cause of early graft loss in the most recent years. The evaluation of the causes of graft loss is necessary to improve kidney transplantation outcomes.

Evolución de las causas de pérdida del injerto en trasplante renal durante 40 años (1979-2019) / Evolution of kidney allograft loss causes over 40 years (1979-2019)

Introducción: La mejoría en la supervivencia del receptor y del injerto renal sufre un proceso de deceleración. La tasa de pérdida del injerto a medio y largo plazo permanece estable desde hace 25 años. Es fundamental conocer las causas de pérdida del injerto y los factores relacionados, así como identificar si se han producido cambios en las causas de pérdida del injerto en los últimos años. El objetivo del presente estudio fue evaluar las causas de pérdida del injerto según fallecimiento del receptor o pérdida del injerto con vuelta a diálisis/retrasplante, y analizar las causas específicas de pérdida del injerto en 2 épocas (1979-1999 y 2000-2019) para identificar cambios en el perfil de los injertos perdidos. Pacientes y métodos: Estudio retrospectivo de todos los trasplantes renales (TR) realizados en el Hospital del Mar (Barcelona) entre mayo-1979 y diciembre-2019. Consideramos pérdida del injerto el fallecimiento del paciente con injerto funcionante o el re-inicio de diálisis o retrasplante. Revisamos las causas de pérdida mediante información clínica e histológica, y analizamos los resultados en 2 periodos (1979-1999 y 2000-2019). (AU)

Introduction: The improvement of kidney allograft recipient and graft survival showed a decrease over the last 40 years. Long-term graft loss rate remained stable during a 25-year time span. Knowing the changing causes and the risk factors associated with graft loss requires special attention. The present study aimed to assess the causes of graft loss and kidney allograft recipient death. Also, we aimed to compare two different periods (1979-1999 and 2000-2019) to identify changes in the characteristics of the failed allografts and recipient and donors profile. Methods and patients: We performed a single-center cohort study. We included all the kidney transplant recipients at the Hospital del Mar (Barcelona) between May 1979 and December 2019. Graft loss was defined as recipient death with functioning graft and as loss of graft function (return to dialysis or retransplantation). We assessed the causes of graft loss using clinical and histological information. We also analyzed the results of the two different transplant periods (1979-1999 and 2000-2019). (AU)

The role of Advanced Practice Nurses in creating the Kidney Transplant candidate care map (APN-preKT): a convergent-parallel mixed methods research protocol.

BACKGROUND: Waiting time for kidney transplants (KT) is an important health determinant for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). During this time, ongoing evaluation and participation is necessary in order to guarantee the quality and suitability of the proposed treatment. There is no existing literature on the potential impact of inclusion of an Advanced Practice Nurse (APN) role in the hospital setting on care for CKD patients who are candidates for KT. The main objectives of this protocol are: to analyse outpatient nursing activity in the care of individuals with KT in Spain; to identify the needs of individuals who are KT candidates; and to measure the impact of the APN role through patient outcomes and experiences. These objectives are fulfilled through 5 specific related substudies. METHODS: A convergent parallel mixed methods approach will be conducted between July 2021 and April 2024. Quantitative and qualitative data will be collected and analysed separately to ascertain whether the findings confirm or contradict one another. Each of the 5 substudies of the project require a specific design, sampling method, and data collection procedure in order to meet the overall objectives for the project. DISCUSSION: The results of the project are expected to inform the design of future nursing roles and contribute to future improvements in the quality of care provided. The data that may be obtained from this protocol are limited to the specific context of the study facility and may be extrapolated but not compared to other settings due to the variability of care pathways for KT candidates internationally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This project was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee (no.2020/9418/I). The study was supported by the "Strategic Plan for Health Research and Innovation" from the Generalitat de Catalunya, registration number SLT017/20/000001, with a contribution of 57,239 euros.

THSD7A-positive membranous nephropathy after kidney transplantation: A case report.

