Search

Contains fulltext : 295017.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The Dutch university medical centres (UMC's) are on the forefront when it comes to validation, implementation and research of telemonitoring. To aid the UMC's in their effort, the Dutch Government has supported the UMC's by fostering the 'Citrien eHealth program'. This program aims at nationwide implementation and upscaling of telemonitoring via a collaborative network. To quantify the success of this program, this study aims to provide insights into the current adoption of telemonitoring by health care professionals (HCP) within Dutch UMC's. METHODS: Based on the evaluation framework as adapted from the Normalization Process Theory (NPT) a cross-sectional study was conducted in all Dutch UMC's. Thirty healthcare professionals (HCPs) per UMC were invited to complete the 23-item Normalization MeAsure Development (NoMAD) questionnaire, a tool to assess the degree of normalisation of telemonitoring. RESULTS: The over-all response rate was 52.4% (124/240). Over 80% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they understand how telemonitoring affects the nature of their work, with a mean score of 1.49 (N = 117, SD 0.74). HCPs reported to believe telemonitoring will become a normal part of their work in the near future (N = 124, mean = 8.67, SD = 1.38). Using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, the difference between current practise and future use of telemonitoring predicts to be statistically significant (Z = - 7.505, p ≤ 0.001). Mean scores for appropriate training and sufficient resources are relatively low (2.39 and 2.70 respectively), indicating a barrier for collective action. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to assess the implementation of telemonitoring as standard practise across Dutch UMCs. The HCPs in this study are the frontrunners, believing that telemonitoring will become standard practise in the future despite the fact that it is currently not. Based on the results of this study, both educational and implementation strategies

Contains fulltext : 204258.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: There is no consensus in the literature on the interpretation of single-antigen bead positive for a specific HLA antibody. METHODS: To inform the debate, we studied the relationship between various single-antigen bead positivity algorithms and the impact of resulting donor-specific HLA antibody (DSA) positivity on long-term kidney graft survival in 3237 deceased-donor transplants. RESULTS: First, we showed that the interassay variability can be greatly reduced when working with signal-to-background ratios instead of absolute median fluorescence intensities (MFIs). Next, we determined pretransplant DSA using various MFI cutoffs, signal-to-background ratios, and combinations thereof. The impact of the various cutoffs was studied by comparing the graft survival between the DSA-positive and DSA-negative groups. We did not observe a strong impact of various cutoff levels on 10-year graft survival. A stronger relationship between the cutoff level and 1-year graft survival for DSA-positive transplants was found when using signal-to-background ratios, most pronounced for the bead of the same HLA locus with lowest MFI taken as background. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to pretransplant risk stratification, we propose a signal-to-background ratio-6 (using the bead of the same HLA-locus with lowest MFI as background) cutoff of 15 combined with an MFI cutoff of 500, resulting in 8% and 21% lower 1- and 10-year graft survivals, respectively, for 8% DSA-positive transplants.

Contains fulltext : 208426.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), Whereas regular allocation avoids unacceptable mismatches on the donor organ, allocation to highly sensitized patients within the Eurotransplant Acceptable Mismatch (AM) program is based on the patient's HLA phenotype plus acceptable antigens. These are HLA antigens to which the patient never made antibodies, as determined by extensive laboratory testing. AM patients have superior long-term graft survival compared with highly sensitized patients in regular allocation. Here, we questioned whether the AM program also results in lower rejection rates. From the PROCARE cohort, consisting of all Dutch kidney transplants in 1995-2005, we selected deceased donor single transplants with a minimum of 1 HLA mismatch and determined the cumulative 6-month rejection incidence for patients in AM or regular allocation. Additionally, we determined the effect of minimal matching criteria of 1 HLA-B plus 1 HLA-DR, or 2 HLA-DR antigens on rejection incidence. AM patients showed significantly lower rejection rates than highly immunized patients in regular allocation, comparable to nonsensitized patients, independent of other risk factors for rejection. In contrast to highly sensitized patients in regular allocation, minimal matching criteria did not affect rejection rates in AM patients. Allocation based on acceptable antigens leads to relatively low-risk transplants for highly sensitized patients with rejection rates similar to those of nonimmunized individuals.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Pre-transplant donor-specific anti-human leucocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies (DSAs) are associated with impaired kidney graft survival while the clinical relevance of non-donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (nDSAs) is more controversial. The aim of the present paired kidney graft study was to compare the clinical relevance of DSAs and nDSAs. METHODS: To eliminate donor and era-dependent factors, a post hoc paired kidney graft analysis was performed as part of a Dutch multicentre study evaluating all transplantations between 1995 and 2005 with available pre-transplant serum samples. Anti-HLA antibodies were detected with a Luminex single-antigen bead assay. RESULTS: Among 3237 deceased donor transplantations, we identified 115 recipient pairs receiving a kidney from the same donor with one recipient being DSA positive and the other without anti-HLA antibodies. Patients with pre-transplant DSAs had a significantly lower 10-year death-censored graft survival (55% versus 82%, P=0.0001). We identified 192 pairs with one recipient as nDSA positive (against Class I and/or II) and the other without anti-HLA antibodies. For the patients with nDSAs against either Class I or II, graft survival did not significantly differ compared with patients without anti-HLA antibodies (74% versus 77%, P = 0.79). Only in patients with both nDSAs Class I and II was there a trend towards a lower graft survival (58%, P = 0.06). Lastly, in a small group of 42 recipient pairs, 10-year graft survival in recipients with DSAs was 49% compared with 68% in recipients with nDSAs (P=0.11). CONCLUSION: This paired kidney analysis confirms that the presence of pre-transplant DSAs in deceased donor transplantations is a risk marker for graft loss, whereas nDSAs in general are not associated with a lower graft survival. Subgroup analysis indicated that only in broadly sensitized patients with nDSAs against Class I and II, nDSAs may be a risk marker for graft loss in the long term.

