6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparison of native and transplant kidney biopsies: diagnostic yield and complications

      research-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

          Background

          The safety and adequacy are established for the native percutaneous renal biopsy (PRB) but no prospective studies exist that directly compare these with transplant PRB.

          Methods

          From 1995 to 2015, 1705 adults underwent percutaneous native [native renal biopsy (NRB)] or transplant renal biopsy (TRB) by the Nephrology service. Real-time ultrasound and automated biopsy needles (NRB, 14 or 16 gauge; TRB, 16 gauge) were used. Patients were observed for 24 h (NRB) or 8 h (TRB) post-procedure. Adequacy was defined as tissue required for diagnosis plus glomerular yield. Complications were defined as those resulting in the need for an intervention, such as surgery, interventional radiologic procedure, readmission, blood transfusion and death. Data were collected prospectively in all biopsies.

          Results

          At the time of biopsy, NRB patients were younger (mean ± SD, 47 ± 17 versus 50 ± 14 years, P < 0.0001) and more often female (62 versus 48%, P < 0.0001) compared with TRB. A fellow supervised by an attending performed the procedure in 91% of NRB compared with 63% of TRB (P < 0.0001). TRB patients were more hypertensive [systolic blood pressure (SBP) 140 ± 22 versus 133 ± 18 mmHg, P < 0.0001] and had a higher serum creatinine (3.1 ± 1.8 versus 2.3 ± 2.2 mg/dL, P < 0.0001), activated partial thromboplastin time (28 ± 4.3 versus 27 ± 5 s, P < 0.0001) as well as lower hemoglobin (Hgb) (11.2 ± 1.8 versus 11.7 ± 2.1 g/dL, P < 0.0001) compared with NRB. Adequate tissue for diagnosis was obtained in > 99% of NRB and TRB (P = 0.71). Compared with TRB, NRB had a greater drop in Hgb after the biopsy (0.97 ± 1.1 versus 0.73 ± 1.3 g/dL, P < 0.0001), a higher complication rate (6.5 versus 3.9%, P = 0.02) and higher transfusion rate (5.2 versus 3.3%, P = 0.045). There was one death in each group attributed to the biopsy.

          Conclusions

          Although death is equally rare, the complication rate is higher in NRB compared with TRB despite TRB having more of the traditional risk factors for bleeding. Differences in technique, operator (fellow or attending) or needle gauge may explain this variability.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology.

          Standardization of renal allograft biopsy interpretation is necessary to guide therapy and to establish an objective end point for clinical trials. This manuscript describes a classification, Banff 97, developed by investigators using the Banff Schema and the Collaborative Clinical Trials in Transplantation (CCTT) modification for diagnosis of renal allograft pathology. Banff 97 grew from an international consensus discussion begun at Banff and continued via the Internet. This schema developed from (a) analysis of data using the Banff classification, (b) publication of and experience with the CCTT modification, (c) international conferences, and (d) data from recent studies on impact of vasculitis on transplant outcome. Semiquantitative lesion scoring continues to focus on tubulitis and arteritis but includes a minimum threshold for interstitial inflammation. Banff 97 defines "types" of acute/active rejection. Type I is tubulointerstitial rejection without arteritis. Type II is vascular rejection with intimal arteritis, and type III is severe rejection with transmural arterial changes. Biopsies with only mild inflammation are graded as "borderline/suspicious for rejection." Chronic/sclerosing allograft changes are graded based on severity of tubular atrophy and interstitial fibrosis. Antibody-mediated rejection, hyperacute or accelerated acute in presentation, is also categorized, as are other significant allograft findings. The Banff 97 working classification refines earlier schemas and represents input from two classifications most widely used in clinical rejection trials and in clinical practice worldwide. Major changes include the following: rejection with vasculitis is separated from tubulointerstitial rejection; severe rejection requires transmural changes in arteries; "borderline" rejection can only be interpreted in a clinical context; antibody-mediated rejection is further defined, and lesion scoring focuses on most severely involved structures. Criteria for specimen adequacy have also been modified. Banff 97 represents a significant refinement of allograft assessment, developed via international consensus discussions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Antibody-mediated rejection criteria - an addition to the Banff 97 classification of renal allograft rejection.

            Antibody-mediated rejection (AbAR) is increasingly recognized in the renal allograft population, and successful therapeutic regimens have been developed to prevent and treat AbAR, enabling excellent outcomes even in patients highly sensitized to the donor prior to transplant. It has become critical to develop standardized criteria for the pathological diagnosis of AbAR. This article presents international consensus criteria for and classification of AbAR developed based on discussions held at the Sixth Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology in 2001. This classification represents a working formulation, to be revisited as additional data accumulate in this important area of renal transplantation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Bleeding complications of native kidney biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

              Kidney biopsy provides important information for nephrologists, but the risk of complications has not been systematically described. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective or retrospective observational studies. Adults undergoing native kidney biopsy in an inpatient or outpatient setting. MEDLINE indexed studies from January 1980 through June 2011; sample size of 50 or more. Native kidney biopsy with automated biopsy device and real-time ultrasonographic guidance. Macroscopic hematuria and erythrocyte transfusion rates and factors associated with these outcomes. 34 studies of 9,474 biopsies met inclusion criteria. The rate of macroscopic hematuria was 3.5% (95% CI, 2.2%-5.1%), and erythrocyte transfusion was 0.9% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.5%). Significantly higher rates of transfusion were seen with the following: 14-gauge compared with smaller needles (2.1% vs 0.5%; P = 0.009), studies with mean serum creatinine level ≥2.0 mg/dL (2.1% vs 0.4%; P = 0.02), ≥50% women (1.9% vs 0.6%; P = 0.03), and ≥10% of biopsies for acute kidney injury (1.1% vs 0.04%; P < 0.001). Higher transfusion rates also were observed in studies with a mean age of 40 years or older (1.0% vs 0.2%; P = 0.2) and mean systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg (1.4% vs 0.1%; P = 0.09). Similar relationships were noted for the macroscopic hematuria rate with the same predictors, but none was statistically significant. Publication bias, few randomized controlled trials, and missing data. Native kidney biopsy using automated biopsy devices and real-time ultrasonography is associated with a relatively small risk of macroscopic hematuria and erythrocyte transfusion requirement. Using smaller gauge needles may lower complication rates. Patient selection may affect outcome because studies with higher serum creatinine levels, more women, and higher rates of acute kidney injury had higher complication rates. Future studies should further evaluate risk factors for complications. Copyright © 2012 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clin Kidney J
                Clin Kidney J
                ckj
                Clinical Kidney Journal
                Oxford University Press
                2048-8505
                2048-8513
                October 2018
                06 July 2018
                06 July 2018
                : 11
                : 5
                : 616-622
                Affiliations
                Division of Nephrology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence and offprint requests to: William L. Whittier; E-mail: william_whittier@ 123456rush.edu ; Twitter handle: @TWhittier_RUSH
                Article
                sfy051
                10.1093/ckj/sfy051
                6165758
                30289130
                60c30133-8d3b-415a-840c-413749899303
                © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 30 January 2018
                : 18 May 2018
                Page count
                Pages: 7
                Categories
                Diagnostic Tests

                Nephrology
                bleeding,complication,kidney biopsy,kidney transplantation
                Nephrology
                bleeding, complication, kidney biopsy, kidney transplantation

                Comments

                Comment on this article