The cutting (w)edge--comparative evaluation of renal baseline biopsies obtained by two different methods

A Machine Learning-Driven Virtual Biopsy System For Kidney Transplant Patients

In kidney transplantation, day-zero biopsies are used to assess organ quality and discriminate between donor-inherited lesions and those acquired post-transplantation. However, many centers do not perform such biopsies since they are invasive, costly and may delay the transplant procedure. We aim to generate a non-invasive virtual biopsy system using routinely collected donor parameters. Using 14,032 day-zero kidney biopsies from 17 international centers, we develop a virtual biopsy system. 11 basic donor parameters are used to predict four Banff kidney lesions: arteriosclerosis, arteriolar hyalinosis, interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy, and the percentage of renal sclerotic glomeruli. Six machine learning models are aggregated into an ensemble model. The virtual biopsy system shows good performance in the internal and external validation sets. We confirm the generalizability of the system in various scenarios. This system could assist physicians in assessing organ quality, optimizing allograft allocation together with discriminating between donor derived and acquired lesions post-transplantation.

Performance of Scores Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Procurement Kidney Biopsies From Deceased Donors With Organs of Lower-Than-Average Quality

Several scores have been devised for providing a prognosis of outcomes after kidney transplantation. This study is a comprehensive test of these scores in a cohort of deceased donors with kidneys of lower-than-average quality and procurement biopsies. In total, 15 scores were tested on a retrospective cohort consisting of 221 donors, 223 procurement biopsies, and 223 recipient records for performance on delayed graft function, graft function, or death-censored graft loss. The best-performing score for DGF was the purely clinical Chapal score (AUC 0.709), followed by the Irish score (AUC 0.684); for graft function, the Nyberg score; and for transplant loss, the Snoeijs score (AUC 0.630) and the Leuven scores (AUCs 0.637 and 0.620). The only score with an acceptable performance was the Chapal score. Its disadvantage is that knowledge of the cold ischemia time is required, which is not known at allocation. None of the other scores performed acceptably. The scores fared better in discarded kidneys than in transplanted kidneys. Our study shows an unmet need for practical prognostic scores useful at the time of a decision about discarding or accepting deceased donor kidneys of lower-than-average quality in the Eurotransplant consortium.

European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT)-TLJ 3.0 Consensus on Histopathological Analysis of Pre-Implantation Donor Kidney Biopsy: Redefining the Role in the Process of Graft Assessment

The ESOT TLJ 3.0. consensus conference brought together leading experts in transplantation to develop evidence-based guidance on the standardization and clinical utility of pre-implantation kidney biopsy in the assessment of grafts from Expanded Criteria Donors (ECD). Seven themes were selected and underwent in-depth analysis after formulation of PICO (patient/population, intervention, comparison, outcomes) questions. After literature search, the statements for each key question were produced, rated according the GRADE approach [Quality of evidence: High (A), Moderate (B), Low (C); Strength of Recommendation: Strong (1), Weak (2)]. The statements were subsequently presented in-person at the Prague kick-off meeting, discussed and voted. After two rounds of discussion and voting, all 7 statements reached an overall agreement of 100% on the following issues: needle core/wedge/punch technique representatively [B,1], frozen/paraffin embedded section reliability [B,2], experienced/non-experienced on-call renal pathologist reproducibility/accuracy of the histological report [A,1], glomerulosclerosis/other parameters reproducibility [C,2], digital pathology/light microscopy in the measurement of histological variables [A,1], special stainings/Haematoxylin and Eosin alone comparison [A,1], glomerulosclerosis reliability versus other histological parameters to predict the graft survival, graft function, primary non-function [B,1]. This methodology has allowed to reach a full consensus among European experts on important technical topics regarding pre-implantation biopsy in the ECD graft assessment.

Artificial Intelligence You Can Trust: What Matters Beyond Performance When Applying Artificial Intelligence to Renal Histopathology?

Although still in its infancy, artificial intelligence (AI) analysis of kidney biopsy images is anticipated to become an integral aspect of renal histopathology. As these systems are developed, the focus will understandably be on developing ever more accurate models, but successful translation to the clinic will also depend upon other characteristics of the system.In the extreme, deployment of highly performant but "black box" AI is fraught with risk, and high-profile errors could damage future trust in the technology. Furthermore, a major factor determining whether new systems are adopted in clinical settings is whether they are "trusted" by clinicians. Key to unlocking trust will be designing platforms optimized for intuitive human-AI interactions and ensuring that, where judgment is required to resolve ambiguous areas of assessment, the workings of the AI image classifier are understandable to the human observer. Therefore, determining the optimal design for AI systems depends on factors beyond performance, with considerations of goals, interpretability, and safety constraining many design and engineering choices.In this article, we explore challenges that arise in the application of AI to renal histopathology, and consider areas where choices around model architecture, training strategy, and workflow design may be influenced by factors beyond the final performance metrics of the system.