Membranous nephropathy (MN) is a common cause of nephrotic syndrome after kidney transplantation (KT); however, scarce is known regarding post-KT thrombospondin type-1 domain-containing 7A (THSD7A)-positive MN. Herein, we report on a 72-year-old woman with end-stage kidney disease due to chronic interstitial nephritis (1996). In February 2020, she received a second deceased-donor KT, achieving optimal kidney function but presenting early post-KT proteinuria, reaching up to 1800mg/24h six months after transplantation, controlled with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade. In July 2021, a kidney allograft biopsy revealed features consistent with MN. Immunohistochemical stains showed diffuse and granular THSD7A and C4d deposition in glomerular capillary walls and negative PLA2R and IgG4 staining. No anti-THSD7A antibodies were detected in the serum. The pre-implantation biopsy showed no MN-associated lesions and negative THSD7A staining. Secondary triggers such as malignancy were discarded. The present report illustrates a THSD7A-positive MN in a KT recipient. Despite lacking native kidney biopsy and early presentation, a recurrent MN seemed unprovable due to documented native kidney disease and a long time span between native kidney disease and MN diagnosis. We, therefore, presumed primary de novo disease. Two years after KT, kidney function remains stable, and the patient has reached complete remission of proteinuria.

Microvascular inflammation in the absence of human leukocyte antigen-donor-specific antibody and C4d: An orphan category in Banff classification with cytotoxic T and natural killer cell infiltration.

Isolated microvascular inflammation (iMVI) without HLA donor-specific antibodies or C4d deposition in peritubular capillaries remains an enigmatic phenotype that cannot be categorized as antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) in recent Banff classifications. We included 221 kidney transplant recipients with biopsies with ABMR (n = 73), iMVI (n = 32), and normal (n = 116) diagnoses. We compared peripheral blood leukocyte distribution by flow cytometry and inflammatory infiltrates in kidney transplant biopsies among groups. Flow cytometry showed fewer lymphocytes and total, CD4+, and CD8+ peripheral T cells in iMVI compared with ABMR and normal cases. ABMR and iMVI had fewer total natural Killer (NK) cells but more NKG2A+ NK cells. Immunohistochemistry indicated that ABMR and iMVI had greater CD3+ and CD68+ glomerular infiltration than normal biopsies, whereas CD8+ and TIA1+ cells showed only increased iMVI, suggesting they are cytotoxic T cells. Peritubular capillaries displayed more CD3+, CD56+, TIA1+, and CD68+ cells in both ABMR and iMVI. In contrast, iMVI had less plasma cell infiltration in peritubular capillaries and interstitial aggregates than ABMR. iMVI displayed decreased circulating T and NK cells mirrored by T cell and NK cell infiltration in the renal allograft, similar to ABMR. However, the lesser plasma cell infiltration in iMVI may suggest an antibody-independent underlying stimulus.

Dynamics of Humoral and Cellular Responses in Renal Transplant Recipients Receiving 3 Doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: The original SARS-CoV-2 vaccination regimen (2 doses) induces insufficient short-term response in kidney transplant (KT) recipients. This study assessed the response to a third dose and the long-term immunogenicity after 2 doses in KT. METHODS: We analyzed the dynamics of the humoral and cellular response by monitoring SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies against the Spike-protein (IgG-Spike) and QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 IFN-γ release assay 6 mo after the second dose (T2) and 28 d after the third dose of mRNA vaccines (T3) to KT and controls (dialysis patients and healthy individuals). RESULTS: At T2, the percentage of IgG-Spike+ KT and dialysis patients decreased (KT 65.8%-52.6%, hemodialysis 92.6-81.5%, and peritoneal dialysis 100%-90%), whereas 100% of healthy controls remained positive. About the cellular response, the percentage of responders decreased in all groups, especially in KT (22.4%-9.2%, P = 0.081). At T3, 92% of KT, 94%-98% of dialysis patients, and 100% of healthy controls were IgG-Spike+. In terms of antibody titers, patients and controls showed a reduction between T2 and T3 and about 80% of dialysis patients and 100% of controls achieved high titers after the third dose (>1479.5 Binding Antibody Units/mL), whereas this percentage was only 50% in KT. With respect to the cellular response, only KT displayed a significant rise after the third dose. CONCLUSIONS: The third dose of mRNA vaccine improves both humoral and cellular responses, but less effectively in KT compared with dialysis patients and healthy controls.

