17 research outputs found

    Ambulatory blood pressure trajectories and blood pressure variability in kidney transplant recipients: a comparative study against chronic kidney disease patients

    Get PDF
    Background Hypertension is a major cardiovascular risk factor in both kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) and patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is considered the gold-standard method for hypertension management in these subjects. This is the first study evaluating the full ambulatory blood pressure (BP) profile and short-term BP variability (BPV) in KTRs versus CKD patients without kidney replacement therapy. Methods Ninety-three KTRs were matched with 93 CKD patients for age, sex, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. All participants underwent 24-hour ABPM. Mean ambulatory BP levels, BP trajectories, and BPV indices (standard deviation [SD], weighted SD, and average real variability) were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant between-group differences in 24-hour systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) (KTRs: 126.9 ± 13.1/79.1 ± 7.9 mmHg vs. CKD: 128.1 ± 11.2/77.9 ± 8.1 mmHg, p = 0.52/0.29), daytime SBP/DBP and nighttime SBP; nighttime DBP was slightly higher in KTRs (KTRs: 76.5 ± 8.8 mmHg vs. CKD: 73.8 ± 8.8 mmHg, p = 0.04). Repeated measurements analysis of variance showed a significant effect of time on both ambulatory SBP and DBP (SBP: F = [19, 3002] = 11.735, p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.069) but not of KTR/CKD status (SBP: F = [1, 158] = 0.668, p = 0.42, partial η2 = 0.004). Ambulatory systolic/diastolic BPV indices were not different between KTRs and CKD patients, except for 24-hour DBP SD that was slightly higher in the latter group (KTRs: 10.2 ± 2.2 mmHg vs. CKD: 10.9 ± 2.6 mmHg, p = 0.04). No differences were noted in dipping pattern between the two groups. Conclusion Mean ambulatory BP levels, BP trajectories, and short-term BPV indices are not significantly different between KTRs and CKD patients, suggesting that KTRs have a similar ambulatory BP profile compared to CKD patients without kidney replacement therapy

    Design and baseline characteristics of the finerenone in reducing cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in diabetic kidney disease trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Among people with diabetes, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and progression of their underlying kidney disease. Finerenone is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist that has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on CV and renal outcomes has not yet been investigated in long-term trials. Patients and Methods: The Finerenone in Reducing CV Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important CV and renal outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIGARO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 6 years. FIGARO-DKD randomized 7,437 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >= 25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio >= 30 to <= 5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level alpha = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Conclusions: FIGARO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of CV and renal events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2015-000950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02545049

    The Evolution of Living Donor Nephrectomy Program at A Hellenic Transplant Center. Laparoscopic vs. Open Donor Nephrectomy: Single-Center Experience

    No full text
    Since its introduction in 1995, laparoscopic nephrectomy has emerged as the preferred surgical approach for living donor nephrectomy. Given the ubiquity of the surgical procedure and the need for favorable outcomes, as it is an elective operation on otherwise healthy individuals, it is imperative to ensure appropriate preoperative risk stratification and anticipate intraoperative challenges. The aim of the present study was to compare peri-and postoperative outcomes of living kidney donors (LD), who had undergone laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN), with a control group of those who had undergone open nephrectomy (ODN). Health-related quality of life (QoL) was also assessed using the validated SF-36 questionnaire. Data from 252 LD from a single transplant center from March 2015 to December 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. In total, 117 donors in the LDN and 135 in the ODN groups were assessed. Demographics, type of transplantation, BMI, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, peri- and postoperative complications, renal function at discharge and QoL were recorded and compared between the two groups using Stata 13.0 software. There was no difference in baseline characteristics, nor in the prevalence of peri-and postoperative complications, with a total complication rate of 16% (mostly minor, Clavien–Dindo grade II) in both groups, while a different pattern of surgical complications was noticed between them. Duration of surgery was significantly longer in the ODN group (median 240 min vs. 160 min in LDN, p &lt; 0.01), warm ischemia time was longer in the LDN group (median 6 min vs.2 min in ODN, p &lt; 0.01) and length of hospital stay shorter in the LDN group (median 3 days vs. 7 days in ODN). Conversion rate from laparoscopic to open surgery was 2.5%. There was a drop in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at discharge of 36 mL/min in the LDN and 32 mL/min in the ODN groups, respectively (p = 0.03). No death, readmission or reoperation were recorded. There was a significant difference in favor of LDN group for each one of the eight items of the questionnaire (SF1–SF8). As for the two summary scores, while the total physical component summary (PCS) score was comparable between the two groups (57.87 in the LDN group and 57.07 in the ODN group), the mental component summary (MCS) score was significantly higher (62.14 vs. 45.22, p &lt; 0.001) in the LDN group. This study provides evidence that minimally invasive surgery can be performed safely, with very good short-term outcomes, providing several benefits for the living kidney donor, thereby contributing to expanding the living donor pool, which is essential, especially in countries with deceased-donor organ shortage

    Assessment of mRNA Vaccine Immunogenicity in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

