Transplant nephrectomy after graft failure: is it so risky? Impact on morbidity, mortality and alloimmunization

Transplant nephrectomy: indication, surgical approach and complications-experiences from a single transplantation center

PURPOSE

Management of a failed kidney allograft, and the question whether it should be removed is a challenging task for clinicians. The reported risks for transplant nephrectomy (TN) vary, and there is no clear recommendation on indications or surgical approach that should be used. This study gives an overview of indications, compares surgical techniques, and identifies risk factors for higher morbidity.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was conducted on all transplant nephrectomies performed between 2005 and 2020 at Charité Hospital Berlin, Department of Urology. Patient demographics, laboratory parameters, graft survival data, indication for TN, and surgical complications were extracted from medical reports.

RESULTS

A total of 195 TN were performed, with graft intolerance syndrome being the most common indication in 52 patients (26.7%), acute rejection in 36 (18.5%), acute infection in 30 (15.4%), and other reasons to stop immunosuppression in 26 patients (13.3%). Rare indications were vascular complications in 16 (8.2%) and malignancies in the allograft in six (3.1%) cases. Extracapsular surgical approach was significantly more often used in cases of vascular complications and earlier allograft removal, but there was no difference in complication rates between extra- and intracapsular approach. Acute infection was identified as an independent risk factor for a complication grade IIIb or higher according to Clavien-Dindo classification, with a HR of 12.3 (CI 2.2-67.7; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Transplant nephrectomy should only be performed when there is a good indication, and non-elective surgery should be avoided, when possible, as it increases morbidity.

Pseudoaneurysm after arterial reconstruction in kidney transplant nephrectomy: A case report and literature review

Background

Pseudoaneurysm formation sometimes complicates transplant nephrectomy. We report a case of bleeding from a pseudoaneurysm after transplantation nephrectomy that resulted in shock and emergency endovascular treatment.

Case presentation

A 56-year-old man underwent transplant nephrectomy 3 years and 9 months following transplantation for pyelonephritis-related infection control. On postoperative day 7, he developed sudden pain in the lower abdomen and subsequently went into shock. A pseudoaneurysm at the anastomosis was detected, and urgent endovascular treatment was performed to stem the bleeding.

Conclusion

Vascular complications, including pseudoaneurysms, following transplant nephrectomy can be life-threatening, and comprehensive awareness is needed in careful postoperative management.

The Role of Allograft Nephrectomy in the Failing Kidney Transplant

Patients with failed renal allografts have associated increased morbidity and mortality. The individualization of immunosuppression taper is the key element in managing these patients to avoid graft intolerance and sensitization while balancing the risk of continued immunosuppression. Most patients with uncomplicated chronic allograft failure do not require allograft nephrectomy (AN), and there is no clear evidence that it improves outcomes. The AN procedure is associated with variable morbidity and mortality. It is reserved mainly for early technical graft failure or in symptomatic cases associated with allograft infection, malignancy, or graft intolerance syndrome. It may also be considered in those who cannot tolerate immunosuppression and are at high risk for graft intolerance. AN has been associated with an increased risk of sensitization due to inflammatory response from surgery, immunosuppression withdrawal with allograft failure, and retained endovascular tissue. Although it is presumed that for-cause AN after transplant failure is associated with sensitization, it remains unclear whether elective AN in patients who remain on immunotherapy may prevent sensitization. The current practice of immunosuppression taper has not been shown to prevent sensitization or increase infection risk, but current literature is limited by selection bias and the absence of medication adherence data. We discuss the management of failed allografts based on retransplant candidacy, wait times, risk of graft intolerance syndrome, and immunosuppression side effects. Many unanswered questions remain, and future prospective randomized trials are needed to help guide evidence-based management.

Allograft nephrectomy vs. no nephrectomy for failed renal transplants

The role of allograft nephrectomy (AN) in failed renal transplants is a topic of debate, owing to controversial results reported in the literature and the fact that most of the studies are limited by a retrospective design and small numbers of participants. Allograft nephrectomy is most likely of benefit in the patient with recurrent allograft intolerance syndrome (AIS) following pulse steroids. Immunosuppression weaning in the presence of clinical signs related to a chronic inflammatory state is also reasonable grounds to pursue AN. Studies are mainly inconclusive but suggest that AN has no overall benefit for allograft survival after retransplant. This topic is still of interest in the transplant field and is particularly relevant for patients who are likely to require retransplantation within their lifetime. Further assessment is needed in the form of randomized controlled trials that control for various AN indications and immunosuppression regimens, and have clearly defined survival outcomes.

