Vnitr Lek 2008, 54(11):1054-1058

Subclinical acute rejections in protocol biopsies at 3 months after kidney transplantation

I. Matl1,*, E. Honsová2, A. Lodererová2, V. Lánská3, O. Viklický1
1 Klinika nefrologie IKEM Praha, přednosta doc. MUDr. Ondřej Viklický, CSc.
2 Pracoviště klinické a transplantační patologie IKEM Praha, přednostka prim. MUDr. Eva Honsová, Ph.D.
3 Oddělení lékařské statistiky IKEM Praha

Aim:
The primary aim of the study was detection of subclinical acute rejection and borderline changes in protocol biopsies at 3 months after transplantation, and assessment of possible clinical and laboratory associations.

Methods:
Biopsy was carried out in 194 patients with stabilized graft function. Patients were treated with immunosuppressive regimen based on cyclosporine A (n = 34), tacrolimus (n = 152), or sirolimus/everolimus (n = 10). Samples were processed by standard paraffine technique, and stained according to laboratory protocol. All samples were tested by immunofluorescence or immunohistochemical procedures for C4d presence as a sign of humoral rejection.

Results:
Of 192 representative samples, subclinical acute rejection and borderline changes were found in 24 samples (12.5%). In patients with this finding, the mean serum creatinine was significantly higher (185.2 ± 2.2 μmol/L), than in patients with normal finding (128.2 ± 28.3 μmol/L) p < 0.001. Using the ROC curve analysis of serum creatinine, the cut-off point 170 μmol/L was found to discriminate normal findings from subclinical rejection and borderline changes. A significant correlation between acute rejections before protocol biopsy and subclinical acute rejections together with borderline changes in protocol biopsy was found. C4d positivity was found in 6 samples. Immunosuppressive therapy (cyclosporine versus tacrolimus) did not have any impact on subclinical acute rejections and borderline changes prevalence.

Conclusions:
The main conclusion of this study is a finding, that acute rejection early after renal transplantation and serum creatinine ≥ 170 μmol/l at three months after transplantation are risks for development of subclinical acute rejection, even of humoral type, or borderline changes.

Keywords: kidney transplantation; protocol biopsy; subclinical acute rejection; borderline changes; immunosuppressive therapy

Received: May 21, 2008; Accepted: August 15, 2008; Published: November 1, 2008  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Matl I, Honsová E, Lodererová A, Lánská V, Viklický O. Subclinical acute rejections in protocol biopsies at 3 months after kidney transplantation. Vnitr Lek. 2008;54(11):1054-1058.
Download citation

