Search

kidney transplantation from HCV-viremic donors into uninfected recipients is associated with excellent short-term outcomes. However, concerns regarding an increased risk for the development of de novo donor specific antibodies (DSA) and acute rejection have been raised in single center reports.a retrospective study of HCV-negative kidney- only transplant recipients between 2018 and 2020. Patients were grouped based on the donor HCV status into group 1; HCV-viremic donors, and group 2; HCV- negative donors. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), with weights derived from the propensity score, were used to estimate the effect of donors' HCV-viremia on the recipients. The primary objective was to compare the one-year incidence of de novo DSA. Secondary outcomes included group comparison of the incidence of biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR), one-year patient and allograft survival, and one-year renal allograft function.71 patients were included in the HCV NAT+ group, and 440 in the HCV- negative group. One-year incidence of de novo DSA was higher in the HCV NAT+ group in the IPTW weighted analysis (19% vs 9%, p = 0.02). In the unweighted analysis, BPAR occurred in 7% of recipients in the HCV NAT+ group, compared to 3% in the control group (P = 0.06). However, due to the low event rate in the in the IPTW weighted groups, a statistical significance test could not be performed. Average estimated GFR was higher in the HCV-viremic group at 3 months (61 vs 53 ml/min/1.73 m 2 p = 0.002), but comparable at 6 (59 vs 56 ml/min/1.73m 2, p = 0.31) and 12 months (60 vs 55 ml/min/1.73m 2, p = 0.07). Patient and allograft survival were comparable between the two groups.kidney transplant from HCV-viremic donors was associated with an increased risk for the development of post-transplant de novo DSA in the first year after transplantation, but no difference in patient and graft survival. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

OBJECTIVES Liver allograft shortage has necessitated greater use of donations after circulatory death. Limited data are available to compare recipients' health care utilization for donation after circulatory death versus brain death. MATERIALS AND METHODS Liver transplant data for our center from November 2016 until May 2019 were obtained (208 donations after brain death and 39 after circulatory death). We excluded patients

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis with valganciclovir is the standard of practice in most transplant centers, but treatment-related leukopenia can limit valganciclovir’s use. Therefore, we evaluated letermovir, a novel antiviral agent recently approved for use in hematopoietic cell transplant patients as CMV prophylaxis, in lung transplant recipients unable to tolerate valganciclovir due to severe leukopenia. We performed a retrospective analysis of all lung transplant patients at our center who received letermovir for CMV prophylaxis between 1 December 2018 and 1 January 2020. A repeated measures mixed model was used to analyze white blood cell (WBC) trends, and descriptive statistics were used to analyze secondary endpoints, including CMV DNAemia, renal function, immunosuppression dosing, and allograft function. Seventeen patients were administered letermovir during the study period due to valganciclovir-induced leukopenia (median WBC nadir 1.1 K/uL, range &lt, 0.30–2.19 K/uL). Median WBC improvement was noted in 15 (88.2%) patients after starting letermovir. Breakthrough CMV DNAemia necessitating treatment occurred in two patients, with one of the two cases being due to patient noncompliance. CMV resistance to letermovir was detected in two patients, necessitating a change to an alternative agent in one of these patients. No major side effects were reported in any patient. Letermovir is a generally safe and effective alternative for CMV prophylaxis in lung transplant recipients unable to tolerate valganciclovir due to leukopenia.

kidney transplantation from Hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremic donors to uninfected recipients is associated with excellent short-term outcomes. However, HCV viremia might be associated with an increased risk for post-transplant viral complications.We designed a retrospective study of HCV-negative kidney-only transplant recipients between 2018 and 2020. Recipients were grouped into group 1; HCV-negative donors, and group 2; HCV-viremic donors. Patients were matched 1:1 using propensity score. The primary objectives were to compare the incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia ≥ 200 ml/IU, and BK viremia ≥1000 copies/ml between the groups. Secondary outcomes included group comparison of CMV disease, BK viremia ≥10 000 copies/ml, and 1-year patient and allograft survival.The study included 634 patients in group 1, and 71 patients in group 2. Sixty-five pairs of patients were matched. Incidence of CMV viremia (33.3% vs. 40.0%, p = .4675), and BK viremia (15.9% vs. 27.7%, p = .1353) did not differ significantly between groups in the matched cohort. Incidence of CMV disease (81.0% vs. 76.9%, p = 1.000), and BK viremia ≥10 000 copies/ml (9.5% vs. 16.9%, p = .2987) were comparable between groups. There was no difference in the 1-year patient or allograft survival between groups.kidney transplant from HCV-viremic donors is not associated with increased risk for BK or CMV viremia.

