Search

Aim: In India, 85% of organ donations are from living donors and 15% are from deceased donors. One‐third of living donors were rejected because of ABO or HLA incompatibility. Kidney exchange transplantation (KET) is a cost‐effective and legal strategy to increase living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) by 25%–35%. Methods: We report our experience with 539 KET cases and the evolution of a single‐centre program to increase the use of LDKT. Results: Between January 2000 and 13 March, 2024, 1382 deceased donor kidney transplantations and 5346 LDKT were performed at our centre, including 10% (n = 539) from KET. Of the 539 KET, 80.9% (n = 436) were ABO incompatible pairs, 11.1% (n = 60) were compatible pairs, and 8% (n = 43) were sensitized pairs. There were 75% 2‐way (n = 2 × 202 = 404), 16.2% 3‐way (n = 3 × 29 = 87), 3% 4‐way (n = 4 × 4 = 16), 1.8% 5‐way (n = 5 × 2 = 10), 2.2% 6‐way (n = 6 × 2 = 12), and 1.8% 10‐way KET (n = 10 × 1 = 10). Of the recipients 81.2% (n = 438) were male and 18.8% (n = 101) were female, while of the donors, 78.5% (n = 423) were female and 21.5% (n = 116) were male. All donors were near relatives; wives (54%, n = 291) and mothers (20%, n = 108) were the most common donors. At a median follow‐up of 8.2 years, patient survival, death censored graft survival, acute rejection, and median serum creatinine levels of functioning grafts were 81.63% (n = 440), 91% (n = 494), 9.8% (n = 53) and 1.3 mg/dL respectively. We credited the success to maintaining a registry of incompatible pairs, high‐volume LDKT programs, non‐anonymous allocation and teamwork. Conclusion: This is the largest single‐centre KET program in Asia. We report the challenges and solutions to replicate our success in other KET programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: There is a wide discrepancy between demand for and availability of donor organs for organ transplantation. There is no study on awareness about organ donation in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients in India. Objectives: To study the awareness and beliefs towards organ donation in CKD patients on hemodialysis in western India. Patients and Methods: Authors conducted a cross sectional study among 85 CKD patients to evaluate knowledge about and attitude towards organ donation at a tertiary hospital. Results: Age of respondents ranged from 15 to 75 years. All were aware of term organ donation and cadaver donation. About 47% of people heard about organ donation through hospital or from doctor. Strikingly, radio was not the source of information to any of the respondents, despite radio being one of the most common medium of mass communication. Almost one third of patients were unaware about any legislation regarding organ donation. All respondents felt that organs should go to the needy irrespective of their religion. About 70% feel that medical colleges should make decisions about organ donation in case of unclaimed dead bodies. About 31.76% believe that there is a danger that donated organs could be misused, abused or misappropriated. Conclusion: Our study shows about 31.76% of our participants believe that there is a danger that donated organs could be misused, abused or misappropriated. There seems to be paucity of information and awareness regarding organ donation among CKD patients. Mass media, religious and political leaders may be involved to maximize awareness about organ donation.

Epstein syndrome constitutes macrothrombocytopenia without neutrophil inclusion bodies along with deafness and renal failure. A diagnosis of Epstein syndrome was made in a 17 year-old-male patient with macrothrombopathic thrombocytopenia, renal failure and sensorineural hearing loss. Our patient is unique as he presented with rapidly progressive renal failure and developed chronic kidney disease in second decade of life with no symptomatic hearing loss or bleeding tendency. Epstein syndrome needs to be differentiated from Alport syndrome which is more common disease with similar clinical presentation.

