Datasheet1_Role of post-transplant graft scintigraphy in kidney donation after circulatory death.pdf
There is no consensus on how to predict post-transplant function of donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidneys. Thus, we aimed to identify renal scintigraphy parameters that could predict 1-year kidney function.
MethodsIn this single center study, we included all consecutive DCD kidney recipients between 2013 and 2021 (n = 29). Patients who did not have a scintigraphy within 10 days of transplantation (n = 3), recipients of multiple organs and less than 18 years old were excluded (n = 1). Primary endpoint was the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).
ResultsMedian eGFR and serum creatinine at 1 year were 67 µmol/L (56–81) and 111 ml/min (99–132), respectively. Among parameters tested, the 3rd/2nd-minute activity ratio had the best diagnostic performance (AUC: 0.74 and 0.71, for eGFR and creatinine) 1 year post transplantation. Using 1.21 as the best cut off, the 3rd/2nd-minute activity ratio specificity and sensitivity to predict eGFR >60 ml/min was 0.82 and 0.83. Renal function was significantly better at 1 week, 3, 6, and 12 months after transplantation in patients with 3rd/2nd-minute activity ratios above 1.21.
ConclusionThis study suggests that the 3rd/2nd-minute activity ratio can predict graft function at 1 year. The benefit of post-transplant scintigraphy should be further validated in a prospective cohort.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1111/ajt.16976
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s11255-014-0695-0
- https://doi.org//10.1038/ki.2015.88
- https://doi.org//10.1093/ndt/gfn667
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.kint.2015.09.002
- https://doi.org//10.1038/ki.2015.190
- https://doi.org//10.5114/aoms.2011.22079
- https://doi.org//10.1111/ctr.13190
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17406-0
- https://doi.org//10.1097/00007890-199706150-00015
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01635.x
- https://doi.org//10.1055/s-2004-861562
- https://doi.org//10.1097/RLU.0000000000002106
- https://doi.org//10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2018.02.010
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00259-018-4129-6
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trre.2017.12.002
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s002590000281
- https://doi.org//10.2215/CJN.13961119
- https://doi.org//10.1111/ctr.12135
- https://doi.org//10.1038/ki.2014.188
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03754.x
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.kint.2016.01.028
- https://doi.org//10.1097/00007890-199605150-00008
- https://doi.org//10.1097/TP.0000000000001323
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60827-6
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61685-7
- https://doi.org//10.1097/SLA.0000000000003515
- https://doi.org//10.1097/MD.0000000000006911
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02651.x
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03562.x
- https://doi.org//10.1097/TP.0000000000001351
- https://doi.org//10.1111/ajt.14031
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.transproceed.2019.07.012
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.transproceed.2019.11.025
- https://doi.org//10.1097/MOT.0b013e32835e2a08
- https://doi.org//10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283446297
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0193791
- https://doi.org//10.3390/diagnostics10090709