References

  1. Burdick JF, Beschorner WE, Smith WJ et al. Characteristics of early routine renal allograft biopsies. Transplantation 1984; 38: 679-684. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  2. Choi BS, Shin MJ, Shin SJ et al. Clinical significance of an early protocol biopsy in living-donor renal transplantation: ten-year experience at a single center. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 1354-1360. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  3. Furness PN, Philpott CM, Chorbadjian MT et al. Protocol biopsy of the stable renal transplant: a multicenter study of methods and complication rates. Transplantation 2003; 76: 969-973. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Gloor JM, Cohen AJ, Lager DJ et al. Subclinical rejection in tacrolimus-treated renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2002; 73: 1965-1968. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  5. Helanterä I, Ortiz F, Helin H et al. Timing and value of protocol biopsies in well-matched kidney transplant recipients - a clinical and histopathologic analysis. Transplant Int 2007; 20: 982-990. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  6. Horčička V Jr, Krejčí K, Zadražil J et al. Arteriovenózní píštěl jako komplikace biopsie ledvin. Vnitř Lék 2002; 48: 432-437. Go to PubMed...
  7. Kanetsuna Y, Yamaguchi Y, Toma H et al. Histological evaluation of renal allograft protocol biopsies in the early period and 1 year after transplantation. Clin Transplant 2003; 17 (Suppl 10): 25-29. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  8. Kee TYS, Chapman JR, Connell PJ et al. Treatment of subclinical rejection diagnosed by protocol biopsy of kidney transplants. Transplantation 2006; 82: 36-42. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  9. Koo DD, Roberts IS, Quiroga I et al. C4d deposition in early allograft protocol biopsies. Transplantation 2004; 78: 398-403. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  10. Legendre C, Thervet E, Skhiri H et al. Histologic features of chronic allograft nephropathy revealed by protocol biopsies in kidney transplant recipients. Transplantation 1998; 65: 1506-1509. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  11. Matl I, Viklický O, Voska L et al. Naše první zkušenosti s protokolární biopsií transplantovaných ledvin. Čas Lék Čes 2004; 143: 253-256.
  12. Mengel M, Gwinner W, Schwarz A et al. Infiltrates in protocol biopsies from renal allografts. Amer J Transplantation 2007; 7: 356-365. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  13. Moreso F, Alperovich G, Fulladosa X et al. Histologic findings in protocol biopsies performed in stable renal allografts under different immunosuppressive schedules. Transplant Proc 2003; 35: 1666-1668. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  14. Nankivell BJ, Fenton-Lee CA, Kuypers DRJ et al. Effect of histological damage on long-term kidney transplant outcome. Transplantation 2001; 71: 515-523. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  15. Nankivell BJ, Borrows RJ, Fung CLS et al. Natural history, risk factors, and impact of subclinical rejection in kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 78: 242-249. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  16. Nankivell BJ, Chapman JR. The significance of subclinical rejection and the value of protocol biopsies. Amer J Transplantation 2006; 6: 2006-2012. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  17. Ponticelli C, Banfi G. The case against protocol kidney biopsies. Transplant Proc 2002; 34: 1716-1718. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  18. Racusen LC, Colvin RB, Solez K. Antibody-mediated rejection criteria - an addition to the Banff '97 classification of renal allograft rejection. Amer J Transplantation 2003; 3: 708-714. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  19. Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin B et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 1999; 55: 713-723. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  20. Rush D, Jeffery JT, Gough J. Sequential protocol biopsies in renal transplant patients. Transplantation 1995; 59: 511-514. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  21. Rush D, Nickerson P, Gough J et al. Beneficial effects of treatment of early subclinical rejection: a randomized study. J Am Soc Nephrol 1998; 9: 2129-2134. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  22. Scholten EM, Rowshani AT, Cremers S et al. Untreated rejection in 6-month protocol biopsy is not associated with fibrosis or with loss of graft function. J Am Soc Nephrol 2006; 17: 2622-2632. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  23. Schück O, Smrčková I, Teplan V et al. Nová metoda stanovení glomerulární filtrace na podkladě sérové koncentrace kreatininu, močoviny a albuminu (MDRD). Vnitř Lék 2004; 50: 507-509. Go to PubMed...
  24. Serón D, Moreso F, Ramón JM et al. Protocol renal allograft biopsies and the design of clinical trials aimed to prevent or treat chronic allograft nephropathy. Transplantation 2000; 69: 1849-1855. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  25. Sund S, Hovig T, Reisaeter A et al. Complement activation in early protocol kidney graft biopsies after living-donor transplantation. Transplantation 2003; 75: 1204-1213. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  26. Tichý T, Tichý M, Zadražil J et al. Histologické nálezy v protokolárních biopsiích transplantovaných ledvin. Čes Slov Patol 2003; 39: 11-16.
  27. Veronese FV, Noronha IL, Manfro RC et al. Protocol biopsies in renal transplant patients: three years' follow-up. Transplant Proc 2002; 34: 500-501. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...




Vnitřní lékařství

Madam, Sir,
please be aware that the website on which you intend to enter, not the general public because it contains technical information about medicines, including advertisements relating to medicinal products. This information and communication professionals are solely under §2 of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. Is active persons authorized to prescribe or supply (hereinafter expert).
Take note that if you are not an expert, you run the risk of danger to their health or the health of other persons, if you the obtained information improperly understood or interpreted, and especially advertising which may be part of this site, or whether you used it for self-diagnosis or medical treatment, whether in relation to each other in person or in relation to others.

I declare:

  1. that I have met the above instruction
  2. I'm an expert within the meaning of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. the regulation of advertising, as amended, and I am aware of the risks that would be a person other than the expert input to these sites exhibited


No

Yes

If your statement is not true, please be aware
that brings the risk of danger to their health or the health of others.