Common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) usually manifests in the second or third decade of life with recurrent bacterial infections and hypoglobulinemia. Secondary renal amyloidosis with history of pulmonary tuberculosis is rare in CVID, although T cell dysfunction has been reported in few CVID patients. A 40-year-old male was admitted to our hospital with a 3-month history of recurrent respiratory infections and persistent pitting pedal edema. His past history revealed 3 to 5 episodes of recurrent respiratory tract infections and diarrhoea each year since last 20 years. He had been successfully treated for sputum positive pulmonary tuberculosis 8 years back. Laboratory studies disclosed high erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), hypoalbuminemia and nephrotic range proteinuria. Serum immunoglobulin levels were low. CD4/CD8 ratio and CD3 level was normal. C3 and C4 complement levels were normal. Biopsy revealed amyloid A (AA) positive secondary renal amyloidosis. Glomeruli showed variable widening of mesangial regions with deposition of periodic schiff stain (PAS) pale positive of pink matrix showing apple green birefringence on Congo-red staining. Immunohistochemistry was AA stain positive. Immunofluorescence microscopy revealed no staining with anti-human IgG, IgM, IgA, C3, C1q, kappa and lambda light chains antisera. Patient was treated symptomatically for respiratory tract infection and was discharged with low dose angiotensin receptor blocker. An old treated tuberculosis and chronic inflammation due to recurrent respiratory tract infections were thought to be responsible for AA amyloidosis. Thus pulmonary tuberculosis should be considered in differential diagnosis of secondary causes of AA renal amyloidosis in patients of CVID especially in endemic settings.

Vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) has been recently linked with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines. It becomes crucial for the transplant communities to have a rigorous approach for accepting VITT donors, as the reports of such transplantation have been associated with thrombotic complications, graft loss, and deaths. The magnitude of facing a VITT donor in transplantation practices is unknown and also the management protocol. However, as per the limited data, it is better to avoid such transplants, and in the case of emergency transplants, the risk-benefit ratio should be weighed. All transplantation from VITT donors should be appropriately counseled before procurement. The organs should undergo deliberate examination for functionality by clinical, laboratory, and radiological parameters. In doubtful cases, a preimplantation biopsy is mandated to rule out any thrombosis. VITT donors are suggested to be treated with newer oral anti-coagulation and intravenous immunoglobulin. Platelet transfusion is best avoided in a VITT donor. There is no established protocol for any modification in surgical procedure, anesthesia, or immunosuppressive medicines in the recipients. The recipients should undergo extensive clinical and laboratory monitoring for any possible complications. No prophylactic therapy is recommended at present but candidates with a history of any COVID-19 vaccine within 30 days, should be avoided. In summary, the evidence for diagnosis and management of VITT donors is based only on a few reports, but with current knowledge, it is advisable to take a multidisciplinary approach to assess all benefits and risks before accepting or discarding organs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shortage of organ donors is the most important obstacle standing in the way of lifesaving organ transplantation in a myriad of patients suffering from end-stage organ failure. It is vital that the transplant societies and associated appropriate authorities develop strategies to overcome the unmet needs for organ donation. The power of prominent social media (SoMe) platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, which reach millions of people, can increase awareness, provide education, and may ameliorate the pessimism toward organ donation among the general population. Additionally, public solicitation of organs may be helpful for waitlisted candidates for organ transplantation, who cannot find a suitable donor among near relations. However, the use of SoMe for organ donation has several ethical issues. This review attempts to highlight the advantages and limitations of using social media in the context of organ donation for transplantation. Some suggestions on the best utilization of social media platforms for organ donation while balancing ethical considerations have been highlighted here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

India is a major contributor to the worldwide distribution off Plasmodium vivax malaria (1). Severe and complicated malaria is usually caused by the P. falciparum parasite, but P. vivax, usually [...]