Contains fulltext : 215571.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), The clinical significance of non-HLA antibodies on renal allograft survival is a matter of debate, due to differences in reported results and lack of large-scale studies incorporating analysis of multiple non-HLA antibodies simultaneously. We developed a multiplex non-HLA antibody assay against 14 proteins highly expressed in the kidney. In this study, the presence of pretransplant non-HLA antibodies was correlated to renal allograft survival in a nationwide cohort of 4770 recipients transplanted between 1995 and 2006. Autoantibodies against Rho GDP-dissociation inhibitor 2 (ARHGDIB) were significantly associated with graft loss in recipients transplanted with a deceased-donor kidney (N = 3276) but not in recipients of a living-donor kidney (N = 1496). At 10 years after deceased-donor transplantation, recipients with anti-ARHGDIB antibodies (94/3276 = 2.9%) had a 13% lower death-censored covariate-adjusted graft survival compared to the anti-ARHGDIB-negative (3182/3276 = 97.1%) population (hazard ratio 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-2.53; P = .0003). These antibodies occur independently from donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA) or other non-HLA antibodies investigated. No significant relations with graft loss were found for the other 13 non-HLA antibodies. We suggest that pretransplant risk assessment can be improved by measuring anti-ARHGDIB antibodies in all patients awaiting deceased-donor transplantation.

The clinical significance of non‐HLA antibodies on renal allograft survival is a matter of debate, due to differences in reported results and lack of large‐scale studies incorporating analysis of multiple non‐HLA antibodies simultaneously. We developed a multiplex non‐HLA antibody assay against 14 proteins highly expressed in the kidney. In this study, the presence of pretransplant non‐HLA antibodies was correl

Whereas regular allocation avoids unacceptable mismatches on the donor organ, allocation to highly sensitized patients within the Eurotransplant Acceptable Mismatch (AM) program is based on the patient's HLA phenotype plus acceptable antigens. These are HLA antigens to which the patient never made antibodies, as determined by extensive laboratory testing. AM patients have superior long-term graft survival compared with highly sensitized patients in regular allocation. Here, we questioned whether the AM program also results in lower rejection rates. From the PROCARE cohort, consisting of all Dutch kidney transplants in 1995-2005, we selected deceased donor single transplants with a minimum of 1 HLA mismatch and determined the cumulative 6-month rejection incidence for patients in AM or regular allocation. Additionally, we determined the effect of minimal matching criteria of 1 HLA-B plus 1 HLA-DR, or 2 HLA-DR antigens on rejection incidence. AM patients showed significantly lower rejection rates than highly immunized patients in regular allocation, comparable to nonsensitized patients, independent of other risk factors for rejection. In contrast to highly sensitized patients in regular allocation, minimal matching criteria did not affect rejection rates in AM patients. Allocation based on acceptable antigens leads to relatively low-risk transplants for highly sensitized patients with rejection rates similar to those of nonimmunized individuals.

