We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Observational Study
Kidney transplantation across a positive crossmatch: a single-center experience.
Transplantation Proceedings 2014 July
BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for end-stage renal disease, with improved mortality and quality of life compared with dialysis. Desensitization protocols have allowed kidney transplantation of highly sensitized patients, who have a lower probability to receive a matching kidney from a deceased or living donor. The aim of this work was to analyze the post-transplantation period of highly HLA-sensitized patients with positive flow cytometry crossmatch against donor cells.
METHODS: Following an observational, retrospective design, we investigated 16 highly sensitized patients who underwent kidney or kidney-pancreas transplantation, assessing the impact of desensitization protocols and investigating treatment-related complications, graft function, antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) rate, and graft and patient survivals.
RESULTS: We studied 16 patients with positive flow cytometry crossmatch, who were divided into 2 groups based on whether they were submitted to a desensitization protocol or not. Patients who were desensitized underwent transplantation in later years, had higher immunologic risk (panel reactive antibody peak 62% vs 33%; P = .038), higher percentage of 2nd kidney transplant (75% vs 25%; P = .066), and higher percentage of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies identified (P = .028). A majority of patients were desensitized with high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin and plasmapheresis, and 5 patients received rituximab. Acute AMR rate was of 38%, and rituximab was associated with fewer episodes of AMR. Only 1 patient had graft failure, due to chronic humoral rejection, and the remaining maintained good graft function (mean serum creatinine value of 1.33 mg/dL). No patient died and few complications related to immunossupression were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Desensitization protocols were safe and allowed kidney transplantation in highly sensitized patients that probably would never undergo transplantation and gave the opportunity of living-donor transplant to patients with anti-HLA antibodies against the donor.
METHODS: Following an observational, retrospective design, we investigated 16 highly sensitized patients who underwent kidney or kidney-pancreas transplantation, assessing the impact of desensitization protocols and investigating treatment-related complications, graft function, antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) rate, and graft and patient survivals.
RESULTS: We studied 16 patients with positive flow cytometry crossmatch, who were divided into 2 groups based on whether they were submitted to a desensitization protocol or not. Patients who were desensitized underwent transplantation in later years, had higher immunologic risk (panel reactive antibody peak 62% vs 33%; P = .038), higher percentage of 2nd kidney transplant (75% vs 25%; P = .066), and higher percentage of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies identified (P = .028). A majority of patients were desensitized with high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin and plasmapheresis, and 5 patients received rituximab. Acute AMR rate was of 38%, and rituximab was associated with fewer episodes of AMR. Only 1 patient had graft failure, due to chronic humoral rejection, and the remaining maintained good graft function (mean serum creatinine value of 1.33 mg/dL). No patient died and few complications related to immunossupression were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Desensitization protocols were safe and allowed kidney transplantation in highly sensitized patients that probably would never undergo transplantation and gave the opportunity of living-donor transplant to patients with anti-HLA antibodies against the donor.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app