A Universal Bleeding Risk Score in Native and Allograft Kidney Biopsies: A French Nationwide Cohort Study

BackgroundThe risk of bleeding after percutaneous biopsy in kidney transplant recipients is usually low but may vary. A pre-procedure bleeding risk score in this population is lacking.MethodsWe assessed the major bleeding rate (transfusion, angiographic intervention, nephrectomy, hemorrhage/hematoma) at 8 days in 28,034 kidney transplant recipients with a kidney biopsy during the 2010-2019 period in France and compared them to 55,026 patients with a native kidney biopsy as controls.ResultsThe rate of major bleeding was low (angiographic intervention: 0.2%, hemorrhage/hematoma: 0.4%, nephrectomy: 0.02%, blood transfusion: 4.0%). A new bleeding risk score was developed (anemia = 1, female gender = 1, heart failure = 1, acute kidney failure = 2 points). The rate of bleeding varied: 1.6%, 2.9%, 3.7%, 6.0%, 8.0%, and 9.2% for scores 0 to 5, respectively, in kidney transplant recipients. The ROC AUC was 0.649 (0.634-0.664) in kidney transplant recipients and 0.755 (0.746-0.763) in patients who had a native kidney biopsy (rate of bleeding: from 1.2% for score = 0 to 19.2% for score = 5).ConclusionsThe risk of major bleeding is low in most patients but indeed variable. A new universal risk score can be helpful to guide the decision concerning kidney biopsy and the choice of inpatient vs. outpatient procedure both in native and allograft kidney recipients

How to Explore an Endocrine Cause of Hypertension

Hypertension (HTN) is the most frequent modifiable risk factor in the world, affecting almost 30 to 40% of the adult population in the world. Among hypertensive patients, 10 to 15% have so-called “secondary” HTN, which means HTN due to an identified cause. The most frequent secondary causes of HTN are renal arteries abnormalities (renovascular HTN), kidney disease, and endocrine HTN, which are primarily due to adrenal causes. Knowing how to detect and explore endocrine causes of hypertension is particularly interesting because some causes have a cure or a specific treatment available. Moreover, the delayed diagnosis of secondary HTN is a major cause of uncontrolled blood pressure. Therefore, screening and exploration of patients at risk for secondary HTN should be a serious concern for every physician seeing patients with HTN. Regarding endocrine causes of HTN, the most frequent is primary aldosteronism (PA), which also is the most frequent cause of secondary HTN and could represent 10% of all HTN patients. Cushing syndrome and pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma (PPGL) are rarer (less than 0.5% of patients). In this review, among endocrine causes of HTN, we will mainly discuss explorations for PA and PPGL

Hypertension with negative metaiodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy

No abstract available

Elevated Lipoprotein(a) levels increase Major Adverse Limb Event

International audienceAbstract Background High lipoprotein(a) levels are involved in the development of cardiovascular events, as particularly in myocardial infarction, stroke, and peripheral artery disease. Studies assessing prognostic values of lipoprotein(a) levels on the lower limbs are lacking. Purpose The aim of our study was to look after a relationship between the lipoprotein(a) level and the incidence of major adverse limb events (MALE) defined as major amputation, peripheral artery endovascular revascularization or peripheral artery bypass. Methods We included 16,513 patients with lipoprotein(a) measurements from our clinical information system. Normal lipoprotein(a) level was under 50 mg/dL and we defined: high lipoprotein(a) level as a lipoprotein(a) level between 50 mg/dL and 134 mg/dL and very high lipoprotein(a) level as a lipoprotein(a) levels over 134 mg/dL, i.e the 95th percentile in this cohort. Accelerated Failure Time models were used to assess the relationship between the lipoprotein(a) level and the incidence of MALE retrieved from the patient's electronic record during a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 3.74 (1.07; 7.30) years after the lipoprotein(a) measurement. MALE was defined as the occurrence of one of the following during follow-up: aortofemoral bypass surgery, limb bypass surgery, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty revascularization of the iliac, or infrainguinal arteries; or major amputation above the forefoot. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary Results Median lipoprotein(a) level was 24 mg/dL (10; 60), with 70.3%; 24.7%; and 5.0% within normal; high and very high lipoprotein(a) level respectively. The 1-year MALE incidence was 2.2% [95% CI: 1.96; 2.51]; 2.60% [95% CI: 2.09; 3.10] and 4.54% [95% CI: 3.08; 5.98] among the normal, high and very high lipoprotein(a) level patients respectively. High and very high lipoprotein(a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of MALE (adjusted Accelerated Failure Time Exponential Estimate) 0.43 [95% CI: 0.24; 0.78], p=0.01 and 0.17 [95% CI: 0.07; 0.40], p<0.001, respectively. Conclusion In this large cohort of unselected real-world hospital inpatients, higher lipoprotein(a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of MALE. Though, lipoprotein(a) measurement shall be taken into account not only to refine the cardiovascular risk but also the lower limb risk of revascularization or amputation. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None