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: The absence of a normal functioning vagina can have a profound impact on women's quality of life and psychological well being. Frasier syndrome is a rare autosomal recessive disorder which presents with male pseudohermaphroditism with gonadal dysgenesis, renal failure in early adulthood and increased risk of developing gonadoblastoma. Kidney transplant recipients are reported to have a high complication rate after colorectal surgery, most probably resulting from immunosuppressive therapy. CASE: A 25-year-old female kidney transplant recipient with Frasier syndrome consulted our department to discuss the possibilities of surgically constructing a functional vagina. She successfully underwent a total laparoscopic colocolpopoiesis without any complications. A sigmoid segment of 16 cm long was isolated laparoscopically and transferred caudally in a dissected pouch between bladder and rectum on its vascular pedicle. There was no short-term morbidity and no complications up to 3 years postoperatively. She experienced no neovaginal symptoms and was able to engage in neovaginal penetration by means of vibrator or neovaginal dilatator. CONCLUSIONS: The positive results in this patient lead us to recommend laparoscopic colocolpopoiesis in kidney transplant patients who are seeking vaginoplasty. We advocate considering a total laparoscopic approach whenever rectosigmoid colocolpopoiesis is indicated, even after a kidney transplantation.

Contains fulltext : 171827.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), INTRODUCTION: Informed consent is mandatory for all (surgical) procedures, but it is even more important when it comes to living kidney donors undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. Donor education, leading to informed consent, needs to be carried out according to certain standards. Informed consent procedures for live donor nephrectomy vary per centre, and even per individual healthcare professional. The basis for a standardised, uniform surgical informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy can be created by assessing what information donors need to hear to prepare them for the operation and convalescence. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project is a prospective, multicentre cohort study, to be carried out in all eight Dutch kidney transplant centres. Donor knowledge of the procedure and postoperative course will be evaluated by means of pop quizzes. A baseline cohort (prior to receiving any information from a member of the transplant team in one of the transplant centres) will be compared with a control group, the members of which receive the pop quiz on the day of admission for donor nephrectomy. Donor satisfaction will be evaluated for all donors who completed the admission pop-quiz. The primary end point is donor knowledge. In addition, those elements that have to be included in the standardised format informed consent procedure will be identified. Secondary end points are donor satisfaction, current informed consent practices in the different centres (eg, how many visits, which personnel, what kind of information is disclosed, in which format, etc) and correlation of donor knowledge with surgeons' estimation thereof. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval for this study was obtained from the medical ethical committee of the Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, on 18 February 2015. Secondary approval has been obtained from the local ethics committees in six participating centres. Approval in the

Contains fulltext : 172479.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Introduction: Informed consent is mandatory for all (surgical) procedures, but it is even more important when it comes to living kidney donors undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. Donor education, leading to informed consent, needs to be carried out according to certain standards. Informed consent procedures for live donor nephrectomy vary per centre, and even per individual healthcare professional. The basis for a standardised, uniform surgical informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy can be created by assessing what information donors need to hear to prepare them for the operation and convalescence. Methods and analysis: The PRINCE (Process of In formed Consent Evaluation) project is a prospective, multicentre cohort study, to be carried out in all eight Dutch kidney transplant centres. Donor knowledge of the procedure and postoperative course will be evaluated by means of pop quizzes. A baseline cohort (prior to receiving any information from a member of the transplant team in one of the transplant centres) will be compared with a control group, the members of which receive the pop quiz on the day of admission for donor nephrectomy. Donor satisfaction will be evaluated for all donors who completed the admission pop-quiz. The primary end point is donor knowledge. In addition, those elements that have to be included in the standardized format informed consent procedure will be identified. S

Background: Novel putative mediators of acute kidney injury (AKI) include immune-cell derived tumour necrosis factor-like weak inducer of apoptosis (TWEAK), angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) and protein pentraxin-3 (PTX3). The effect of continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) and different anticoagulation regimens on plasma levels were studied. Methods: At 0, 10, 60, 180 and 720 min of CVVH, samples were collected from pre- and postfilter blood and ultrafiltrate. No anticoagulation (n = 13), unfractionated heparin (n = 8) or trisodium citrate (n = 21) were compared. Results: Concentrations of TWEAK, Ang-2 and PTX3 were hardly affected by CVVH since the mediators were not (TWEAK, PTX3) or hardly (Ang-2) detectable in ultrafiltrate, indicating negligible clearance by the filter in spite of molecular sizes (TWEAK, PTX3) at or below the cutoff of the membrane. Heparin use, however, was associated with an increase in in- and outlet plasma TWEAK. Conclusion: Novel AKI mediators are not cleared nor produced by CVVH. However, heparin anticoagulation increased TWEAK levels in patient's plasma whereas citrate did not, favouring the latter as anticoagulant in CVVH for AKI.

