Impact of Pretransplant Dialysis Modality on Posttransplant Outcomes: A Single-Center Experience.

OBJECTIVES: It remains unclear whether posttransplant outcomes differ according to the pretransplant dialysis modality (peritoneal dialysis vs hemodialysis). Our aim was to assess posttransplant outcomes in patients with different predialysis modalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two thousand two hundred fifty-eight kidney recipients following up in Hamed Alessa Organ transplant center in Kuwait were included and divided into two groups according to pre-transplant dialysis modality: Group 1: those who received hemodialysis (HD) and group 2: those with peritoneal dialysis (PD). Demographics, pretransplant and posttransplant comorbidities, and patient and graft outcomes were studied. RESULTS: There were 1956 patients on hemodialysis, and 302 patients were on peritoneal dialysis. Most were male patients (1456 vs 802 female patients), with comparable mean age (P = .34). Chronic glomerulonephritis and diabetic nephropathy represented the most common original kidney disease before transplant (27.6% and 21.4%, respectively), with higher prevalence of glomerulonephritis in group 1 and diabetic nephropathy in group 2 (P = .001). The 2 groups were comparable with regard to immunosuppression (induction and maintenance) (P > .05). Posttransplant diabetes and hypertension were significantly higher in the hemodialysis group (P = .004 and P = 003, respectively). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with regard to the graft outcome (P = .86). However, patient survival was significantly higher in the hemodialysis group (81.2% vs 64.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with peritoneal dialysis, pretransplant hemodialysis is associated with better posttransplant patient survival despite no difference in the graft outcome. Diabetes-related complications could be attributed to such outcomes.

Acute Kidney Injury Among COVID-19-Positive Patients Is Associated With Higher Mortality: A Single-Center Experience.

OBJECTIVES: Renal complications of COVID-19 are not yet well studied. We aimed to evaluate acute kidney injury prevalence among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection and explore its effect on patient outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 586 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Of these patients, 267 (45.5%) developed acute kidney injury, as classified according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guidelines. We compared this group with 319 patients (54.5%) without acute kidney injury. RESULTS: Most patients in both study groups were men; mean age was 60.8 ± 14 versus 51.7 ± 16 years. Comorbid conditions that were substantially predominant among patients with acute kidney injury were diabetes mellitus (64% vs 42.9%), hypertension (72.6% vs 43.5%), and ischemic heart disease (25% vs 14.7%). Fever, cough, shortness of breath, and dehydration were the main presentations among patients with acute kidney injury, and patients in this group had greater prevalence of radiological findings concordant with COVID-19 (86.8% vs 59.8%). Sepsis, volume depletion, shock, arrhythmias, and acute respiratory distress syndrome were higher in patients with acute kidney injury. Anticoagulation (85% vs 59.2%), vasopressors, plasma infusions, antimicrobials, and steroids were more frequently used in patients with acute kidney injury. More patients with acute kidney injury had acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (62.3% vs 32.9%), with higher overall mortality rate (63.2% vs 31.1%). CONCLUSIONS: We found more frequent prevalence of acute kidney injury associated with severe COVID-19 than shown in reports from Chinese, European, and North American cohorts. Patients with COVID-19 who developed acute kidney injury had risk factors such as hypertension and diabetes, greater need for mechanical ventilation, were males, and were older age. Mortality was high in this population, especially among older patients and those who developed Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes stage 3 disease.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors & glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, efficacy & safety in diabetic kidney transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular and renal complications define the outcomes of diabetic kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). The new diabetes medications have changed the management of diabetes. However, transplant physicians are still reluctant to use sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) post kidney transplantation due to fear of drug related complications and lack of established guidelines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We collected 1-year follow-up data from records of 98 diabetic KTRs on SGLT2I, 41 on GLP- 1RA and 70 on standard-of-care medicines. Patients were more than 3 months post-transplant with a minimum estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25 ml/min/1.73 m2 . Demographic data were similar except for a slightly lower HbA1c in the control group and higher albuminuria in SGLT2i group. RESULTS: HbA1c dropped significantly by .4% in both SGLT2i and GLP-1RA compared to .05% in the control group. A significant decrease in BMI by .32 in SGLT2i and .34 in GLP-1RA was observed compared to an increase by .015 in control group. A tendency for better eGFR in study groups was observed but was non-significant except for the SGLT2i group with an eGFR above 90 (p = .0135). The usual dip in eGFR was observed in the SGLT2i group at 1-3 months. Albuminuria was significantly reduced in both study groups. Adverse events were minimal with comparable safety in all groups. CONCLUSION: The use of SGLT2i and GLP-1RA appears to be effective and safe in diabetic KTRs with good outcomes. Randomized control trials are required to confirm these findings and establish guidelines.