Computer-assisted evaluation enhances the quantification of interstitial fibrosis in renal implantation biopsies, measures differences between frozen and paraffin sections, and predicts delayed graft function

Background

(Pre-)Implantation biopsies provide important data on the quality of donor kidneys. Interstitial fibrosis, as a known predictor for kidney disease progression, is an essential feature of this evaluation. However, the assessment of frozen sections of implantation biopsies is challenging and can result in the disposal of candidate organs. We sought to apply digital image analysis (DIA) to quantify the differences between frozen and paraffin sections when evaluating interstitial fibrosis, identify factors that influence these variations and test the predictive value of the computerised measures.

Methods

We quantified the differences between frozen and paraffin sections in the same biopsy samples by measuring Sirius red-stained interstitial areas (SRIA) in DIA. We compared them to the original reports, and retrospectively correlated our findings to clinical data, graft function and outcome in 73 patients.

Results

Frozen sections display a broader interstitial area than paraffin sections, in some cases up to one-third more (mean difference + 7.8%, range − 7 to 29%). No donor-related factors (age or gender, cold ischemia time, or non-heart-beating donor) influenced significantly this difference. Compared to the original assessment of frozen vs paraffin sections in optical microscopy, the DIA of interstitial fibrosis shows a higher consistency (ICC 0.69). Our approach further allows to distinguish SRIA in paraffin sections as an independent predictor for delayed graft function (OR = 1.1; p = 0.028).

Conclusions

DIA is superior to and more consistent than routine optic microscopy for interstitial fibrosis evaluation. This method could improve implantation biopsy diagnostics and help to reduce disposal of organs.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40620-022-01315-y.

PreImplantation Trial of Histopathology In renal Allografts (PITHIA): a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Most potential kidney transplant donors in the UK are aged over 60 years, yet increasing donor age is associated with poorer graft survival and function. Urgent preimplantation kidney biopsy can identify chronic injury, and may aid selection of better 'quality' kidneys from this group. However, the impact of biopsy on transplant numbers remains unproven. The PreImplantation Trial of Histopathology In renal Allografts (PITHIA) study will assess whether the introduction of a national, 24 hours, digital histopathology service increases the number, and improves outcomes, of kidneys transplanted in the UK from older deceased donors.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

PITHIA is an open, multicentre, stepped-wedge cluster randomised study, involving all UK adult kidney transplant centres. At 4-monthly intervals, a group of 4-5 randomly selected clusters (transplant centres) will be given access to remote, urgent, digital histopathology (total intervention period, 24 months). The trial has two primary end points: it is powered for an 11% increase in the proportion of primary kidney offers from deceased donors aged over 60 years that are transplanted, and a 6 mL/min increase in the estimated glomerular filtration rate of recipients at 12 months post-transplant. This would equate to an additional 120 kidney transplants performed in the UK annually. Trial outcome data will be collected centrally via the UK Transplant Registry held by NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) and will be analysed using mixed effects models allowing for clustering within centres and adjusting for secular trends. An accompanying economic evaluation will estimate the cost-effectiveness of the service to the National Health Service.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been given favourable ethical opinion by the Cambridge South Research Ethics Committee and is approved by the Health Research Authority. We will present our findings at key transplant meetings, publish results within 4 years of the trial commencing and support volunteers at renal patient groups to disseminate the trial outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN11708741; Pre-results.

Zero-Time Renal Transplant Biopsies: A Comprehensive Review

Zero-time kidney biopsies, obtained at time of transplantation, are performed in many transplant centers worldwide. Decisions on kidney discard, kidney allocation, and choice of peritransplant and posttransplant treatment are sometimes based on the histological information obtained from these biopsies. This comprehensive review evaluates the practical considerations of performing zero-time biopsies, the predictive performance of zero-time histology and composite histological scores, and the clinical utility of these biopsies. The predictive performance of individual histological lesions and of composite scores for posttransplant outcome is at best moderate. No single histological lesion or composite score is sufficiently robust to be included in algorithms for kidney discard. Dual kidney transplantation has been based on histological assessment of zero-time biopsies and improves outcome in individual patients, but the waitlist effects of this strategy remain obscure. Zero-time biopsies are valuable for clinical and translational research purposes, providing insight in risk factors for posttransplant events, and as baseline for comparison with posttransplant histology. The molecular phenotype of zero-time biopsies yields novel therapeutic targets for improvement of donor selection, peritransplant management and kidney preservation. It remains however highly unclear whether the molecular expression variation in zero-time biopsies could become a better predictor for posttransplant outcome than donor/recipient baseline demographic factors.

German recommendations for pretransplantation donor kidney biopsies

PURPOSE

This manuscript reviews the data about the histopathologic and develops recommendations to standardise and improve the biopsy procedure, the biopsy handling, the histopathological evaluation, the communication of results and the collection of data from pretransplantation kidney biopsies of deceased donors in Germany.

METHODS

The recommendations are based on this literature review, on discussions at two workshops held by the German Society of Pathology and the German Organ Transplantation Foundation and on personal experiences of the authors.

