4.4 Article

Kidney NGAL is a novel early marker of acute injury following transplantation

期刊

PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY
卷 21, 期 6, 页码 856-863

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00467-006-0055-0

关键词

acute renal failure; delayed graft function; biomarkers; lipocalins; protocol biopsy

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK-58872, P50-DK52612, R21-DK070163, R01-DK53289, R01-DK55388] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Acute kidney injury secondary to ischemia-reperfusion in renal allografts often results in delayed graft function. We tested the hypothesis that expression of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) is an early marker of acute kidney injury following transplantation. Sections from paraffin-embedded protocol biopsy specimens obtained at approximately one hour of reperfusion after transplantation of 13 cadaveric (CAD) and 12 living-related (LRD) renal allografts were examined by immunohistochemistry for expression of NGAL. The staining intensity was correlated with cold ischemia time, peak post-operative serum creatinine, and dialysis requirement. There were no differences between the LRD and CAD groups in age, gender or preoperative serum creatinine. Using a scoring system of 0 (no staining) to 3 (most intense staining), NGAL expression was significantly increased in CAD specimens (2.3 +/- 0.8 versus 0.8 +/- 0.7 in LRD, p < 0.001). There was a strong correlation between NGAL staining intensity and cold ischemia time (R=0.87, p < 0.001). Importantly, NGAL staining in these early CAD biopsies was strongly correlated with peak postoperative serum creatinine, which occurred days later (R=0.86, p < 0.001). Four patients developed delayed graft function requiring dialysis during the first week posttransplantation; all of these patients displayed the most intense NGAL staining in their first protocol biopsies. We conclude that NGAL staining intensity in early protocol biopsies represents a novel predictive biomarker of acute kidney injury following transplantation.

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

4.4
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