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

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Tavares da Silva, E
Data de Publicação: 2014
Outros Autores: Oliveira, R, Castelo, D, Marques, V, Sousa, V, Moreira, P, Simões, P, Bastos, C, Figueiredo, A, Mota, A
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1992
Resumo: Abstract 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.
id RCAP_a2f67767117f802802bfbbddf4a1f2b6
oai_identifier_str oai:rihuc.huc.min-saude.pt:10400.4/1992
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?Transplantação de RimBiopsiaPeríodo Pré-OperatórioSobrevivência de EnxertoAbstract 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.RIHUCTavares da Silva, EOliveira, RCastelo, DMarques, VSousa, VMoreira, PSimões, PBastos, CFigueiredo, AMota, A2016-12-12T15:43:01Z2014-122014-12-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1992engTransplant Proc. 2014 Dec;46(10):3330-4.10.1016/j.transproceed.2014.10.026info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-11T14:23:17Zoai:rihuc.huc.min-saude.pt:10400.4/1992Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T18:04:26.117843Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?
title Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?
spellingShingle Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?
Tavares da Silva, E
Transplantação de Rim
Biopsia
Período Pré-Operatório
Sobrevivência de Enxerto
title_short Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?
title_full Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?
title_fullStr Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?
title_full_unstemmed Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?
title_sort Pretransplant biopsy in expanded criteria donors: do we really need it?
author Tavares da Silva, E
author_facet Tavares da Silva, E
Oliveira, R
Castelo, D
Marques, V
Sousa, V
Moreira, P
Simões, P
Bastos, C
Figueiredo, A
Mota, A
author_role author
author2 Oliveira, R
Castelo, D
Marques, V
Sousa, V
Moreira, P
Simões, P
Bastos, C
Figueiredo, A
Mota, A
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv RIHUC
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Tavares da Silva, E
Oliveira, R
Castelo, D
Marques, V
Sousa, V
Moreira, P
Simões, P
Bastos, C
Figueiredo, A
Mota, A
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Transplantação de Rim
Biopsia
Período Pré-Operatório
Sobrevivência de Enxerto
topic Transplantação de Rim
Biopsia
Período Pré-Operatório
Sobrevivência de Enxerto
description Abstract 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.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-12
2014-12-01T00:00:00Z
2016-12-12T15:43:01Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1992
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1992
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Transplant Proc. 2014 Dec;46(10):3330-4.
10.1016/j.transproceed.2014.10.026
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1817554338167390208