Management of Chronic Active Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Renal Transplant Recipients: Single-Center Experience.

OBJECTIVES: Data on the management of chronic antibody-mediated rejection after kidney transplantation are limited. We aimed to assess the impact of treatment of biopsy-proven chronic active antibodymediated rejection with combined plasma exchange, intravenous immunoglobulin, and rituximab treatment versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone or conservative management on the evolution of renal function in renal transplant recipients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, we compared patients diagnosed with chronic active antibody-mediated rejection who were treated with standard of care steroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, plasma exchange, and rituximab (n = 40) at our center versus those who received intravenous immunoglobulin only or just intensified maintenance immunosuppression (n = 28). All patients were followed for 12 months clinically and by laboratory tests for graft and patient outcomes. RESULTS: The two groups were matched regarding mean recipient age (41.9 ± 15.4 vs 37.8 ± 15.5 y in patients with conservative versus combined treatment), recipient sex, mean body weight, and the cause of end-stage kidney disease. Most patients and their donors were males. Glomerulonephritis represented the most common cause of end-stage kidney disease in both groups followed by diabetic nephropathy. The type of induction and pretransplant comorbidities were not different between groups (P > .05) except for the significantly higher number of chronic hepatitis C infections in patients who received conservative treatment (P = .007). Mean serum creatinine values before and after treatment of chronic active antibodymediated rejection were comparable between groups (P > .05). Active treatment with heavier immunosuppression (rituximab and plasma exchange) was associated with posttreatment viral (cytomegalovirus and BK virus) and bacterial infections that necessitated more hospitalization (P > .05). However, graft and patient outcomes were significantly better in the active treatment group than in patients with conservative treatment (P = .002 and .028, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Combined treatment of chronic active antibody-mediated rejection with plasma exchange, intravenous immunoglobulin, and rituximab can significantly improve outcomes after renal transplant.

Kidney Transplant in a Patient With Factor VII Deficiency: Case Report.

Organ transplant in patients with congenital bleeding disorders is a challenge requiring an integrated approach of various specialists. Inherited factor VII deficiency is the most common of the rare bleeding disorders, with a wide set of hemorrhagic features. Although a kidney allograft is the most frequent type of solid-organ transplant, it is rarely performed in individuals with congenital hemorrhagic disorders. Here, we highlight the course of a patient with coagulation factor VII deficiency who underwent successful kidney transplant without significant coagulopathy. Our patient was a 19-year-old man with end-stage kidney disease and congenital coagulation factor VII deficiency. Perioperative bleeding was successfully prevented by administration of recombinant factor VII, confirming its safety in solid-organ transplants. Success requires evaluation of doses and therapeutic schedules, as well as a multidisciplinary approach.

Bariatric Surgery in Renal Transplant Patients.

OBJECTIVES: The idea of transplanting organs is not new, nor is the disease of obesity. Obese transplant recipients have greater risk of early death than their cohorts, which is not due to increased rejection but due to obesity-related complications, including arterial hypertension, diabetes, and delayed graft function. Here, our aim was to evaluate the effects of bariatric surgery versus lifestyle changes on outcomes of moderate to severely obese renal transplant recipients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-two morbidly obese patients with stable graft function who underwent bariatric surgery were compared with 44 obese patients on lifestyle management (control group). Both groups were evaluated regarding graft and patient outcomes. RESULTS: The studied groups were comparable demographically. In the bariatric study group versus control group, we observed that the mean body mass index was 38.49 ± 9.1 versus 44.24 ± 6 (P = .024) at transplant and 34.34 ± 7.6 versus 44.38 ± 6.7 (P = .002) at 6 months of bariatric surgery. Both groups received a more potent induction immunosuppression, but this was significantly higher in the obese nonbariatric control group (P < .05). There were more patients with slow and delayed graft functions in the same nonbariatric group. The 2 groups were comparable regarding new-onset diabetes after transplant, total patients with diabetes, and graft outcomes (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgeries are feasible, safe pro cedures for selected obese renal transplant recipients.