RESULTS

These German recommendations advocate the use of punch biopsies, paraffin embedding and detailed descriptive reporting of histopathological findings.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations constitute only a starting point. Periodical revisions will help to simplify and optimise the recommendations with the ultimate goal to prospectively gather data for the elaboration of a computer-based algorithm that allows the exact prediction of transplantation outcome for a given match of donor and recipient.

Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?

INTRODUCTION

Renal transplantation is the best treatment for end-stage renal disease, including when using expanded criteria donors (ECD) kidneys. However, these suboptimal kidneys should be evaluated rigorously to meet their usefulness. Opinions differ about the best way to evaluate them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed kidneys from ECD harvested by a single academic institution between January 2008 and September 2013. Needle biopsies were performed at the time of the harvest when considered relevant by the transplant team. Two pathologists where responsible for their analysis; the Remuzzi classification has been used in all cases.

RESULTS

We evaluated 560 ECD kidneys. Biopsies were made in 197 (35.2%) organs, 20 of which were considered not usable and 36 good only for double transplantation. Sixty-three kidneys (11.3%) were discarded by the transplant team based on the biopsy result and clinical criteria. Donors who underwent a biopsy were older (P < .001) and had a worse glomerular filtration rate (GFR; P = .001). Comparing donors approved and rejected by the biopsy, the rejected donors were heavier (P = .003) and had a lower GFR (P = .002). Cold ischemia time was longer for the biopsy group (P < .001). Regarding graft function, the biopsy overall score correlated with the transplant outcome in the short and long term. Separately, glomeruli and interstitium scores were correlated with recipient's GFR in the earlier periods (3 months; P = .025 and .037), and the arteries and tubules correlated with GFR in the longer term (at 3 years P = .004 and .010).

CONCLUSION

The decision on the usability of ECD grafts is complex. At our center, we chose a mixed approach based on donor risk. Low-risk ECD do not require biopsy. In more complex situations, especially older donors or those with a lower GFR, prompted a pretransplant biopsy. The biopsy results proved to be useful as they relate to subsequent transplant outcomes, thereby allowing us to exclude grafts whose function would most probably be less than optimal.

Donor Kidney Evaluation

In patients with end-stage renal disease, kidney transplantation is the best means to extend survival and offer a better quality of life. The current shortage of organs available for transplantation has led to an effort to expand the kidney donor pool, including the use of nonideal donor kidneys. Assessment of the quality of the donated kidney is essential, and would facilitate the decision to transplant a potential organ or discard it. Multiple clinical and histologic parameters have been examined to evaluate the donor kidney and relate the findings to the graft outcome, but clear-cut criteria are yet to be defined.

Pre-implant biopsy predicts outcome of single-kidney transplantation independent of clinical donor variables

BACKGROUND

Pre-implant biopsy findings account for the discard of many donor kidneys although their clinical value is not fully understood. We retrospectively investigated the predictive value of pre-implant histology, which in our center was obtained for protocol purposes, not for transplant decisions, on long-term allograft and recipient outcome after single-kidney transplantation.

METHODS

This single-center study included 628 consecutive adult recipients of 174 Expanded Criteria Donor (ECD) and 454 Standard Criteria Donor kidneys. Chronic donor organ injury was assessed applying a chronic lesion score differentiating between mild, moderate, and severe histologic organ injury based on the integration of glomerular, vascular, tubular, and interstitial lesions. Recipients were followed over a median time of 7.8 years.

RESULTS

Donor kidneys exhibiting mild or moderate chronic lesions yielded almost identical graft and recipient survival independent of ECD status or other clinical covariables (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.83-1.74, P=0.326, and HR 1.27, 95% CI 0.83-1.95, P=0.274, respectively). However, if allograft injury was severe, occurring in 3% of transplanted kidneys, graft and recipient survival was significantly reduced (HR 3.13, 95% CI 1.61-6.07, P<0.001 and HR 2.42, 95% CI 1.16-5.04, P=0.005, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that donor kidneys displaying moderate chronic injury can safely be transplanted as single kidneys, while organs displaying severe injury should be discarded. Thus, pre-implant biopsy might offer an effective approach to increase the utilization of renal donor organs, especially from ECD and donors with cerebrovascular accident as cause of death, and to improve overall graft outcome.

Assessment of donor biopsies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an up-to-date overview about the assessment of donor biopsies and to discuss the current problems and chances of preimplantation biopsies for transplant allocation with a focus on the technical work up and the histological variables scored.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preimplantation biopsy results are the major reason for discarding procured extended donor criteria kidneys in the USA. There is neither a consensus on the work up, nor the reporting of preimplantation donor biopsies, nor the importance of the biopsy findings in the process of allocation. The best available data have been collected in the context of single vs. double kidney transplantation. A clinical risk factor score may help to define kidneys when a preimplantation biopsy is warranted. Punch biopsies using a skin punch device appear to be a reasonable alternative for surgeons fearing needle biopsies.

SUMMARY

Donor biopsies are very useful as zero-hour biopsies establishing baseline information for comparison with subsequent transplant biopsies. As none of the histological variables and scores provides perfect prediction, preimplantation biopsy results have to be interpreted in the context of all available donor and recipient information.