4.1 Article

Chronic allograft nephropathy score before sirolimus rescue predicts allograft function in renal transplant patients

Journal

TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS
Volume 39, Issue 1, Pages 94-98

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2006.10.017

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK029961-19] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN) is a major indication for initiation of sirolimus (SRL) in renal transplantation (TX) to prevent deterioration of renal function. We evaluated whether the CAN score at time of sirolimus rescue (SRL-R) predicts renal allograft function. CAN score is the sum of the following 4 categories: glomerulopathy (cg, 0-3), interstitial fibrosis (ci, 0-3), tubular atrophy (ct, 0-3), and vasculopathy (cv, 0-3). This is a retrospective cohort study of renal transplant recipients from July 2001 to March 2004. Immunosuppression consisted of preconditioning with rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin or alemtuzumab and maintenance with tacrolimus (TAC) monotherapy with spaced weaning, if applicable, SRL-R was achieved by conversion from TAC, or by addition to reduced doses of TAC. Ninety patients received SRL. Thirty-three of these patients met the inclusion criteria of the following: (1) receipt of SRL for > 6 months, and (2) follow-up of; >= 6 months. There were 16 patients in the low-CAN (0-4) group and 17 patients in the high-CAN (> 4) group. Cockcroft-Gault (C-G) glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated at SRL-R and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The Delta GFR was significantly better in the low-CAN group at 1, 3, and 6 months. A trend toward an improved Delta GFR was present at 12 months in the low-CAN group (P =.16). CAN scoring at the time of SRL-R predicts recovery of renal allograft function (as measured using Delta GFR), and should be used in preference to biochemical markers (Cr and C-G GFR), which may not be reliable predictors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available