Steroid avoidance or withdrawal for kidney transplant recipients

Background: Steroid-sparing strategies have been attempted in recent decades to avoid morbidity from long-term steroid intake among kidney transplant recipients. Previous systematic reviews of steroid withdrawal after kidney transplantation have shown a significant increase in acute rejection. There are various protocols to withdraw steroids after kidney transplantation and their possible benefits or harms are subject to systematic review. This is an update of a review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of steroid withdrawal or avoidance for kidney transplant recipients. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 15 February 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which steroids were avoided or withdrawn at any time point after kidney transplantation were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Assessment of risk of bias and data extraction was performed by two authors independently and disagreement resolved by discussion. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model and dichotomous outcomes were reported as relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals. MAIN RESULTS: We included 48 studies (224 reports) that involved 7803 randomised participants. Of these, three studies were conducted in children (346 participants). The 2009 review included 30 studies (94 reports, 5949 participants). Risk of bias was assessed as low for sequence generation in 19 studies and allocation concealment in 14 studies. Incomplete outcome data were adequately addressed in 22 studies and 37 were free of selective reporting.The 48 included studies evaluated three different comparisons: steroid avoidance or withdrawal compared with steroid maintenance, and steroid avoidance compared with steroid withdrawal. For the adult studies there was no significant difference in patient mortality either in studies comparing steroid withdrawal versus steroid maintenance (10 studies, 1913 participants, death at one year post transplantation: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.30) or in studies comparing steroid avoidance versus steroid maintenance (10 studies, 1462 participants, death at one year after transplantation: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.80). Similarly no significant difference in graft loss was found comparing steroid withdrawal versus steroid maintenance (8 studies, 1817 participants, graft loss excluding death with functioning graft at one year after transplantation: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.92) and comparing steroid avoidance versus steroid maintenance (7 studies, 1211 participants, graft loss excluding death with functioning graft at one year after transplantation: RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.86). The risk of acute rejection significantly increased in patients treated with steroids for less than 14 days after transplantation (7 studies, 835 participants: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.30) and in patients who were withdrawn from steroids at a later time point after transplantation (10 studies, 1913 participants, RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.61). There was no evidence to suggest a difference in harmful events, such as infection and malignancy, in adult kidney transplant recipients. The effect of steroid withdrawal in children is unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This updated review increases the evidence that steroid avoidance and withdrawal after kidney transplantation significantly increase the risk of acute rejection. There was no evidence to suggest a difference in patient mortality or graft loss up to five year after transplantation, but long-term consequences of steroid avoidance and withdrawal remain unclear until today, because prospective long-term studies have not been conducted

Steroid avoidance or withdrawal for kidney transplant recipients

Background: Steroid-sparing strategies have been attempted in recent decades to avoid morbidity from long-term steroid intake among kidney transplant recipients. Previous systematic reviews of steroid withdrawal after kidney transplantation have shown a significant increase in acute rejection. There are various protocols to withdraw steroids after kidney transplantation and their possible benefits or harms are subject to systematic review. This is an update of a review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of steroid withdrawal or avoidance for kidney transplant recipients. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 15 February 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which steroids were avoided or withdrawn at any time point after kidney transplantation were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Assessment of risk of bias and data extraction was performed by two authors independently and disagreement resolved by discussion. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model and dichotomous outcomes were reported as relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals. MAIN RESULTS: We included 48 studies (224 reports) that involved 7803 randomised participants. Of these, three studies were conducted in children (346 participants). The 2009 review included 30 studies (94 reports, 5949 participants). Risk of bias was assessed as low for sequence generation in 19 studies and allocation concealment in 14 studies. Incomplete outcome data were adequately addressed in 22 studies and 37 were free of selective reporting.The 48 included studies evaluated three different comparisons: steroid avoidance or withdrawal compared with steroid maintenance, and steroid avoidance compared with steroid withdrawal. For the adult studies there was no significant difference in patient mortality either in studies comparing steroid withdrawal versus steroid maintenance (10 studies, 1913 participants, death at one year post transplantation: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.30) or in studies comparing steroid avoidance versus steroid maintenance (10 studies, 1462 participants, death at one year after transplantation: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.80). Similarly no significant difference in graft loss was found comparing steroid withdrawal versus steroid maintenance (8 studies, 1817 participants, graft loss excluding death with functioning graft at one year after transplantation: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.92) and comparing steroid avoidance versus steroid maintenance (7 studies, 1211 participants, graft loss excluding death with functioning graft at one year after transplantation: RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.86). The risk of acute rejection significantly increased in patients treated with steroids for less than 14 days after transplantation (7 studies, 835 participants: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.30) and in patients who were withdrawn from steroids at a later time point after transplantation (10 studies, 1913 participants, RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.61). There was no evidence to suggest a difference in harmful events, such as infection and malignancy, in adult kidney transplant recipients. The effect of steroid withdrawal in children is unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This updated review increases the evidence that steroid avoidance and withdrawal after kidney transplantation significantly increase the risk of acute rejection. There was no evidence to suggest a difference in patient mortality or graft loss up to five year after transplantation, but long-term consequences of steroid avoidance and withdrawal remain unclear until today, because prospective long-term studies have not been conducted

Management of obesity in kidney transplant candidates and recipients: A clinical practice guideline by the DESCARTES Working Group of ERA

