4.6 Article

TAFRO Syndrome in a Kidney Transplant Recipient That Was Diagnosed on Autopsy: A Case Report

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.747678

关键词

autopsy; kidney transplant; membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis; TAFRO syndrome; thrombotic microangiopathy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A 57-year-old man who had received a kidney transplant developed TAFRO syndrome, which led to thrombocytopenia and ultimately death, despite treatment with high-dose steroids and other measures. Pathological analysis of kidney tissues showed similarities to his pre-transplant condition, suggesting recurrence of TAFRO syndrome.
A 57-year-old man who received a kidney transplant 4 years previously owing to unknown underlying disease presented with thrombocytopenia and fever. Hepatosplenomegaly and lymphadenopathy were observed, and development of prominent anasarca and worsening of renal function yielded the diagnosis of TAFRO syndrome. He was treated with high-dose steroids and plasmapheresis, and a thrombopoietin receptor agonist was administered for refractory thrombocytopenia. However, his general condition worsened, and he died on day 92. Histopathological analysis of a kidney autopsy specimen showed thrombotic microangiopathy characterized by glomerular endothelial swelling, mesangiolysis, and double contours of the glomerular capillary walls. His bone marrow showed megakaryocytic hyperplasia with mild reticulin fibrosis. Interestingly, these clinical and pathological features were remarkably similar to those the patient demonstrated before the kidney transplant, suggesting the recurrence of TAFRO syndrome. TAFRO syndrome is a rare systemic disorder whose concept has recently been established, but information on its long-term outcome is scarce. To our knowledge, this is the first case of TAFRO syndrome developing in a kidney transplant recipient, which suggests that disease recurrence occurs many years after the kidney transplant.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据