Improving Outcomes after Allograft Nephrectomy through Use of Preoperative Angiographic Kidney Embolization

BACKGROUND

Allograft nephrectomy (AN) has been associated with considerable perioperative morbidity. We aimed to determine if preoperative angiographic kidney embolization (PAKE) to induce graft thrombosis before AN improves outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

We reviewed adult kidney transplant alone patients who underwent AN at a single center from 2002 to 2020 and compared perioperative outcomes for patients with and without PAKE.

RESULTS

Eighty patients underwent AN, including 54 (67.5%) with PAKE before AN and 26 (32.5%) with AN alone. PAKE was associated with significantly reduced blood loss (PAKE: mean 266 ± 292 mL vs AN alone: 495 ± 689 mL; p = 0.04) and reduced transfusion requirements (PAKE: mean 0.5 ± 0.8 packed red blood cell units vs AN alone: 1.6 ± 2.6 units; p = 0.004) despite similar preoperative hemoglobin levels. Mean operating time (PAKE: 142 ± 43 minutes vs AN alone: 202 ± 111 minutes; p = 0.001) and length of hospital stay (PAKE: 4.3 ± 2.0 days vs AN alone: 9.3 ± 9.4 days; p = 0.0003) also favored PAKE, as did the surgical complication rate (PAKE: 6/54 [11%] vs AN alone: 9/26 [35%], p = 0.02). Long-term patient survival after AN was comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PAKE was associated with lower intraoperative blood loss, fewer transfusions, reduced operating time, shorter length of stay, and fewer surgical complications compared with AN alone at our center.

Association of Nephrectomy of the Failed Renal Allograft With Outcome of the Future Transplant: A Systematic Review

Kidney allograft failure is a significant complication in kidney transplant recipients, and the surgical decision to perform allograft nephrectomy poses a strong dilemma because it is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. There is a debate over the effect of allograft nephrectomy on the development of allosensitization and the impact on potential retransplantation. Moreover, the use of immunosuppression may contribute to antibody allosensitization as allograft nephrectomy and immunosuppression act jointly and interdependently toward antibody formation. Because more and more patients with kidney allograft failure are entering wait lists for repeat transplant procedures, a review of available evidence on the field is required. Here, we performed a literature search using multiple medical databases to identify relevant studies that assessed the effects of allograft nephrectomy on important retransplant endpoints such as allograft and patient survival; furthermore, secondary outcomes such as alloantibody sensitization were also evaluated. A total of 15 studies were identified; all were retrospective, single-center studies. The rate of allograft nephrectomy in patients with retransplant varied widely (from 20% to 80%). The average allograft nephrectomy rate in included studies was 43% (allograft nephrectomy number/number of repeat transplantations: 2351/5431). Most studies did not observe an allograft survival benefit after retransplant for patients with allograft nephrectomy with the exception of 4 studies that found worse allograft survival after allograft nephrectomy. Interestingly, 1 study found that, in the patient subgroup with early kidney allograft failure (<12 months posttransplant), allograft nephrectomy may be associated with better allograft survival. Available data suggested that allograft nephrectomy may be associated with a higher risk of increasing anti-HLA antibody levels. The quality of the included studies suffered from nonrandomized design, potential confounding, and small sample size. To conclude, further randomized controlled trials are required to delineate the role of allograft nephrectomy on retransplant outcomes.

Long-term outcomes after kidney transplant failure and variables related to risk of death and probability of retransplant: Results from a single-center cohort study in Brazil

Background

Returning to dialysis after kidney graft loss (GL) is associated with a high risk of mortality, mainly in the first 3–6 months. The follow-up of patients with GL should be extended to better understand crude patient outcomes, mainly in emerging countries, where the transplantation activity has increased.

Methods

This is a historical single-center cohort study conducted in an emerging country (Brazil) that included 115 transplant patients with kidney allograft failure who were followed for 44.1 (21.4; 72.6) months after GL. The outcomes were death or retransplantation after GL calculated by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. Proportional hazard ratios for death and retransplantation were assessed by Cox regression.

Results

The 5-year probability of retransplantation was 38.7% (95% CI: 26.1%-51.2%) and that of death was 37.7% (95% CI: 24.9%-50.5%); OR = 1.03 (95% CI: 0.71–1.70) and P = 0.66. The likelihood of retransplantation was higher in patients who resumed dialysis with higher levels of hemoglobin (HR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.04–1.43; P = 0.01) and lower in blood type O patients (HR = 0.48; 95% CI = 0.25–0.93; P = 0.03), which was associated with a lower frequency of retransplantation with a subsequent living-donor kidney. On the other hand, the risk of death was significantly associated with Charlson comorbidity index (HR for each point = 1.37; 95% CI 1.19–1.50; P<0.001), and residual eGFR at the time when patients had resumed to dialysis (HR for each mL = 1.14; 95% CI = 1.05–1.25; P = 0.002). The trend toward a lower risk of death when patients had resumed to dialysis using AV fistula access was observed (HR = 0.50; 95% CI 0.25–1.02; P = 0.06), while a higher risk seems to be associated with the number of previous engraftment (HR = 2.01; 95% CI 0.99–4.07; P = 0.05).