Introduction: The use of remdesivir is not recommended in patients with end-stage renal disease with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection unless potential advantage offset disadvantage due to limited safety data. Our objective was to assess the safety of remdesivir in patients with end-stage renal failure and evaluate the outcome of this vulnerable group. Methodology: We carried out a retrospective observational study in dialysis-dependent end-stage renal disease patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection who received a standard 5-day course of remdesivir (powder form) from June 2020 to December 2020. Oxygen requirement, hemogram, inflammatory markers, and liver function tests before and after remdesivir treatment were compared. Result: We found thirty-nine such patients with mean age of patients 58.79 ± 12.13 years. Diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiac diseases were present in 58.97, 87.17, and 23.07% of patients, respectively. Mean oxygen saturation on admission was 85.41% (±7.73). There were no events of hepatotoxicity, altered behavior, or infusion reaction. There was statistically significant improvement in total leukocyte count, absolute lymphocyte counts, and C-reactive protein (p value <0.001, 0.01, and 0.02, respectively) post remdesivir treatment. A total of 60% of patients had improved oxygenation while 13% of patients had no change in oxygen requirement after completion of remdesivir course. Mortality in our study was 28.21%. We did not find any significant benefit of early remdesivir administration (3--6 days of illness) on mortality or days of hospitalization. Conclusion: The use of remdesivir in end-stage kidney disease is safe. Improvement in oxygenation was significant when baseline oxygen requirement was less. It requires prospective controlled trials with larger population to assess its impact on mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Chronic kidney disease patients on hemodialysis (CKD-5D) are among the worst hit by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Need to travel for dialysis, comorbidities, and immunosuppressive state put them at risk of severe disease and poor outcomes. We report our experience of COVID-19 in a cohort of CKD-5D from a public sector tertiary-care center from western India. Material and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the records of 58 CKD-5D patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to our COVID-19 hospital. Suspected COVID-19, acute kidney injury (AKI), or AKI on CKD were excluded. We studied the clinical, demographic, radiological, and laboratory profiles; treatment; and outcomes of the patients. We assessed the potential clinical and laboratory parameters to predict mortality. Results: The mean age of the patients was 48.7 ± 16.9 years, with 55% males. Comorbidities included hypertension (65%), diabetes (19%), and cardiovascular disease (15.5%). The presenting features included fever (69%), respiratory distress (50%), upper respiratory symptoms (36%), and diarrhea (13%). Five (8.6%) were asymptomatic. Bilateral infiltrates on chest imaging were the commonest radiological pattern. The patients were managed with oxygenation, hydroxychloroquine, steroids, anticoagulation, remdesivir, and favipiravir. Twenty-two (37.9%) patients died, predominantly due to respiratory failure. Disease severity and C-reactive protein (CRP) above 175 mg/L at admission were the only parameters predictive of mortality. Conclusion: CKD-5D patients with COVID-19 were less likely to present with the classical syndrome of fever and respiratory distress compared with reports from the general population and had higher mortality. Only disease severity and high CRP (>175 mg/L) were predictive of mortality in our cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Graft loss and rejections (acute/chronic) continue to remain important concerns in long-term outcomes in kidney transplant despite newer immunosuppressive regimens and increased use of induction agents. Global guidelines identify the risk factors and suggest a framework for management of patients at different risk levels for rejection; however, these are better applicable to deceased donor transplants. Their applicability in Indian scenario (predominantly live donor program) could be a matter of debate. Therefore, a panel of experts discussed the current clinical practice and adaptability of global recommendations to Indian settings. They also took a survey to define risk factors in kidney transplants and provide direction toward evidence- and clinical experience-based risk stratification for donor/recipient and transplant-related characteristics, with a focus on living donor transplantations. Several recipient related factors (dialysis, comorbidities, and age, donor-specific antibodies [DSAs]), donor-related factors (age, body mass index, type -- living or deceased) and transplantation related factors (cold ischemia time [CIT], number of transplantations) were assessed. The experts suggested that immunological conflict should be avoided by performing cytotoxic cross match, flow cross match in all patients and DSA-(single antigen bead) whenever considered clinically relevant. HLA mismatches, presence of DSA, along with donor/recipient age, CIT, etc., were associated with increased risk of rejection. Furthermore, the panel agreed that the risk of rejection in living donor transplant is not dissimilar to deceased donor recipients. The experts also suggested that induction immunosuppression could be individualized based on the risk stratification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Organ donation following circulatory determination of death (DCDD) has contributed