Increased mortality after kidney transplantation in mildly frail recipients.

Background: Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) is the most used frailty instrument among kidney transplant recipients, classifying patients as pre-frail if they have 1-2 criteria and as frail if they have ≥3. However, different definitions of robustness have been used among renal patients, including only those who have 0 criteria, or those with 0-1 criteria. Our aim was to determine the impact of one PFP criterion on transplant outcomes. Methods: We undertook a retrospective study of 296 kidney transplant recipients who had been evaluated for frailty by PFP at the time of evaluating for transplantation. Results: Only 30.4% of patients had 0 criteria, and an additional 42.9% showed one PFP criterion. As PFP score increased, a higher percentage of women and cerebrovascular disease were found. Recipients with 0-1 criteria had lower 1-year mortality after transplant than those with ≥2 (1.8% vs 10.1%), but this difference was already present when we only considered those who scored 0 (mortality 1.1%) and 1 (mortality 2.4%) separately. The multivariable analysis confirmed that one PFP criterion was associated to a higher risk of patient death after kidney transplantation [hazard ratio 3.52 (95% confidence interval 1.03-15.9)]. Conclusions: Listed kidney transplant candidates frequently show only one PFP frailty criterion. This has an independent impact on patient survival after transplantation.

Kidney transplant outcome of expanded criteria donors after circulatory death.

The increase in the number of patients on the kidney transplant waiting list has led to an attempt to increase the number of potential donors by incorporating candidates that previously would not have been considered optimal, including donors after cardiac death (DCD) and those with "expanded" criteria (ECD). Recipients of controlled DCD (cDCD) grafts suffer more delayed graft function (DGF), but have a long-term evolution comparable to those of brain-dead donors, which has allowed an increase in the number of cDCD transplants in different countries in recent years. In parallel, the use of cDCD with expanded criteria (cDCD/ECD) has increased in recent years in different countries, allowing the waiting list for kidney transplantation to be shortened. The use of these grafts, although associated with a higher frequency of DGF, offers similar or only slightly lower long-term graft survival than those of brain death donors with expanded criteria. Different studies have observed that cDCD/ECD graft recipients have worse kidney function than cDCD/standard and DBD/ECD. Mortality associated with cDCD/ECD graft transplantation mostly relates to the recipient age. Patients who receive a cDCD/≥60 graft have better survival than those who continue on the waiting list, although this fact has not been demonstrated in recipients of cDCD/>65 years. The use of this type of organ should be accompanied by the optimization of surgical times and the shortest possible cold ischemia.

[Management of immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients with COVID19. A multicentre national study derived form the S.E.N. COVID registry.] / Manejo de la inmunosupresión en pacientes trasplantados de riñón con COVID19. Estudio multicéntrico nacional derivado del registro COVID de la S.E.N.