Use of livers donated after circulatory death (DCD) is one way to expand the donor pool. Our center has aggressively incorporated use of DCD liver grafts into practice. We examined our center and national outcomes as well as national DCD liver utilization.Liver transplants performed at our center and nationally from 11/2016 through 9/2020 were compared. Primary outcomes were patient and graft survival, and national DCD liver utilization.For our center, DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) donors were similar except DCD donors were younger (37 vs 40 years; p 0.05). Recipient Na-MELD (20 vs 24; p 0.0001) and cold ischemia time (4.63 vs 5.18 h; p 0.05) were lower in DCD recipients. There were no significant differences in 1-year patient and graft survival between DCD and DBD liver recipients locally. Nationally, there was a difference in 1-year graft survival year (89.4% vs 92.4%, p 0.0001) but patient survival was similar between groups. The proportion of DCD livers recovered and transplanted widely varied among organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and transplant centers.Similar outcomes for DCD and DBD liver recipients should encourage centers and OPOs nationwide to expand utilization of DCD livers.

Background Hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) parameters are influenced by donor variables which further affect recipient outcome. Interplay between these parameters can help to predict kidney performance on pump and the long term outcome. Methods All the kidneys transplanted at our center between May 2013 through November 2017 were included in the study. Donor and recipient data was obtained from internal database. Multiple logistic regression models with backward selection were used to determine significant donor and pump variables. Results Donor BMI, KDPI, age and donor sex had a significant association with pump flow. Donor sex, donor type, KDPI and age had significant effect on RI. Diastolic pressure and KDPI were significantly associated with DGF. Duration on pump, KDPI, flow, donor creatinine and type of donor were significantly associated with day 5 creatinine. KDPI was significantly associated with Day 365 creatinine. Conclusion HMP effects early graft function while the long term function depends on donor parameters.

The use of diabetic kidneys is increasing worldwide with better outcome than being on waitlist and possible reversal of diabetic changes in transplanted kidneys. But particular caution is warranted in diabetic donor-recipient combination. Total 1223 deceased donor kidney transplants were performed at our center between 2008 and 2018. 689 from non-diabetic donor (NDD) to non-diabetic recipient, 400 from non-diabetic donor to diabetic recipient, 97 from diabetic to non-diabetic recipient, and 32 from diabetic donor (DD) to diabetic recipient. The DD was older than NDDs (median age 48 vs 39 years, P < 0.0001). DD had higher BMI (35.6 vs 26.9, P < 0.0001), higher KDPI (74% vs 37%, P < 0.0001), and higher terminal creatinine (1.10 mg/dl vs 0.95 mg/dl, p 0.0046) than the NDD. Diabetes recipients were comparatively older (57 vs 54, P < 0.001). DD recipients had higher serum creatinine at 6 months (1.70 vs 1.50 mg/dl, p 0.00304) and 2 years post-transplant (1.70 vs 1.50 mg/dl P < 0.0002). DD recipients had more favorable end CPRA than NDD recipients (77.5% at 0% vs 67.4% at 0, P = 0.0074). Ten-year patient and graft survival was best in NDD-recipient pair and worse in DD-recipient pair. Diabetic donor kidneys to diabetic recipients have lower 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival.

Results Conclusion  B-scan ultrasound has been used to measure the diameter of the optic nerve sheath in the setting of elevated intracranial hypertension.[1,2]  No previous studies have compared B-scan ultrasound measurement of optic nerve sheath diameter in pediatric patients with measurements obtained by MRI in the same patient on the same day.  The purpose of this study is to determine the correlation of B-scan ultrasound optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) measurements with high resolution orbital MRI in pediatric patients.