Conclusions

The 5-year probability of retransplantation was not less than that of death. Variables related to the probability of retransplantation were hemoglobin level before resuming dialysis and ABO blood type, while the risk of death was associated with comorbidities and residual eGFR.

Treatment options for localised renal cell carcinoma of the transplanted kidney

Currently, there is no consensus among the transplant community about the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of the transplanted kidney. Until recently, graftectomy was universally considered the golden standard, regardless of the characteristics of the neoplasm. Due to the encouraging results observed in native kidneys, conservative options such as nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) (enucleation and partial nephrectomy) and ablative therapy (radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, microwave ablation, high-intensity focused ultrasound, and irreversible electroporation) have been progressively used in carefully selected recipients with early-stage allograft RCC. Available reports show excellent patient survival, optimal oncological outcome, and preserved renal function with acceptable complication rates. Nevertheless, the rarity and the heterogeneity of the disease, the number of options available, and the lack of long-term follow-up data do not allow to adequately define treatment-specific advantages and limitations. The role of active surveillance and immunosuppression management remain also debated. In order to offer a better insight into this difficult topic and to help clinicians choose the best therapy for their patients, we performed and extensive review of the literature. We focused on epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic work up, staging strategies, tumour characteristics, treatment modalities, and follow-up protocols. Our research confirms that both NSS and focal ablation represent a valuable alternative to graftectomy for kidney transplant recipients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage T1aN0M0 RCC. Data on T1bN0M0 lesions are scarce but suggest extra caution. Properly designed multi-centre prospective clinical trials are warranted.

Renal Graft Embolization as a Treatment for Graft Intolerance Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Renal graft intolerance syndrome is an inflammatory process that occurs in up to 40% of patients with graft loss. It is characterized by fever, graft pain, hematuria, and anemia. Traditionally, the treatment has been nephrectomy; however, this procedure is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. As an alternative, graft embolization is associated with success rates of up to 92%. In this study, we describe the graft embolization experience of 1 center, its clinical outcomes and complications.

METHODS

An observational, retrospective study was conducted. It included all patients with graft intolerance syndrome undergoing graft embolization between 2012 and 2018. The success of the procedure was defined by the resolution of the symptoms that motivated the embolization.

RESULTS

We found 12 cases of patients undergoing embolization. The time of presentation of the graft intolerance syndrome after admission to dialysis was 6 months (range, 0.6-13). The main clinical manifestation was pain in the area of the graft and macroscopic hematuria. Except for 1 patient, all continued with the immunosuppressive treatment regimen after graft loss for 4 months (range, 0.6-9), received antibiotics for 5.5 days (range, 2-14), and 10 patients received steroid treatment for 6.5 days (range, 5-10). The main complication, secondary to the procedure, was hematoma at the puncture site in 3 patients. Only 1 patient had postembolization syndrome, which resolved with steroid administration. Two patients required postembolization nephrectomy due to persistent renal blood flow and symptoms such as pain and hematuria. The average hospital stay was 5.5 days (range, 1-24).

CONCLUSIONS

Renal graft embolization is an effective technique as a treatment strategy in patients with clinical signs of intolerance syndrome, with a success rate ≥83.3%, low morbidity, and short hospital stay; furthermore, it avoids the potential complications of a surgical nephrectomy. Graft infection should be ruled out before embolization, and the use of prophylactic antibiotics and steroid therapy is recommended to reduce the risk of postembolization syndrome and infectious complications.

The Failing Kidney Transplant Allograft. Transplant Nephrectomy: Current State-of-the-Art

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides a critical literature overview of the risks and benefits of transplantectomy in patients with a failed allograft. Additionally, it offers a summary of related problems, primarily alloantibody sensitization in the event of nephrectomy and immunosuppression weaning.

RECENT FINDINGS

Transplant nephrectomy has high morbidity and mortality rates. The morbidity of transplant nephrectomy (4.3 to 82%) is mostly due to hemorrhage or infection. Mortality rates range from 1.2 to 39%, and most are due to sepsis. Transvascular graft embolization has been described as a less invasive alternative technique for the management of symptomatic graft rejection, with minimal complications compared with transplantectomy. The number of patients with a failed allograft returning to dialysis is increasing. The role of allograft nephrectomy in the management of asymptomatic transplant failure is still controversial and up today continues to depend on the usual clinical practice of each institution. The less invasive transvascular embolization could have applicability in asymptomatic patients with the obvious lower morbidity and mortality rate.