INTRODUCTION: SARS CoV2 infection has had a major impact on renal transplant patients with a high mortality in the first months of the pandemic. Intentional reduction of immunosuppressive therapy has been postulated as one of the cornerstone in the management of the infection in the absence of targeted antiviral treatment. This has been modified according to the patient`s clinical situation and its effect on renal function or anti-HLA antibodies in the medium term has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the management of immunosuppressive therapy made during SARS-CoV2 infection, as well as renal function and anti-HLA antibodies in kidney transplant patients 6 months after COVID19 diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective, national multicentre, retrospective study (30 centres) of kidney transplant recipients with COVID19 from 01/02/20 to 31/12/20. Clinical variables were collected from medical records and included in an anonymised database. SPSS statistical software was used for data analysis. RESULTS: 615 renal transplant recipients with COVID19 were included (62.6% male), with a mean age of 57.5 years.The predominant immunosuppressive treatment prior to COVID19 was triple therapy with prednisone, tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid (54.6%) followed by m-TOR inhibitor regimens (18.6%). After diagnosis of infection, mycophenolic acid was discontinued in 73.8% of patients, m-TOR inhibitor in 41.4%, tacrolimus in 10.5% and cyclosporin A in 10%. In turn, 26.9% received dexamethasone and 50.9% were started on or had their baseline prednisone dose increased.Mean creatinine before diagnosis of COVID19, at diagnosis and at 6 months was: 1.7±0.8, 2.1±1.2 and 1.8±1 mg/dl respectively (p<0.001).56.9% of the patients (N=350) were monitored for anti-HLA antibodies. 94% (N=329) had no anti-HLA changes, while 6% (N=21) had positive anti-HLA antibodies. Among the patients with donor-specific antibodies post-COVID19 (N=9), 7 patients (3.1%) had one immunosuppressant discontinued (5 patients had mycophenolic acid and 2 had tacrolimus), 1 patient had both immunosuppressants discontinued (3.4%) and 1 patient had no change in immunosuppression (1.1%), these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The management of immunosuppressive therapy after diagnosis of COVID19 was primarily based on discontinuation of mycophenolic acid with very discrete reductions or discontinuations of calcineurin inhibitors. This immunosuppression management did not influence renal function or changes in anti-HLA antibodies 6 months after diagnosis.

Necesidades asistenciales durante el estudio de personas candidatas a donantes de riñón “PREMIO SEDEN SOBRE DONACIÓN Y TRASPLANTE 2021” / Care needs during the study of kidney donor candidates

Objetivos: Describir las necesidades asistenciales del candidato a donante de riñón; sus características sociodemográficas y clínicas; y analizar los resultados desde una perspectiva de género.Material y Método: Estudio observacional descriptivo transversal. Se recogieron datos clínicos; sociodemográficos; y el número y tipo de visitas y pruebas realizadas durante el año 2020.Resultados: Se incluyeron 60 candidatos a donantes de riñón (n=37 mujeres; 61,67%) con una media de 51,98±14,50 años y una mediana de 2,5 [RIQ (0,69-5,29)] meses de estudio. 16 (26,67%) fueron aptos para la donación, correspondiendo al 14,16% de la actividad en Trasplante Renal (TR) del centro de referencia. Se requirieron 757 visitas (20,60% de la actividad) de las que 341 (45,05%) fueron visitas con la enfermera. Se requirieron 423 pruebas (19,60% de la actividad) durante el estudio. Se identificó una media de 1,87±1,35 factores de riesgo cardiovascular en la muestra analizada, siendo de 1,56±0,81 en los que finalmente fueron donantes. Más mujeres (n=12; 75%) que hombres (n=4; 25%) fueron finalmente donantes renales.Conclusiones: El estudio del candidato a donante de riñón es complejo e implica el doble de actividad que en el de los candidatos a receptores de trasplante renal. El proceso finaliza en donación en el 27% de los candidatos estudiados. La enfermera concentra el 45% de las visitas que se requieren. Es necesario explorar estrategias para optimizar el proceso de estudio. Hay diferencias de género en cuanto a la predisposición para estudiarse voluntariamente como candidata a donante renal. (AU)

Objetives: To describe the care needs of the kidney donor candidate; the socio-demographic and clinical characteristics; and to analyse the results from a gender perspective.Material and Method: Cross-sectional descriptive observational study. Clinical and socio-demographic data, number and type of visits and clinical tests performed during 2020 were collected.Results: Sixty kidney donor candidates (n=37 women; 61.67%) with a mean age of 51.98±14.50 years and a median of 2.5 [RIQ (0.69-5.29)] months of study were included. 16 (26.67%) were eligible for donation, corresponding to 14.16% of the Renal Transplant (RT) activity of the reference centre. 757 visits were required (20.60% of the activity) of which 341 (45.05%) were visits with a nurse. 423 tests (19.60% of the activity) were required during the study. A mean of 1.87±1.35 cardiovascular risk factors was identified in the sample analysed, being 1.56±0.81 in those who were donors. More women (n=12; 75%) than men (n=4; 25%) were ultimately renal donors.Conclusions: The study of kidney donor candidates is complex and involves twice as much activity as that of kidney transplant recipient candidates. The process ends in donation in 27% of the candidates studied. The nurse concentrates 45% of the visits required. Strategies need to be explored to optimise the study process. There are gender differences in the predisposition to be studied voluntarily as a kidney donor candidate. (AU)

