Utility and safety of early allograft biopsy in adult deceased donor kidney transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Delayed graft function (DGF) is considered a risk factor for rejection after kidney transplantation (KTx). Clinical guidelines recommend weekly allograft biopsy until DGF resolves. However, who may benefit the most from such an aggressive policy and when histology should be evaluated remain debated. METHODS: We analyzed 223 biopsies in 145 deceased donor KTx treated with basiliximab or anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG) and calcineurin inhibitor-based maintenance. The aim of the study was to assess the utility and safety of biopsies performed within 28 days of transplant. Relationships between transplant characteristics, indication, timing, and biopsy-related outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Main indication for biopsy was DGF (87.8%) followed by lack of improvement in graft function (9.2%), and worsening graft function (3.1%). Acute tubular necrosis was the leading diagnosis (89.8%) whereas rejection was detected in 8.2% specimens. Rejection was more frequent in patients biopsied due to worsening graft function or lack of improvement in graft function than DGF (66.7% vs. 3.5%; P = 0.0075 and 33.3% vs. 3.5%; P = 0.0104, respectively) and in biopsies performed between day 15 and 28 than from day 0 to 14 (31.2% vs. 3.7%; P = 0.0002). Complication rate was 4.1%. Management was affected by the information gained with histology in 12.2% cases (7% considering DGF). CONCLUSIONS: In low-immunological risk recipients treated with induction and calcineurin inhibitors maintenance, protocol biopsies obtained within 2 weeks of surgery to rule out rejection during DGF do not necessarily offer a favourable balance between risks and benefits. In these patients, a tailored approach may minimize complications thus optimizing results.

Predicting palliative care needs and mortality in end stage renal disease: use of an at-risk register.

INTRODUCTION: The Gold Standard Frameworks (GSF) Committee devised Prognostic Indicator Guidance in November 2007 to 'aid identification of adult patients with advanced disease, in the last months or year of life, who are in need of supportive or palliative care'. METHODS: This research used the GSF `surprise question' to formulate a list of patients predicted to die within 1 year with end stage renal failure and to establish the specificity and sensitivity of this register. RESULTS: 58 patients were added to the list during the follow-up period of which 28 (48.3%) died during the same period giving an annual mortality of 32.2%. In comparison with the patients who died during the follow-up period but were not added to the at-risk register, those on the register had a much higher mortality rate (32.2% vs 7.8%). Identification of patients with chronic kidney disease and reduced life expectancy by this method appears to have a high sensitivity (66.7%) and specificity (77.9%). In particular, the negative predictive value for mortality for those on the at-risk register appears to be very high (88.3%), indicating the very low mortality among those not on the register. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with chronic kidney disease and a reduced life expectancy can be accurately identified by a multi-disciplinary team using the surprise trigger question with a relatively high sensitivity and specificity. The accurate identification of patients with reduced life expectancy allows appropriate end of life care planning to begin in keeping with patients' wishes and within published guidelines.

Critically ill patients requiring acute renal replacement therapy are at an increased risk of long-term renal dysfunction, but rarely receive specialist nephrology follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Episodes of acute kidney injury (AKI) have been associated with the development of chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, follow-up pathways for patients who have survived AKI complicating critical illness are not well established. We hypothesised that patients who had AKI requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) in intensive care are at risk of CKD, but are rarely referred for nephrology follow-up at hospital discharge. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who survived AKI requiring renal replacement therapy in intensive care units (ICUs) in the East London region, examining renal function at baseline, hospital discharge and 3-6 months follow-up. We excluded patients who were known to renal services prior to index admission. RESULTS: From 5,544 critical care admissions, we identified 219 patients who survived to be discharged, having undergone RRT for AKI, that were not previously known to renal services. Of these, 124 (57%) had creatinine measured within 3-6 months after discharge, 104 having a pre-morbid baseline for comparison. Only 26 patients (12%) received specialist nephrology follow-up. At 3-6 months follow-up, the estimated glomerular filtration rate was significantly lower than baseline (48 vs. 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2); p < 0.001), with the prevalence of CKD stage III-V rising from 49 to 70% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up of patients who required RRT for AKI in ICU is inconsistent despite evidence of a significant increase in the prevalence of CKD. There is strong justification for the development of robust pathways to identify survivors of AKI in order to detect and manage CKD and its complications.