Search

Purpose In the presence of static cadaveric donation rates, renal transplantation relies increasingly on living donors. ABO blood group incompatibility has traditionally prevented many potential living donors from donating because risk of hyperacute rejection/antibody-mediated rejection (AbMR) with graft loss, with or without need for concurrent splenectomy and intense immunosuppression. Pre- and post-transplant antibody removal and monitoring anti-blood group antibody levels have allowed this to become a clinical possibility. We report results on the first ten ABO incompatible kidney transplants performed in Australia at The Royal Melbourne and Melbourne Private Hospitals, without splenectomy. Method All patients underwent transplantation after two weeks of Mycophenolate Mofetil, and antibody removal (plasma exchanges or Glycosorb columns). Three patients received Rituximab pre-transplant. Standard immunosuppression was commenced at transplantation. All patients, except one low-titre A2/O patient, received post transplant antibody removal. None underwent splenectomy. Results Thirty day mortality was zero, and at median six-month follow-up, there have been no episodes of rejection or opportunistic infections. All transplants are currently functioning. Two patients developed urosepsis, one post-transplant diabetes. Two patients required reoperation and ureteric reimplantation for ureteric leakage. Conclusion ABO incompatible transplantation can be performed without excessive immunosuppression and with low morbidity. Preservation of the spleen reduces operative risk, post-operative complications and the added vulnerability to infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Epidemiologic data show an association between the prevalence and severity of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and the incidence and stage of chronic kidney disease (CKD); furthermore, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)-related cirrhosis has a higher risk of renal failure, a greater necessity for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation, and a poorer renal outcome than cirrhosis of other etiologies even after simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation. These data suggest that NASH and CKD share common proinflammatory and profibrotic mechanisms of progression, which are targeted incompletely by current treatments. We reviewed therapeutic approaches to late preclinical/early clinical stage of development in NASH and/or CKD, focusing on anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic treatments, which could slow the progression of both disease conditions. Renin inhibitors and angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 activators are new renin-angiotensin axis modulators that showed incremental advantages over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin-receptor blockers in preclinical models. Novel, potent, and selective agonists of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors and of farnesoid X receptor, designed to overcome limitations of older compounds, showed promising results in clinical trials. Epigenetics, heat stress response, and common effectors of redox regulation also were subjected to intensive research, and the gut was targeted by several approaches, including synbiotics, antilipopolysaccharide antibodies, Toll-like receptor-4 antagonists, incretin mimetics, and fibroblast growth factor 19 analogs. Promising anti-inflammatory therapies include inhibitors of NOD-like receptor family, pyrin domain containing 3 inflammasome, of nuclear factor-κB, and of vascular adhesion protein-1, chemokine antagonists, and solithromycin, and approaches targeting common profibrogenic pathways operating in the liver and the kidney include galectin-3 antagonists, and inhibitors of rho-associated protein kinase and of epidermal growth factor activation. The evidence, merits, and limitations of each approach for the treatment of NASH and CKD are discussed., (Copyright © 2017 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a risk factor for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). ESRD or CVD develop in a substantial proportion of patients with CKD receiving standard-of-care therapy, and mortality in CKD remains unchanged. These data suggest that key pathogenetic mechanisms underlying CKD progression go unaffected by current treatments. Growing evidence suggests that nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and CKD share common pathogenetic mechanisms and potential therapeutic targets. Common nutritional conditions predisposing to both NAFLD and CKD include excessive fructose intake and vitamin D deficiency. Modulation of nuclear transcription factors regulating key pathways of lipid metabolism, inflammation, and fibrosis, including peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors and farnesoid X receptor, is advancing to stage III clinical development. The relevance of epigenetic regulation in the pathogenesis of NAFLD and CKD is also emerging, and modulation of microRNA21 is a promising therapeutic target. Although single antioxidant supplementation has yielded variable results, modulation of key effectors of redox regulation and molecular sensors of intracellular energy, nutrient, or oxygen status show promising preclinical results. Other emerging therapeutic approaches target key mediators of inflammation, such as chemokines; fibrogenesis, such as galectin-3; or gut dysfunction through gut microbiota manipulation and incretin-based therapies. Furthermore, NAFLD per se affects CKD through lipoprotein metabolism and hepatokine secretion, and conversely, targeting the renal tubule by sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors can improve both CKD and NAFLD. Implications for the treatment of NAFLD and CKD are discussed in light of this new therapeutic armamentarium., (© 2016 by the American Diabetes Association.)

With increasing success in overcoming the immunological and infectious challenges accompanying solid organ transplantation, susceptibility to post-transplant diabetes and cardiovascular disease has assumed increasing importance. Although some guidance is available from diabetes-related literature pertaining to the general population, some aspects are unique to solid organ allograft recipients. Both insulin resistance and β-cell dysfunction are generally agreed to contribute to development and manifestation of post-transplant diabetes, but controversy continues about which is most important and to what extent post-transplant diabetes is a distinct entity or simply a variant of type 2 diabetes with transplant-specific components. The optimum method and timing for detection and diagnosis of post-transplant diabetes remains an area of uncertainty. However, the greatest needs are to: address the absence of contemporary data for incidence and clinical outcomes associated with post-transplant diabetes; establish the role of glycaemic control; and assess the role of new diabetic therapies in prevention and management of post-transplant diabetes. We place the present knowledge base in the context of other advances in transplantation, challenge some existing ideas, and examine the potential role of emerging diabetes therapies. In highlighting existing deficiencies, we hope to provide direction for future research that will ultimately reduce incidence and improve management of post-transplant diabetes., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: For dialysis patients with a cancer history, a period of surveillance is generally recommended before listing for transplantation. However, the outcomes of patients with cancer recurrence and/or a second primary cancer after transplantation are unknown., Aim: To determine the prognosis of kidney transplant recipients who developed cancer after transplantation and whether this varied with cancer types (first cancer, recurrence, second primary cancer)., Methods: Using data from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, we compared the cancer-specific and all-cause mortality among recipients with different cancer types using adjusted Cox proportional hazard models., Results: Of the 21,415 recipients transplanted between 1965 and 2012, 3% (651 of 21,415) had a previous cancer history. A total of 2840 (13%) recipients developed cancer after the first transplant, of whom 2760 (97.2%) developed a first cancer, 23 (0.8%) experienced cancer recurrence, and 57 (2%) developed a second primary cancer. There were no significant differences in the risks of cancer-specific and all-cause mortality between recipients who developed their first cancer after transplant, those with cancer recurrence (adjusted hazard ratios [aHRs], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.38-1.67; P = 0.54 and aHRs, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.45-1.66; P = 0.66, respectively) and recipients who developed a second primary cancer after transplantation (aHRs, 1.01; 95%CI, 0.63-1.62; P = 0.95 and aHRs, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.79-1.69; P = 0.45, respectively)., Conclusion: Among patients with a previous history of malignancy, recurrent and second primary cancers are infrequent after renal transplantation. A history of previous malignancy does not have an additive effect on the cancer-specific and overall survival of kidney transplant recipients who develop cancer.