Background: During continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH), regional anticoagulation with citrate may be superior to heparin in terms of biocompatibility, since heparin as opposed to citrate may activate complement (reflected by circulating C5a) and induce neutrophil degranulation in the filter and myeloperoxidase (MPO) release from endothelium. Methods. No anticoagulation (n = 13), unfractionated heparin (n = 8) and trisodium citrate (n = 17) regimens during CVVH were compared. Blood samples were collected pre- and postfilter; C5a, elastase and MPO were determined by ELISA. Additionally, C5a was also measured in the ultrafiltrate. Results: In the heparin group, there was C5a production across the filter which most decreased over time as compared to other groups (P = 0.007). There was also net production of elastase and MPO across the filter during heparin anticoagulation (P = 0.049 or lower), while production was minimal and absent in the no anticoagulation and citrate group, respectively. During heparin anticoagulation, plasma concentrations of MPO at the inlet increased in the first 10 minutes of CVVH (P = 0.024). Conclusion: Citrate confers less filter-induced, potentially harmful complement activation and neutrophil degranulation and less endothelial activation than heparin when used for anticoagulation during continuous venovenous haemofiltration in critically ill patients.

Introduction: Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) is a biomarker of acute kidney injury (AKI), and levels reflect severity of disease in critically ill patients. However, continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) may affect plasma levels by clearance or release of NGAL by activated neutrophils in the filter, dependent on the anticoagulation regimen applied. We therefore studied handling of NGAL by CVVH in patients with AKI.Methods: Immediately before initiation of CVVH, prefilter blood was drawn. After 10, 60, 180, and 720 minutes of CVVH, samples were collected from pre- and postfilter (in- and outlet) blood and ultrafiltrate. CVVH with the following anticoagulation regimens was studied: no anticoagulation in case of a high bleeding tendency (n = 13), unfractionated heparin (n = 8), or trisodium citrate (n = 21). NGAL levels were determined with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).Results: Concentrations of NGAL at inlet and outlet were similar, and concentrations did not change over time in any of the anticoagulation groups; thus no net removal or production of NGAL occurred. Concentrations of NGAL at inlet correlated with disease severity at initiation of CVVH and at the end of a CVVH run. Concentrations of NGAL in the ultrafiltrate were lower with citrate-based CVVH (P = 0.03) and decreased over time, irrespective of anticoagulation administered (P < 0.001). The sieving coefficient and clearance of NGAL were low and decreased over time (P < 0.001).Conclusions: The plasma level and biomarker value of NGAL in critically ill patients with AKI are not affected by CVVH, because clearance by the filter was low. Furthermore, no evidence exists for intrafilter release of NGAL by neutrophils, irrespective of the anticoagulation method applied.

Introduction: Because of ongoing controversy, renal and vital outcomes are compared between systemically administered unfractionated heparin and regional anticoagulation with citrate-buffered replacement solution in predilution mode, during continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI).Methods: In this multi-center randomized controlled trial, patients admitted to the intensive care unit requiring CVVH and meeting inclusion criteria, were randomly assigned to citrate or heparin. Primary endpoints were mortality and renal outcome in intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary endpoints were safety and efficacy. Safety was defined as absence of any adverse event necessitating discontinuation of the assigned anticoagulant. For efficacy, among other parameters, survival times of the first hemofilter were studied.Results: Of the 139 patients enrolled, 66 were randomized to citrate and 73 to heparin. Mortality rates at 28 and 90 days did not differ between groups: 22/66 (33%) of citrate-treated patients died versus 25/72 (35%) of heparin-treated patients at 28 days, and 27/65 (42%) of citrate-treated patients died versus 29/69 (42%) of heparin-treated patients at 90 days (P = 1.00 for both). Renal outcome, i.e. independency of renal replacement therapy 28 days after initiation of CVVH in surviving patients, did not differ between groups: 29/43 (67%) in the citrate-treated patients versus 33/47 (70%) in heparin-treated patients (P = 0.82). Heparin was discontinued in 24/73 (33%) of patients whereas citrate was discontinued in 5/66 (8%) of patients (P < 0.001). Filter survival times were superior for citrate (median 46 versus 32 hours