Primary graft dysfunction of the liver: definitions, diagnostic criteria and risk factors / Disfunção primária do enxerto hepático: definições, critérios diagnósticos e fatores de risco

ABSTRACT Primary graft dysfunction is a multifactorial syndrome with great impact on liver transplantation outcomes. This review article was based on studies published between January 1980 and June 2015 and retrieved from PubMed database using the following search terms: “primary graft dysfunction”, “early allograft dysfunction”, “primary non-function” and “liver transplantation”. Graft dysfunction describes different grades of graft ischemia-reperfusion injury and can manifest as early allograft dysfunction or primary graft non-function, its most severe form. Donor-, surgery- and recipient-related factors have been associated with this syndrome. Primary graft dysfunction definition, diagnostic criteria and risk factors differ between studies.

RESUMO A disfunção primária do enxerto hepático é uma síndrome multifatorial com grande impacto no resultado do transplante de fígado. Foi realizada uma ampla revisão da literatura, consultando a base de dados PubMed, em busca de estudos publicados entre janeiro de 1980 e junho de 2015. Os termos descritivos utilizados foram: “primary graft dysfunction”, “early allograft dysfunction”, “primary non-function” e “liver transplantation”. A disfunção traduz graus diferentes da lesão de isquemia e reperfusão do órgão, e pode se manifestar como disfunção precoce ou, na forma mais grave, pelo não funcionamento primário do enxerto. Fatores relacionados ao doador, ao transplante e ao receptor contribuem para essa síndrome. Existem definições diferentes na literatura quanto ao diagnóstico e aos fatores de risco associados à disfunção primária.

BKV-infection in kidney graft dysfunction

INTRODUCTION: BKV nephropathy (BKN) causes kidney graft loss, whose specific diagnosis is invasive and might be predicted by the early detection of active viral infection. OBJECTIVE: Determine the BKV-infection prevalence in late kidney graft dysfunction by urinary decoy cell (DC) and viral DNA detection in urine (viruria) and blood (viremia; active infection). METHODS: Kidney recipients with >1 month follow-up and creatinine >1.5 mg/dL and/or recent increasing >20 percent (n = 120) had their urine and blood tested for BKV by semi-nested PCR, DC searching, and graft biopsy. PCR-positive patients were classified as 1+, 2+, 3+. DC, viruria and viremia prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio (LR) were determined (Table 2x2). Diagnosis efficacy of DC and viruria were compared to viremia. RESULTS: DC prevalence was 25 percent, viruria 61.7 percent, and viremia 42.5 percent. Positive and negative patients in each test had similar clinical, immunossupressive, and histopathological characteristics. There was no case of viremia with chronic allograft nephropathy and, under treatment with sirolimus, patients had a lower viruria prevalence (p = 0.043). Intense viruria was the single predictive test for active infection (3+; LR = 2.8).1,6-4,9 CONCLUSION: DC, BKV-viruria and -viremia are commun findings under late kidney graft dysfunction. Viremia could only be predicted by intense viruria. These results should be considered under the context of BKN confirmation.