Mesangial expansion at 5 years predicts death and death‐censored graft loss after renal transplantation

Death with a functioning graft and death‐censored renal allograft failure remain major problems for which effective preventative protocols are lacking. The retrospective cohort study aimed to determine whether histologic changes on a 5‐year surveillance kidney biopsy predict adverse outcomes after transplantation in recipients who had: both Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²) at the time of transplantation (T2DM/Obesity, n = 75); neither (No T2DM/No obesity, n = 78); No T2DM/Obesity (n = 41), and T2DM/No obesity (n = 47). On 5‐year biopsies, moderate‐to‐severe mesangial expansion was more common in the T2DM/Obesity group (Banff mm score ≥2 = 49.3%; Tervaert classification MS ≥ 2b = 26.7%) compared to the other groups (p < .001 for both scores). Risk factors included older age, higher BMI, HbA1C, and triglycerides at 1‐year post‐transplant. Moderate‐to‐severe mesangial expansion correlated with death with function (HR 1.74 (1.01, 2.98), p = .045 Banff and 1.89 (1.01, 3.51) p = .045 Tervaert) and with death‐censored graft loss (HR 3.2 (1.2, 8.8), p = .02 Banff and HR 3.8 (1.3, 11.5), p = .01 Tervaert) over a mean of 11.6 years of recipient follow‐up post‐transplant. These data suggest that mesangial expansion in recipients with T2DM and obesity may reflect systemic vascular injury and might be a novel biomarker to predict adverse outcomes post renal transplant.     

The Liver Retransplantation Risk Score: a prognostic model for survival after adult liver retransplantation

High-risk combinations of recipient and graft characteristics are poorly defined for liver retransplantation (reLT) in the current era. We aimed to develop a risk model for survival after reLT using data from the European Liver Transplantation Registry, followed by internal and external validation. From 2006 to 2016, 85 067 liver transplants were recorded, including 5581 reLTs (6.6%). The final model included seven predictors of graft survival: recipient age, model for end-stage liver disease score, indication for reLT, recipient hospitalization, time between primary liver transplantation and reLT, donor age, and cold ischemia time. By assigning points to each variable in proportion to their hazard ratio, a simplified risk score was created ranging 0–10. Low-risk (0–3), medium-risk (4–5), and high-risk (6–10) groups were identified with significantly different 5-year survival rates ranging 56.9% (95% CI 52.8–60.7%), 46.3% (95% CI 41.1–51.4%), and 32.1% (95% CI 23.5–41.0%), respectively (P < 0.001). External validation showed that the expected survival rates were closely aligned with the observed mortality probabilities. The Retransplantation Risk Score identifies high-risk combinations of recipient- and graft-related factors prognostic for long-term graft survival after reLT. This tool may serve as a guidance for clinical decision-making on liver acceptance for reLT.     

Comparative survival of elderly renal transplant recipients with a living donor versus a deceased donor: A retrospective single center observational study

Increasing numbers of elderly (≥65 years) patients are listed for kidney transplantation. This study compares the survival outcome between living (LDK), regularly allocated (ETKAS), and Eurotransplant Senior Program (ESP) donor kidneys in elderly recipients. This is a single-center retrospective cohort study of elderly kidney transplant recipients transplanted between 2005 and 2017. Primary outcome measures were nondeath-censored graft, death-censored graft, and patient survival. In total, 348 patients were transplanted, 109 recipients (31.3%) received an LDK, 100 (28.7%) an ETKAS, and 139 (40%) an ESP kidney. 62.5% were male, and median age was 68 years. LDK recipients had significantly better 5-year nondeath-censored graft survival compared with ETKAS and ESP (resp. 71.0% vs. 66.1% vs. 55.6%, P = 0.047). Death-censored graft survival after 1 year was significantly better in LDK recipients (99.1%) (ETKAS 90.8%; ESP 87.7%, P < 0.001). After 5 years, the difference remained significant (P < 0.001) with little additional graft loss (97.7% vs. 88.1% vs. 85.6). There was no significant difference in patient survival after 5 years (71.7% vs. 67.4% vs 61.9%, P = 0.480). In elderly recipients, the patient survival benefits of an LDK are limited, but there is decreased death-censored graft loss for LDK recipients. Nevertheless, graft survival in ETKAS and ESP remains satisfactory.     