The clinical practice guideline Management of Obesity in Kidney Transplant Candidates and Recipients was developed to guide decision-making in caring for people with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) living with obesity. The document considers the challenges in defining obesity, weighs interventions for treating obesity in kidney transplant candidates as well as recipients and reflects on the impact of obesity on the likelihood of wait-listing as well as its effect on transplant outcomes. It was designed to inform management decisions related to this topic and provide the backdrop for shared decision-making. This guideline was developed by the European Renal Association's Developing Education Science and Care for Renal Transplantation in European States working group. The group was supplemented with selected methodologists to supervise the project and provide methodological expertise in guideline development throughout the process. The guideline targets any healthcare professional treating or caring for people with ESKD being considered for kidney transplantation or having received a donor kidney. This includes nephrologists, transplant physicians, transplant surgeons, general practitioners, dialysis and transplant nurses. Development of this guideline followed an explicit process of evidence review. Treatment approaches and guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Limitations of the evidence are discussed and areas of future research are presented

Risk prediction models for acute kidney injury in adults: An overview of systematic reviews.

BackgroundThe incidence of Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) and its human and economic cost is increasing steadily. One way to reduce the burden associated with AKI is to prevent the event altogether. An important step in prevention lies in AKI risk prediction. Due to the increasing number of available risk prediction models (RPMs) clinicians need to be able to rely on systematic reviews (SRs) to provide an objective assessment on which RPM can be used in a specific setting. Our aim was to assess the quality of SRs of RPMs in AKI.MethodsThe protocol for this overview was registered in PROSPERO. MEDLINE and Embase were searched for SRs of RPMs of AKI in any setting from 2003 till August 2020. We used the ROBIS tool to assess the methodological quality of the retrieved SRs.ResultsEight SRs were retrieved. All studies were assessed as being at high risk for bias using the ROBIS tool. Eight reviews had a high risk of bias in study eligibility criteria (domain 1), five for study identification and selection (domain 2), seven for data collection and appraisal (domain 3) and seven for synthesis and findings (domain 4). Five reviews were scored at high risk of bias across all four domains. Risk of bias assessment with a formal risk of bias tool was only performed in five reviews. Primary studies were heterogeneous and used a wide range of AKI definitions. Only 19 unique RPM were externally validated, of which 11 had only 1 external validation report.ConclusionThe methodological quality of SRs of RPMs of AKI is inconsistent. Most SRs lack a formal risk of bias assessment. SRs ought to adhere to certain standard quality criteria so that clinicians can rely on them to select a RPM for use in an individual patient.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration number is CRD 42020204236, available at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=204236

HLA Class II Antibodies at the Time of Kidney Transplantation and Cardiovascular Outcome: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: The negative role of HLA class II donor-specific antibody on graft outcome is well recognized. However, the potentially negative cardiovascular effects of preformed HLA class II antibodies and donor HLA in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) remain unestablished. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, retrospective cohort study including 1115 KTRs (2003-2016) with up to 4449 person-years of follow-up after transplantation and a median follow-up time of 5.1 years (interquartile range, 2.7-7.6). We evaluated the unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted association between pretransplant HLA class I and II antibodies, as well as HLA-DR1 donor/recipient genotype and the primary (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event [MACCE] or all-cause mortality) and secondary (MACCE or cardiovascular mortality) outcome. RESULTS: In a multivariate Cox proportional hazard model, HLA class II antibodies before transplantation were associated with increased adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for MACCE or all-cause mortality (aHR, 1.71 [1.13-2.60]; P = 0.012) even after adjustment for time-varying covariate graft loss (aHR, 1.68 [1.08-2.62]; P = 0.022) and biopsy-proven acute rejection (aHR, 1.71 [1.13-2.60]; P = 0.012). HLA class II antibodies were also associated with increased aHR for the secondary outcome, MACCE, or cardiovascular mortality (aHR, 1.92 [1.12-3.30]; P = 0.018). We investigated the effect of donor and recipient HLA-DR1 on these outcome parameters and demonstrated that KTRs with HLA-DR1 positive donors had an increased aHR for MACCE with all-cause (aHR, 1.45 [1.09-1.94]; P = 0.012) and cardiovascular mortality (aHR, 1.49 [1.00-2.22]; P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Prior sensitization against HLA class II antigens is associated with unfavorable long-term cardiovascular outcome in KTRs independent of graft loss or rejection. Recipients of an HLA-DR1 donor also have an impaired cardiovascular outcome.status: publishe

Exercise training for adult kidney transplant recipients

Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:. This review aims:. To assess the benefits and harms of regular physical activity interventions in adult kidney transplant recipients when compared with any other or no intervention. To determine whether benefits and harms vary in absolute or relative terms dependent on specific characteristics of the physical activity intervention (i.e. frequency, intensity, type, time, volume, progression and pattern of the intervention). To determine whether benefits and harms vary in absolute or relative terms dependent on specific characteristics of the participants studied (i.e. the influence of age and underlying kidney disease)

Exercise training for adult kidney transplant recipients

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014868pubpu

Nephrology and Public Policy Committee (NPPC) propositions to stimulate research collaboration in adults and children in Europe

The present paper aims to specify the strengths and the limitations currently present in Europe in order to explore how to proceed in the near future. Epidemiological and clinical research and public policy in Europe is generally considered to be comprehensive and successful and the European Renal Association – European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) is playing a key role in the field of nephrology research. The Nephrology and Public Policy Committee (NPPC) aims to improve the current situation and translation into public policy by planning 8 research topics to be supported in the coming 5 years by the ERA EDTA