2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessment of Organ Quality in Kidney Transplantation by Molecular Analysis and Why It May Not Have Been Achieved, Yet

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Donor organ shortage, growing waiting lists and substantial organ discard rates are key problems in transplantation. The critical importance of organ quality in determining long-term function is becoming increasingly clear. However, organ quality is difficult to predict. The lack of good measures of organ quality is a serious challenge in terms of acceptance and allocation of an organ. The underlying review summarizes currently available methods used to assess donor organ quality such as histopathology, clinical scores and machine perfusion characteristics with special focus on molecular analyses of kidney quality. The majority of studies testing molecular markers of organ quality focused on identifying organs at risk for delayed graft function, yet without prediction of long-term graft outcome. Recently, interest has emerged in looking for molecular markers associated with biological age to predict organ quality. However, molecular gene sets have not entered the clinical routine or impacted discard rates so far. The current review critically discusses the potential reasons why clinically applicable molecular quality assessment using early kidney biopsies might not have been achieved yet. Besides a critical analysis of the inherent limitations of surrogate markers used for organ quality, i.e., delayed graft function, the intrinsic methodological limitations of studies assessing organ quality will be discussed. These comprise the multitude of unpredictable hits as well as lack of markers of nephron mass, functional reserve and regenerative capacity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references86

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Acute kidney disease and renal recovery: consensus report of the Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) 16 Workgroup

          Acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease are increasingly recognized as interconnected entities and the term acute kidney disease (AKD) has been proposed to define ongoing pathophysiologic processes following an episode of AKI. In this Consensus statement, the Acute Disease Quality Initiative 16 Workgroup propose definitions and staging criteria for AKD, and strategies for the management of affected patients. They also make recommendations for areas of future research with the aims of improving understanding of the underlying processes and improving outcomes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A comprehensive risk quantification score for deceased donor kidneys: the kidney donor risk index.

            We propose a continuous kidney donor risk index (KDRI) for deceased donor kidneys, combining donor and transplant variables to quantify graft failure risk. By using national data from 1995 to 2005, we analyzed 69,440 first-time, kidney-only, deceased donor adult transplants. Cox regression was used to model the risk of death or graft loss, based on donor and transplant factors, adjusting for recipient factors. The proposed KDRI includes 14 donor and transplant factors, each found to be independently associated with graft failure or death: donor age, race, history of hypertension, history of diabetes, serum creatinine, cerebrovascular cause of death, height, weight, donation after cardiac death, hepatitis C virus status, human leukocyte antigen-B and DR mismatch, cold ischemia time, and double or en bloc transplant. The KDRI reflects the rate of graft failure relative to that of a healthy 40-year-old donor. Transplants of kidneys in the highest KDRI quintile (>1.45) had an adjusted 5-year graft survival of 63%, compared with 82% and 79% in the two lowest KDRI quintiles (<0.79 and 0.79-<0.96, respectively). There is a considerable overlap in the KDRI distribution by expanded and nonexpanded criteria donor classification. The graded impact of KDRI on graft outcome makes it a useful decision-making tool at the time of the deceased donor kidney offer.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Defining delayed graft function after renal transplantation: simplest is best.

              Delayed graft function (DGF) after renal transplantation can be diagnosed according to several different definitions, complicating comparison between studies that use DGF as an endpoint. This is a particular problem after transplantation with kidneys from donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidneys, because DGF is common, and its relationship to early graft failure may differ depending on the definition of DGF. The presence of DGF in 213 donation after brain death (DBD) and 312 DCD kidney transplants from October 2005 to August 2011 was determined according to 10 different, but widely used, definitions (based on dialysis requirements, creatinine changes, or both). The relationship of DGF to graft function and graft survival was determined. The incidence of DGF varied widely depending on the definition used (DBD; 24%-70%: DCD; 41%-91%). For kidneys from DCD donors, development of DGF was only associated with poorer 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate for 1 of 10 definitions of DGF, and no definition of DGF was associated with impaired graft survival. Conversely, for DBD kidneys, DGF, as defined in 9 of 10 different ways, was associated with poorer 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate and inferior graft survival. Importantly, the predictive power for poorer transplant outcome was comparable for all definitions of DGF. No definition of DGF is superior. We suggest that the most widely used and most easily calculated definition--the use of dialysis in the first postoperative week--should be universally adopted as the definition of DGF clinically and as a study endpoint.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Immunol
                Front Immunol
                Front. Immunol.
                Frontiers in Immunology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-3224
                12 May 2020
                2020
                : 11
                : 833
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Division of Nephrology, University Hospital Zürich , Zurich, Switzerland
                [2] 2Division of Transplantation Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center , New York City, NY, United States
                [3] 3Division Transplantation Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center , Memphis, TN, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Oriol Bestard, Hospital Universitario de Bellvitge, Spain

                Reviewed by: Maarten Naesens, KU Leuven, Belgium; Constanca Figueiredo, Hannover Medical School, Germany

                *Correspondence: Thomas F. Mueller, thomas.mueller@ 123456usz.ch

                This article was submitted to Alloimmunity and Transplantation, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

                Article
                10.3389/fimmu.2020.00833
                7236771
                32477343
                09cd82d0-b07e-4cb1-84bd-6f2f1f099fee
                Copyright © 2020 von Moos, Akalin, Mas and Mueller.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 17 January 2020
                : 14 April 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 80, Pages: 12, Words: 0
                Categories
                Immunology
                Mini Review

                Immunology
                marginal organs,molecular diagnostics,implant biopsies,organ quality,surrogate marker
                Immunology
                marginal organs, molecular diagnostics, implant biopsies, organ quality, surrogate marker

                Comments

                Comment on this article