1
|
Corr M, Lawrie K, Baláž P, O'Neill S. Management of an aneurysmal arteriovenous fistula in kidney transplant recipients. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2023; 37:100799. [PMID: 37804690 DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2023.100799] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2023] [Revised: 09/26/2023] [Accepted: 09/26/2023] [Indexed: 10/09/2023]
Abstract
Aneurysms remain the most common complication of an arteriovenous fistula created for dialysis access. The management of an aneurysmal arteriovenous fistula (AAVF) in kidney transplant recipients remains contentious with a lack of clear clinical guidelines. Recipients of a functioning graft do not require the fistula for dialysis access, however risk of graft failure and needing the access at a future date must be considered. In this review we outline the current evidence in the assessment and management of a transplant recipient with an AAVF. We will describe our recommended five-step approach to assessing an AAVF in transplant patients; 1.) Define AAVF 2.) Risk assess AAVF 3.) Assess transplant graft function and future graft failure risk 4.) Consider future renal replacement therapy options 5.) Vascular mapping to assess future vascular access options. Then we will describe the current therapeutic options and when they would most appropriately be employed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Corr
- Centre of Public Health - Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom; Regional Nephrology & Transplant Unit-Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, United Kingdom.
| | - Kateřina Lawrie
- Department of Transplantation Surgery, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Prague, Czech Republic; Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Peter Baláž
- Division of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Královské Vinohrady, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Cardiocenter, University Hospital Královské Vinohrady, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Department of Vascular Surgery, National Institute for Cardiovascular Disease, Bratislava, Slovak Republic
| | - Stephen O'Neill
- Regional Nephrology & Transplant Unit-Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, United Kingdom; Centre of Medical Education, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mamode N, Bestard O, Claas F, Furian L, Griffin S, Legendre C, Pengel L, Naesens M. European Guideline for the Management of Kidney Transplant Patients With HLA Antibodies: By the European Society for Organ Transplantation Working Group. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10511. [PMID: 36033645 PMCID: PMC9399356 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2022] [Accepted: 06/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
This guideline, from a European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) working group, concerns the management of kidney transplant patients with HLA antibodies. Sensitization should be defined using a virtual parameter such as calculated Reaction Frequency (cRF), which assesses HLA antibodies derived from the actual organ donor population. Highly sensitized patients should be prioritized in kidney allocation schemes and linking allocation schemes may increase opportunities. The use of the ENGAGE 5 ((Bestard et al., Transpl Int, 2021, 34: 1005–1018) system and online calculators for assessing risk is recommended. The Eurotransplant Acceptable Mismatch program should be extended. If strategies for finding a compatible kidney are very unlikely to yield a transplant, desensitization may be considered and should be performed with plasma exchange or immunoadsorption, supplemented with IViG and/or anti-CD20 antibody. Newer therapies, such as imlifidase, may offer alternatives. Few studies compare HLA incompatible transplantation with remaining on the waiting list, and comparisons of morbidity or quality of life do not exist. Kidney paired exchange programs (KEP) should be more widely used and should include unspecified and deceased donors, as well as compatible living donor pairs. The use of a KEP is preferred to desensitization, but highly sensitized patients should not be left on a KEP list indefinitely if the option of a direct incompatible transplant exists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nizam Mamode
- Department of Transplantation, Guys Hospital, London, United Kingdom
- *Correspondence: Nizam Mamode,
| | - Oriol Bestard
- Department of Nephrology and Kidney Transplantation, Vall d’Hebrón University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Frans Claas
- Department of Immunology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
- Department of Immunology, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Lucrezia Furian
- Kidney and Pancreas Transplantation Unit, Department of Surgical Gastroenterological and Oncological Sciences, University Hospital of Padua, Padua, Italy
| | - Siân Griffin
- Department of Nephrology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom
| | - Christophe Legendre
- Department of Nephrology and Adult Kidney Transplantation, Hôpital Necker and Université de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Liset Pengel
- Centre for Evidence in Transplantation, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Maarten Naesens
- Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Manook M, Johnson R, Robb M, Burnapp L, Fuggle SV, Mamode N. Changing patterns of clinical decision making: are falling numbers of antibody incompatible transplants related to the increasing success of the UK Living Kidney Sharing Scheme? A national cohort study. Transpl Int 2020; 34:153-162. [PMID: 33095917 DOI: 10.1111/tri.13776] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2019] [Revised: 11/03/2019] [Accepted: 10/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Antibody incompatibility is a barrier to living kidney transplantation; antibody incompatible transplantation (AIT) is an accepted treatment modality, albeit higher risk. This study aims to determine changes to clinical decision making and access to AIT in the UK. An electronic survey was sent to all UK renal transplant centres (n = 24), in 2014, and again in 2018. Questions focused on entry & duration in the UKLKSS for HLA and ABO-incompatible pairs, Can and provision of direct AIT transplantation within those centres. Between 2014 & 2018, the duration recommended for patients in the UKLKSS increased. In 2014, 34.8% of centres reported leaving HLA-i pairs in the UKLKSS indefinitely, or reviewing on a case by case basis, by 2018 this increased to 61%. Centres offering direct HLA-i transplantation reduced from 58% to 37%. For low titre (1:8) ABO-i recipients, 66% of centres recommended at least 9 months (3 matching runs) in the UKLKSS scheme in 2018, compared to 47% in 2014, 50% fewer units consider direct ABO-i transplantation for unsuccessful pairs with high ABO titres (>1:512). Over time, clinicians appear to be facilitating more conservative management of AIT patients, potentially limiting access to living donor transplantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miriam Manook
- Renal and Transplant Department, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Rachel Johnson
- National Health Service Blood and Transplant (NHSBT), Bristol, UK
| | - Matthew Robb
- National Health Service Blood and Transplant (NHSBT), Bristol, UK
| | - Lisa Burnapp
- National Health Service Blood and Transplant (NHSBT), Bristol, UK
| | - Susan V Fuggle
- National Health Service Blood and Transplant (NHSBT), Bristol, UK
| | - Nizam Mamode
- Renal and Transplant Department, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bellini MI, Courtney AE, McCaughan JA. Living Donor Kidney Transplantation Improves Graft and Recipient Survival in Patients with Multiple Kidney Transplants. J Clin Med 2020; 9:jcm9072118. [PMID: 32635614 PMCID: PMC7408952 DOI: 10.3390/jcm9072118] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2020] [Revised: 07/01/2020] [Accepted: 07/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Failed kidney transplant recipients benefit from a new graft as the general incident dialysis population, although additional challenges in the management of these patients are often limiting the long-term outcomes. Previously failed grafts, a long history of comorbidities, side effects of long-term immunosuppression and previous surgical interventions are common characteristics in the repeated kidney transplantation population, leading to significant complex immunological and technical aspects and often compromising the short- and long-term results. Although recipients’ factors are acknowledged to represent one of the main determinants for graft and patient survival, there is increasing interest in expanding the donor’s pool safely, particularly for high-risk candidates. The role of living kidney donation in this peculiar context of repeated kidney transplantation has not been assessed thoroughly. The aim of the present study is to analyse the effects of a high-quality graft, such as the one retrieved from living kidney donors, in the repeated kidney transplant population context. Methods: Retrospective analysis of the outcomes of the repeated kidney transplant population at our institution from 1968 to 2019. Data were extracted from a prospectively maintained database and stratified according to the number of transplants: 1st, 2nd or 3rd+. The main outcomes were graft and patient survivals, recorded from time of transplant to graft failure (return to dialysis) and censored at patient death with a functioning graft. Duration of renal replacement therapy was expressed as cumulative time per month. A multivariate analysis considering death-censored graft survival, decade of transplantation, recipient age, donor age, living donor, transplant number, ischaemic time, time on renal replacement therapy prior to transplant and HLA mismatch at HLA-A, -B and -DR was conducted. In the multivariate analysis of recipient survival, diabetic nephropathy as primary renal disease was also included. Results: A total of 2395 kidney transplant recipients were analysed: 2062 (83.8%) with the 1st kidney transplant, 279 (11.3%) with the 2nd graft, 46 (2.2%) with the 3rd+. Mean age of 1st kidney transplant recipients was 43.6 ± 16.3 years, versus 39.9 ± 14.4 for 2nd and 41.4 ± 11.5 for 3rd+ (p < 0.001). Aside from being younger, repeated kidney transplant patients were also more often males (p = 0.006), with a longer time spent on renal replacement therapy (p < 0.0001) and a higher degree of sensitisation, expressed as calculated reaction frequency (p < 0.001). There was also an association between multiple kidney transplants and better HLA match at transplantation (p < 0.0001). A difference in death-censored graft survival by number of transplants was seen, with a median graft survival of 328 months for recipients of the 1st transplant, 209 months for the 2nd and 150 months for the 3rd+ (p = 0.038). The same difference was seen in deceased donor kidneys (p = 0.048), but not in grafts from living donors (p = 0.2). Patient survival was comparable between the three groups (p = 0.59). Conclusions: In the attempt to expand the organ donor pool, particular attention should be reserved to high complex recipients, such as the repeated kidney transplant population. In this peculiar context, the quality of the donor has been shown to represent a main determinant for graft survival—in fact, kidney retrieved from living donors provide comparable outcomes to those from single-graft recipients.