Resultados del trasplante renal con donante en asistolia controlada expandido / Kidney transplant outcome of expanded criteria donors after circulatory death

El incremento en el número de pacientes en lista de espera de trasplante renal ha llevado a intentar aumentar el número de posibles donantes incorporando candidatos que anteriormente no se habrían considerado óptimos, incluyendo entre estos a los donantes de pacientes de asistolia (DA) y aquellos con criterios «expandidos» (DCE). Los receptores de injertos de DA controlada (DAc) sufren más función retrasada del injerto, pero presentan una evolución a largo plazo equiparable a los de donantes de muerte encefálica, lo que ha permitido un aumento en el número de trasplantes de DAc en distintos países en los últimos años. De forma paralela, el uso de DAc con criterios expandidos (DAc/DCE) se ha incrementado en los últimos años en diferentes países, permitiendo acortar la lista de espera del trasplante renal. El uso de estos injertos, aunque se relaciona con una mayor frecuencia de función retrasada del injerto, ofrece supervivencias del injerto a largo plazo similares o solo ligeramente inferiores a las de los donantes de muerte encefálica con criterios expandidos. Distintos estudios han observado que los receptores de injertos DAc/DCE tienen peor función renal que los DAc/estándar y que los donantes de muerte encefálica/DCE. La mortalidad asociada al trasplante de injertos de DAc/DCE se relaciona principalmente con la elevada edad del receptor. Los pacientes que reciben un trasplante renal de DAc/≥ 60 años presentan mejor supervivencia que los que continúan en la lista de espera, aunque este hecho no se ha demostrado en los receptores de DAc/> 65 años. La utilización de este tipo de órganos debe llevar pareja la optimización de los tiempos quirúrgicos y el menor tiempo de isquemia fría posible. (AU)

The increase in the number of patients on the kidney transplant waiting list has led to an attempt to increase the number of potential donors by incorporating candidates that previously would not have been considered optimal, including donors after cardiac death (DCD) and those with “expanded” criteria (ECD). Recipients of controlled DCD (cDCD) grafts suffer more delayed graft function (DGF), but have a long-term evolution comparable to those of brain-dead donors, which has allowed an increase in the number of cDCD transplants in different countries in recent years. In parallel, the use of cDCD with expanded criteria (cDCD/ECD) has increased in recent years in different countries, allowing the waiting list for kidney transplantation to be shortened. The use of these grafts, although associated with a higher frequency of DGF, offers similar or only slightly lower long-term graft survival than those of brain death donors with expanded criteria. Different studies have observed that cDCD/ECD graft recipients have worse kidney function than cDCD/standard and brain death/ECD. Mortality associated with cDCD/ECD graft transplantation mostly relates to the recipient age. Patients who receive a cDCD/≥60 graft have better survival than those who continue on the waiting list, although this fact has not been demonstrated in recipients of cDCD/>65 years. The use of this type of organ should be accompanied by the optimization of surgical times and the shortest possible cold ischemia. (AU)

Outcomes of Frail Patients While Waiting for Kidney Transplantation: Differences between Physical Frailty Phenotype and FRAIL Scale.