What happens after graft loss? A large,long-term,single-center observation

The number of patients returning to dialysis after graft failure increases. Surprisingly, little is known about the clinical and immunological outcomes of this cohort. We retrospectively analyzed 254 patients after kidney allograft loss between 1997 and 2017 and report clinical outcomes such as mortality, relisting, retransplantations, transplant nephrectomies, and immunization status. Of the 254 patients, 49% had died 5 years after graft loss, while 27% were relisted, 14% were on dialysis and not relisted, and only 11% were retransplanted 5 years after graft loss. In the complete observational period, 111/254 (43.7%) patients were relisted. Of these, 72.1% of patients were under 55 years of age at time of graft loss and only 13.5% of patients were ≥65 years. Age at graft loss was associated with relisting in a logistic regression analysis. In the complete observational period, 42 patients (16.5%) were retransplanted. Only 4 of those (9.5%) were ≥65 years at time of graft loss. Nephrectomy had no impact on survival, relisting, or development of dnDSA. Patients after allograft loss have a high overall mortality. Immunization contributes to long waiting times. Only a very limited number of patients are retransplanted especially when ≥65 years at time of graft loss.     

Open Classic Latarjet Procedure Performed Using Freehand Technique—Surgical Technique and Outcome

IntroductionLatarjet procedure is commonly performed for recurrent anterior shoulder instability with glenoid side bone loss. Classic Latarjet procedure can be performed using specially designed drill guides, jigs, or by freehand technique. Here we have described a technical note on classic Latarjet procedure performed with freehand technique utilizing simple rulers and caliper. The functional and radiological outcomes of our patients have also been analysed.Material and Methods149 open classic Latarjet procedures were performed using our technique between March 2015 and July 2018. The mean age of the patients was 32.95 years (Range 22–59 years). The functional outcome of the patients was measured using Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) and Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS) at 2 years of follow-up. Screw and graft positioning were studied in 24 consecutive patients with a postoperative computed tomography (CT) scan.ResultsThere was no incidence of recurrent subluxation or dislocation post-surgery. Mean OSIS score increased from 15.63 ± 3.20 preoperatively to 42.44 ± 3.88 postoperatively (p value < 0.05). WOSI score decreased significantly from 62.54% ± 8.24 to 10.26 ± 6.33 postoperatively at 2-year follow-up (p value < 0.05). Postoperative CT scan also showed satisfactory screw placement in all patients.ConclusionOpen Latarjet procedure performed using freehand technique provides good functional and radiological outcomes in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability with glenoid side bone loss.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-021-00385-7.     

星点设计-效应面法优化柴银口服液提取工艺及其稳定性研究

目的 优化柴银口服液提取工艺,明确其成品稳定性。方法 在单因素试验基础上将加水量、提取时间、提取次数作为考察因素,以黄芩苷转移率与澄清度值的总评归一（OD）值为评价指标,采用星点设计-效应面法优化柴银口服液提取工艺,将经优化后工艺条件生产的柴银口服液成品与原工艺成品进行加速与长期稳定性对比。结果 最佳提取工艺参数为加水量8.3倍、提取时间2.2 h、提取3次,此条件下OD值最高为0.702,此条件下生产的柴银口服液在稳定性考察中pH、澄清度、黄芩苷含量及微生物限度等指标均明显优于原工艺成品。结论 星点设计-效应面法优化柴银口服液提取工艺方法可靠、参数精确,能有效提升其价值、延长保质期。