Collapse
|
5
|
Baker RJ, Marks SD. Management of chronic renal allograft dysfunction and when to re-transplant. Pediatr Nephrol 2019; 34:599-603. [PMID: 30039433 PMCID: PMC6394652 DOI: 10.1007/s00467-018-4000-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2018] [Revised: 06/09/2018] [Accepted: 06/12/2018] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
Despite the advances in renal transplantation over the last decades, chronic allograft dysfunction remains the largest concern for patients, their families, clinicians and other members of the multi-disciplinary team. Although we have made progress in improving patient and renal allograft survival within the first year after transplantation, the rate of transplant failure with requirement for commencement of dialysis or re-transplantation has essentially remained unchanged. It is important that paediatric and adult nephrologists and transplant surgeons, not only manage their patients and their renal transplants but provide the best chronic kidney disease management during the time of decline of renal allograft function. The gold standard for patients with Stage V chronic kidney disease is to have pre-emptive living donor transplants, where possible and the same is true for healthy renal transplant recipients with declining renal allograft function. The consideration for children and young people as they embark on their end-stage kidney disease journey is the risk-benefit profile of giving the best immunologically matched and good quality renal allografts as they may require multiple renal transplantation operations during their lifetime.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard J. Baker
- Renal Unit, Lincoln Wing, St. James’s University Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF UK
| | - Stephen D. Marks
- Department of Paediatric Nephrology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK ,University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
McCaughan JA, Tinckam KJ. Donor specific HLA antibodies & allograft injury: mechanisms, methods of detection, manifestations and management. Transpl Int 2018; 31:1059-1070. [DOI: 10.1111/tri.13324] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2018] [Revised: 06/11/2018] [Accepted: 07/27/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer A. McCaughan
- HLA Laboratory; Laboratory Medicine Program; University Health Network; Toronto ON Canada
- Department of Nephrology and Transplantation; Belfast City Hospital; Belfast UK
| | - Kathryn J. Tinckam
- HLA Laboratory; Laboratory Medicine Program; University Health Network; Toronto ON Canada
- Division of Nephrology; Department of Medicine; University Health Network; Toronto ON Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Baker RJ, Marks SD. Management of chronic renal allograft dysfunction and when to re-transplant. PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY (BERLIN, GERMANY) 2018. [PMID: 30039433 DOI: 10.1007/s00467-018-4000-9x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Despite the advances in renal transplantation over the last decades, chronic allograft dysfunction remains the largest concern for patients, their families, clinicians and other members of the multi-disciplinary team. Although we have made progress in improving patient and renal allograft survival within the first year after transplantation, the rate of transplant failure with requirement for commencement of dialysis or re-transplantation has essentially remained unchanged. It is important that paediatric and adult nephrologists and transplant surgeons, not only manage their patients and their renal transplants but provide the best chronic kidney disease management during the time of decline of renal allograft function. The gold standard for patients with Stage V chronic kidney disease is to have pre-emptive living donor transplants, where possible and the same is true for healthy renal transplant recipients with declining renal allograft function. The consideration for children and young people as they embark on their end-stage kidney disease journey is the risk-benefit profile of giving the best immunologically matched and good quality renal allografts as they may require multiple renal transplantation operations during their lifetime.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard J Baker
- Renal Unit, Lincoln Wing, St. James's University Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
| | - Stephen D Marks
- Department of Paediatric Nephrology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|