Frailty is associated with poorer outcomes among patients waiting for kidney transplantation (KT). Several different tools to measure frailty have been used; however, their predictive value is unknown. This is a prospective longitudinal study of 449 KT candidates evaluated for frailty by the Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) and the FRAIL scale. During the study period, 296 patients received a KT, while 153 remained listed. Patients who did not get receive a transplant were more frequently frail according to PFP (16.3 vs. 7.4%, p = 0.013). Robust patients had fewer hospital admissions during the 1st year after listing (20.8% if PFP = 0 vs. 43.4% if ≥1, and 27.1% if FRAIL = 0 vs. 48.9% if ≥1) and fewer cardiovascular events (than FRAIL ≥ 1) or major infectious events (than PFP ≥ 1). According to PFP, scoring 1 point had an impact on patient survival and chance of transplantation in the univariate analysis. The multivariable analysis corroborated the result, as candidates with PFP ≥ 3 had less likelihood of transplantation (HR 0.45 [0.26-0.77]). The FRAIL scale did not associate with any of these outcomes. In KT candidates, pre-frailty and frailty according to both the PFP and the FRAIL scale were associated with poorer results while listed. The PFP detected that frail patients were less likely to receive a KT, while the FRAIL scale did not.

Frailty in kidney transplant candidates: a comparison between physical frailty phenotype and FRAIL scales.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is common among advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients who are kidney transplant (KT) candidates, and predisposes to poor outcomes after transplantation. However, frailty is not routinely measured during pretransplant work-up and it is unknown which metric should be used in this specific population. Our aim was to establish frailty prevalence in KT candidates according to different frailty scales. METHODS: Prospective longitudinal study of 451 KT candidates evaluated for frailty by both Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) and FRAIL scale at the time of inclusion on the KT waiting list. Clinical and functional characteristics including sociodemographics, comorbidities, disability and nutritional status were recorded. Agreement between PFP and FRAIL scales as well as dissonant patients were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean age was 60.9 years and 31.7% were female. Comorbidity burden among patients was high, with 36.9% and 16.2% presenting with diabetes and ischemic coronary disease, respectively. Disabilities were also frequent. More than 70% of patients presented with ≥ 1 PFP criteria while this percentage for ≥ 1 FRAIL criteria was 45.4%. Agreement between PFP and FRAIL was not good (kappa index 0.317). There were 132 patients who were pre-frail or frail according to PFP but non-frail according to the FRAIL scale and they presented with fewer comorbidities and less disability. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is frequent in advanced CKD patients, although its prevalence may vary according to different scales. Agreement between PFP and FRAIL scale is not good, and FRAIL scale might misclassify as robust patients those frail/prefrail patients who are in better health conditions.

Immunoguided Discontinuation of Prophylaxis for Cytomegalovirus Disease in Kidney Transplant Recipients Treated With Antithymocyte Globulin: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Antiviral prophylaxis is recommended in cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seropositive kidney transplant (KT) recipients receiving antithymocyte globulin (ATG) as induction. An alternative strategy of premature discontinuation of prophylaxis after CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMV-CMI) recovery (immunoguided prevention) has not been studied. Our aim was to determine whether it is effective and safe to discontinue prophylaxis when CMV-CMI is detected and to continue with preemptive therapy. METHODS: In this open-label, noninferiority clinical trial, patients were randomized 1:1 to follow an immunoguided strategy, receiving prophylaxis until CMV-CMI recovery or to receive fixed-duration prophylaxis until day 90. After prophylaxis, preemptive therapy (valganciclovir 900 mg twice daily) was indicated in both arms until month 6. The primary and secondary outcomes were incidence of CMV disease and replication, respectively, within the first 12 months. Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) assessed 2 deleterious events (CMV disease/replication and neutropenia). RESULTS: A total of 150 CMV-seropositive KT recipients were randomly assigned. There was no difference in the incidence of CMV disease (0% vs 2.7%; P = .149) and replication (17.1% vs 13.5%; log-rank test, P = .422) between both arms. Incidence of neutropenia was lower in the immunoguided arm (9.2% vs 37.8%; odds ratio, 6.0; P < .001). A total of 66.1% of patients in the immunoguided arm showed a better DOOR, indicating a greater likelihood of a better outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis can be prematurely discontinued in CMV-seropositive KT patients receiving ATG when CMV-CMI is recovered since no significant increase in the incidence of CMV replication or disease is observed. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03123627.