The Association between Renal Resistive Index and Premature Mortality after Kidney Transplantation Is Modified by Pre-Transplant Diabetes Status: A Cohort Study

International audienceBACKGROUND: Renal resistive index (RI) predicts mortality in renal transplant recipients, but we do not know whether this is true in diabetic patients. The objective of this study was to analyse the long-term predictive value of RI for death with a functioning graft (DWFG) in renal transplant recipients with or without pre-transplant diabetes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in 1800 renal transplant recipients between 1985 and 2017 who were followed for up to 30 years (total observation period: 14\,202 patient years). Donor and recipient characteristics at time of transplantation and at 3\,months were reviewed. The long-term predictive value of RI for DWFG and the age-RI and arterial pressure-RI relationships were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 284/1800 (15.7%) patients had diabetes mellitus before transplantation. RI was <0.75 in 1327/1800 patients (73.7%). High RI was associated with a higher risk of DWFG in non-diabetic patients [hazard ratio (HR)\,=\,3.39, 95% confidence interval 2.50-4.61; P\,<\,0.001], but not in patients with pre-transplant diabetes (HR\,=\,1.25, 0.70-2.19; P\,=\,0.39), even after multiple adjustments. There was no interaction between diabetes and age. In contrast, there was an interaction between RI and pulse pressure. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that RI is not a predictor of DWFG in diabetic renal transplant recipients, in contrast to non-diabetic recipients. These findings could be due to a different age-RI or pulse pressure-RI relationship

Impact on Renal Resistive Index of Diabetes in Renal Transplant Donors and Recipients: A Retrospective Analysis of 1827 Kidney Transplant Recipients

International audienceHigh renal resistive index (RI) is observed in diabetes and is associated with poor patient survival, but whether it is primarily due to renal vascular resistance or systemic vascular alterations is unclear. The respective impact of kidney transplant from diabetic donors or to diabetic recipients on RI would shed some light on this issue. The objective of the study was to analyze the impact of donor and recipient diabetes on RI in order to understand the respective impact of the kidney and the vascular environment. The authors conducted a retrospective study in 1827 renal transplant recipients who received a kidney between 1985 and 2017, and had Doppler measurements at 3~months after transplant. Donor and recipient characteristics at the time of transplant and at 3~months were reviewed. Both donor diabetes and recipient diabetes were associated with RI in univariate analysis, but only recipient diabetes remained significantly associated in stepwise multivariate analyses (effect estimate on RI: +0.03~±~0.005, P~<~0.001). These findings were confirmed when RI was expressed as a binary variable using a cutoff of 0.75 (OR~=~2.50 [1.77, 3.54], P~<~0.001). Other determinants of RI were recipient characteristics (age, sex, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and duration of dialysis). Donor characteristics were not associated with RI. Our results suggest that high RI observed in diabetic recipients shortly after transplant is primarily due to the new vascular environment, rather than to characteristics of the transplanted kidney. Therefore, RI reflects systemic rather than intra-renal changes