Renal Transplantation Flashcards
Notes on deceased vs living donor kidney transplants
Deceased
- Higher earliy morality rate, lower mortality risk in long term
Live donor
- Trump deceased donors for graft survival in long term
- 5YS graft = 90% in living donor 80% in deceased
- 5YS patient = 96% living donor, 90% with deceased
- Allows pre-emptive treatment → graft and patient survival improved in pre-emptive vs non-preemptive treatment
- 25% Tx Australia are living donor
Notes on HLA incompatibility
- HLA sensitised patients remain difficult to match. HLA sensitisation from:
- Previous transplants (poorly HLA matched)
- Pregnancies
- Blood transfusions → avoid where possible (EPO helps to reduce blood transfusions in CKD and reduce risk of HLA sensitisation)
- To detect donor specific anti-HLA antibodies against any potential donor:
- Options are cdc (compleent dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch, flow cross match, virtual crossmatch (single antigen bead).
- Risk of rejection/graft loss if positive test: CDC > flow > virtual XM
- If you have a “reasonably weake: donor specific antibody from virtual XM and phycial one if negative outcomes can be ”quite reasonable” compared to Tx without a donor specific antibody in terms of graft survival
Notes on ABO incompatible kidney transplants
- ABO incompatible kidney transplant has been occurring in Japan for several decades (deceased donor option quite limited)
- In “contemporary era” - graft survival almost equivalent to ABO compatible transplants
- Australia/NZ
- First month - increased death censored graft loss and rejection (still very low)
- In the long-term no difference in the graft or patient survival compared with APO compatible transplant
- Antibody removal via plasma exchange
- Try to maintain antibody levels at a low level for 2-4 weeks to allow for process called accommodation
- Kidney biopsy - antigen-antibody interaction (positive C4D staining) without any evidence of rejection - quite specific for ABO incompatible kidney transplants
- Not performed for HLA donor specific antibodies
Eligibility criteria for kidney transplant
- ESKD requiring dialysis (in NZ, eGFR < 15, don’t need to be on dialysis)
- Low perioperative mortality risk
- Reasonable post transplant patient and graft survival with liklihood of significant benefit from transplant
- Age not a contraindications
- Carefully selected > 70 years, limited comorbidities
Risk of ESKD post kidney donation
Low absolute but increased risk of ESKD post donation. Lifetime risk <1%
Lifetime risk higher in the younger donor candidates
General standard immunosuppression following renal transplant
Basiliximab induction following triple therapy 1. Prednisone 2. Calcineurin inhibitor - tacrolimus (usually ciclosporin in NZ) 3. Anti-metabolite - mycophenolate vs azathioprine
Basiliximab vs ATG in induction therapy for renal transplant
Basiliximab: human/mouse chimeric Ab, binds to IL-2 receptor (anti CD25) on activated T cells, reduction in acute rejection vs placebo - benefit less clear in tacrolimus era, minimal side effects (expensive) ATG: rabbit polyclonal Ab, targets T cells, reduction in acute rejection (superior vs Basiliximab in high immunological risk group - less clear in long term graft survival). Increased risks of infections and malignancies. EBV donor positive, recipient negative - post transplant lymphoproliferative disorder Mostly used for treatment of steroid resistant rejection rather than induction therapy
Calcineurin inhibitors in renal transplant
Tacrolimus and ciclosporin
- Both nephrotoxic - acute and chronic -
- Hypertension, hyperlipideamia
- TMA - No bone marrow suppression
- “Safe in pregnancy
Tacrolimus
- Less acute rejection and early graft loss L
- ess de novo DSA (A/W chronic rejection and graft loss)
- More post transplant diabetes
- Magnesium and phosphate derangements,
- Tremor
- More nephrotoxic than ciclosporin M
- More hair loss compared to ciclosporin
Ciclosporin
- Gum hypertrophy, hirsutism - more so than Tacrolimus
- Lowers levels of mycophenolate → one reason for less rejection with tacrolimus
Mechanism of action of myocphenolate
Inhibits IMPDH (inosine-5 monophosphate dehydrogenase) involved in purine synthesis
Adverse effects of mycophenolate
GI upset - dose dependent response
Myelosupression - 2-6 months after initiation
Infection
Malignancy
Teratogenic
Levels lowered by cyclosporin but not tacrolimus
Anti-metabolites in renal transplant - mycophenolate vs azathioprine
Mycophenolate
- Less acute rejection and ?graft loss compared to azathioprine
- More diarrhoea
- Teratogenic - contraindicated in pregnancy - need to switch to azathioprine in pregnancy (usual regimen CNI + AZA + pred)
- No drug interactions with allopurinol/febuxostat (role of xanthine oxidase in purine metabolism)
- No issue with TMPT deficiency
Sirolimus - mechanism of action and side effects
Mammalian target of rapomycin (mTOR) inhibitor. Binds to FK binding protein and inhibits mTOR -> inhibits IL2 signalling
Side effects - wound compliations/fluid collection, proteinuria, haematological - cytopaenia with antimetabolite, TMA (W/ CNI - esp sirolimus compared to everolimus), hyperlipidaemia, mouth ulcers, oedema, interstitial pneumonitis, contraindicated in pregnancy
Use of mTORi (sirolimus and everolimus) in renal transplantation
- Previously as CNI sparing with mycophenolate (avoid tac/cyclo) - to avoid CNI nephrotoxicity and hopefully late graft loss
- However more rejection and graft loss, high discontinuation rate
- More recently - used with reduced dose CNI and prednisolone (to replace mycophenolate)
- Similar rejection rate and GFR
- Less viral infection (especially CMV)
- Less skin malignancy
- Less neutropenia and diarrhoea
- Still quite high discontinuation rate, long term follow up lacking for everolimus with tacrolimus
Cells involved in acute cellular rejection in renal transplantation
T lymphocytes
Opportunistic infection 6 months post renal transplant:
Aspergillus
Nocardia
BK virus - should be associated with decline in renal function
Herpes Zoster
Hepatitis B
Hepatitis C