significantly to the donor pool in several countries. In India, majority of deceased donations happen following brain death (BD). While existing legislation allows for DCDD, there have been only few reports of kidney transplantation following DCDD from India. This document, prepared by a multidisciplinary group of experts, reviews international best practices in DCDD and outlines the path for DCDD in India. Ethical, medical, legal, economic, procedural, and logistic challenges unique to India have been addressed. The practice of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment (WLST) in India, laid down by the Supreme Court of India, is time-consuming, possible only in patients in a permanent vegetative state, and too cumbersome for day-to-day practice. In patients where continued medical care is futile, the procedure for WLST is described. In controlled DCDD (category-III), decision for WLST is independent of and delinked from the subsequent possibility of organ donation. Families that are inclined toward organ donation are explained the procedure including the timing and location of WLST, consent for antemortem measures, no-touch period, and the possibility of stand-down and return to the intensive care unit (ICU) without donation. In donation following neurologic determination of death (DNDD), if cardiac arrest occurs during the process of BD declaration, the protocol for DCDD category-IV has been described in detail. In DCDD category-V, organ donation may be possible following unsuccessful cardiopulmonary resuscitation of cardiac arrest in the ICU. An outline of organ-specific requisites for kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplantation following DCDD and techniques, such as normothermic regional perfusion (nRP) and ex vivo machine perfusion, has been provided. The outcomes of transplantation following DCDD are comparable to those following DBDD or living donor transplantation. Documents and checklists necessary for successful execution of DCDD in India are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a scarcity of data comparing the consequences of first and second COVID‐19 waves on kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) in India. Methods: We conducted a single‐centre retrospective study of 259 KTRs with COVID‐19 to compare first wave (March 15–December 31 2020, n = 157) and second wave (April 1–May 31 2021, n = 102). Results: KTRs during second wave were younger (43 vs. 40 years; p‐value.04) and also included paediatric patients (0 vs. 5.9%; p‐value.003). Symptoms were milder during the second wave (45 vs. 62.7%; p‐value.007); COVID‐19 positive patients had less frequent cough (32 vs. 13.8%; p‐value.001), fever was less frequent (58 vs. 37%; p‐value.001), and we observed fewer co‐morbidities (11 vs. 20.6%; p‐value.04). The percentages of neutrophils (77 vs. 83%; p‐value.001) and serum ferritin (439 vs. 688; p‐value.0006) were higher during second wave, while lymphocyte counts were reduced (20 vs. 14%; p‐value.0001). Hydroxychloroquine (11 vs. 0%; p‐value.0001) and tocilizumab (7 vs. 0%; p‐value.004) were more frequently prescribed during first wave, while utilization of dexamethasone (6 vs. 27%; p‐value.0001) and remdesivir (47 vs. 65%; p‐value.03) increased during the second wave. Mucormycosis (1.3 vs. 10%; p‐value.01) and ICU admissions (20 vs. 37.2%; p‐value.002) were more frequent during second wave. The 28‐day mortality rate (9.6 vs. 10%; p‐value 1) was not different. Conclusions: There has been a different clinical spectrum of COVID‐19 amongst KTR with similar mortality between the two waves at a large Indian transplant centre. SUMMARY AT A GLANCE: A large single centre study from India reporting on the health outcomes of COVID‐19 infected kidney transplant recipients during the two waves of between 2020 and 2021. The rate of intensive care admission was more frequent during the second wave of infection although mortality rates were similar in both waves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Telemedicine represents an innovative but untested approach to maintain patient care and reduce the risk of COVID-19 exposure to patients, health-care workers, and the public. In this study, we evaluated the applicability and efficacy of telemedicine in a kidney transplant recipient (KTR) cohort in COVID 19 era. Materials and Methods: An observational cohort study was conducted at a tertiary-care public-sector kidney disease institute in western India between March and September 2020. We evaluated the reasons, modes, and outcomes of patient contacts by telemedicine in the KTR cohort. We also evaluated the utility of telemedicine across three age groups. Results: Of 840 participants, whose mean age was 38.78 ± 12.39 years, male to female ratio was 4:1. The most common mode of communication was WhatsApp (653, 77.7%) followed by in-person surrogates (126, 15%). Acceptability of telemedicine was significantly better in younger and middle-age groups (P < 0.00001) compared to the elderly. Request for drug delivery (n = 756) was the most common reason for contact overall and managed through postal parcels. KTRs (n = 200) and donors (n = 75) were evaluated for medical illnesses. The most common medical reasons for contact were for febrile illness (n = 120) and graft dysfunction (n = 60). COVID-19-related disease was diagnosed and managed in 80 KTRs and 2 donors. COVID-19 updates were given to all contacts. Conclusion: Telemedicine is underutilized in the care of the KTR cohort. Telemedicine can be used across all ages although it's best suited for young and middle age groups. The impact of telemedicine on short- and long-term patient outcomes is unclear and warrants further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine efficacy, especially against severe disease is known to wane over time. We examined current knowledge of COVID-19 vaccine booster dose in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR). We have systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and Google Scholar with the following MeSH terms: "SARS-CoV-2 vaccine," or "COVID-19 vaccine," and "organ transplantation" and "booster" or "third dose." This review article examines a number of studies including guidelines from professional societies examining the safety as well as increased immunogenicity of a booster dose among SOTR. Equitable distribution of vaccines across the globe is the need of the hour. While some countries are well into the booster dose phase, the lower-income countries are languishing behind with primary doses for their health workers. Available reports suggest less efficacy of COVID-19 vaccine in SOTR suggesting booster dose for them. Several studies highlighted the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines booster dose among SOTR. SOTR should also continue to adhere to all safety and COVID-19 appropriate behaviors. There is a growing need for alternative strategies to improve protection. As Omicron cases rise around the world, India announced that COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 15-18 years and "precautionary (booster) doses" would be administered to healthcare and frontline workers and people above 60 years of age with comorbidities from January 2022. In near future, with increased availability of vaccinations, all SOTR will have access to booster dose in a phased manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the context of organ donation, COVID-19 vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is important as there is an ethical dilemma in utilizing versus discarding organs from potential donors succumbing to VITT. This consensus statement is an attempt by the National Organ and Tissue Transplant Organization (NOTTO) apex technical committees, India, to formulate the guidelines for deceased organ donation and transplantation in relation to VITT to help in appropriate decision-making. VITT is a rare entity, but a meticulous approach should be taken by the organ procurement organization's (OPO) team in screening such cases. All such cases must be strictly notified to the national authorities (NOTTO) as a resource for data collection and ensuring compliance with protocols in the management of adverse events following immunization. Organs from any patient who developed thrombotic events up to 4 weeks after adenoviral vector-based vaccination should be considered to be linked to VITT and investigated appropriately. The viability of the organs must be thoroughly checked by the OPO, and the final decision in relation to organ use should be decided by the expert committee of the OPO team consisting of a virologist, a hematologist, and a treating team. Considering the organ shortage, in case of suspected/confirmed VITT, both clinicians and patients should consider the risk-benefit equation based on limited experience. An appropriate written informed consent of potential recipients and family members should be obtained before the transplantation of organs from suspected or proven VITT donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inpatient COVID-19 outcomes in solid organ transplant recipients compared to non-solid organ transplant patients: a retrospective cohort. A case report of successful kidney transplantation from a deceased donor with terminal COVID-19-related lung damage: Ongoing dilemma between discarding and accepting organs in COVID-19 era! With ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the scenarios, dealing with donors and recipients recovered from COVID-19 would be a general norm. Dear Editors, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection is now emerging with a new challenge of transplantation from coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-recovered donors. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV2) infection has drastically impacted the transplant communities. Remdesivir (RDV) has shown some promising results in coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) albeit with low certainty. Data in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are still lacking. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort of 57 moderate to severe COVID‐19 positive KTR in a single center who received RDV as a part of COVID‐19 management. No dose adjustments were done. The outcomes were measured as acute kidney injury (AKI) recovery; liver function tests abnormalities; other side effects; graft loss and death. Results: The median (inter‐quartile range) age of presentation was 44 (31‐51) years. The duration from onset of symptoms to RDV initiation was 6 (5‐7) days. Thirty‐two (56%) cases received RDV on the day of admission. Forty‐six (81%) cases were on oxygen support upon initiation of RDV. Thirty‐eight (66.6%) cases had acute kidney injury on admission. The median baseline, admission, and 28‐day follow‐up serum creatinine of the cohort were 1.59 (1.1‐2.1), 2.13 (1.3‐3.1), and 1.58 (1.05‐2.1) mg/dl, respectively. A total of 8(14%) cases died in the study with 1 (1.7%) graft loss. All those cases that died were on oxygen therapy at the time of initiation of RDV. No liver function derangements or any other major adverse events with the drug were reported. Conclusion: RDV therapy is safe and clinically feasible in renal transplant recipients as seen in our cohort. Larger clinical registries and randomized clinical trials should be conducted to further explore the efficacy in transplant recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]