    No full text
    Background and Objectives: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients have a higher risk of suffering from severe Coronavirus (COVID-19) compared to the general population. Studies have shown impaired immunogenicity of mRNA vaccines in this high-risk population; thus, SOT recipients have been prioritized globally for primary and booster doses. Materials and Methods: We analyzed 144 SOT recipients who had previously received two doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA1273 vaccine, and who were subsequently vaccinated with a booster dose of the mRNA1273 vaccine. Humoral and cellular immune responses were measured 1 and 3 months after the second dose, and 1 month after the third dose. Results: One month after the second dose, 33.6% (45/134) of patients displayed a positive antibody response with a median (25th, 75th) antibody titer of 9 (7, 161) AU/mL. Three months after the second dose, 41.8% (56/134) tested positive with a median (25th, 75th) antibody titer of 18 (7, 251) AU/mL. After the booster dose, the seropositivity rate increased to 69.4% (93/134), with a median (25th, 75th) titer of 966 (10, 8027) AU/mL. The specific SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response was assessed in 44 randomly selected recipients 3 months after the second dose, and 11.4% (5/44) of them had a positive response. Following the third dose, 42% (21/50) tested positive. Side effects after the third dose were mild, with pain at the injection site being the most frequent adverse effect, reported by 73.4% of the recipients. Conclusion: Our study shows a mild delayed increase in antibody titer, three months after primary vaccination compared to one month after. It also shows a robust augmentation of humoral and specific T-cell responses after the booster dose, as well as the safety and tolerability of the mRNA vaccines in SOT recipients

    Immunogenicity of the Two mRNA SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in a Large Cohort of Dialysis Patients

    No full text
    Chronic kidney disease patients, especially those on hemodialysis, are at the highest risk of a severe course and death from COVID-19. Moreover, they appear to have suboptimal response in both cellular and humoral immunity after vaccination. The present study investigated humoral and cellular response and safety after two doses of either of the two authorized mRNA vaccines in a cohort of 310 patients on maintenance dialysis. The antibody response rate was 94.5%, with a median (25th, 75th) antibody titer of 3478 (1236, 8141) AU/mL. Only mild adverse effects were observed. Only vaccine type was independently associated with immunogenicity. &Alpha; statistically significant difference in favor of mRNA1273 versus BNT162b2 vaccine was observed. Antibody positivity (100% vs. 94.3%, p &lt; 0.001), median (25th, 75th) antibody levels: 9499 (6118, 20,780) AU/mL vs. 3269 (1220, 7807) AU/mL (p &lt; 0.001). Among the 65 patients tested for T-cell response, 27 (41.5%) had a positive one with a median (25th, 75th) antibody titer of 6007 (3405, 12,068) AU/mL, while 38 with no T-cell response presented a lower median (25th, 75th) antibody titer of 1744 (850, 4176) AU/mL (p &lt; 0.001). Both mRNA vaccines are safe for dialysis patients and can trigger humoral and cellular responses, although with lower titers than those that have been reported to healthy individuals

    The <i>Han:SPRD</i> Rat: A Preclinical Model of Polycystic Kidney Disease

    No full text
    Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease (ADPKD) stands as the most prevalent hereditary renal disorder in humans, ultimately culminating in end-stage kidney disease. Animal models carrying mutations associated with polycystic kidney disease have played an important role in the advancement of ADPKD research. The Han:SPRD rat model, carrying an R823W mutation in the Anks6 gene, is characterized by cyst formation and kidney enlargement. The mutated protein, named Samcystin, is localized in cilia of tubular epithelial cells and seems to be involved in cystogenesis. The homozygous Anks6 mutation leads to end-stage renal disease and death, making it a critical factor in kidney development and function. This review explores the utility of the Han:SPRD rat model, highlighting its phenotypic similarity to human ADPKD. Specifically, we discuss its role in preclinical trials and its importance for investigating the pathogenesis of the disease and developing new therapeutic approaches

    Τhe Impact of Pre-Transplant Kidney Biopsy on the Evaluation of Prospective Living Kidney Donors

    No full text
    Living kidney donation contributes to increasing the donor pool. Since safety and excellent outcomes of living kidney donors (LKD) are essential, renal biopsy must be part of the pre-transplant evaluation in donors with isolated urine abnormalities or other risk factors. We retrospectively collected data on potential living donors evaluated in the pre-transplant outpatient clinic of Laiko General Hospital of Athens between 2007 and 2022, who underwent a pre-transplant biopsy. Biopsy indications included microscopic hematuria, borderline proteinuria and comorbidities suggestive of chronicity. Those with glomerular diseases or chronic lesions were excluded from donation. We identified 59 potential living donors who underwent renal biopsy. Of these, 10 (16.9%) were male. Median age was 58 (IQR 51–63) years, while 23 (39%) were older than 60 years. 49 out of 59 (83%) had glomerular hematuria, 10 (16.7%) had proteinuria (150–300 mg/d). Out of the 59 donors, 21 (35.6%) were hypertensive, three (5.1%) had impaired glucose tolerance and seven (11.9%) had a BMI > 30 kg/m2. A total of 32 (54.2%) potential donors were accepted for donation. Eight (13.6%) had IgA nephropathy, 10 (16.9%) TBMD and nine (15.3%) had increased chronicity including secondary FSGS. When compared with a control group of donors who did not need a pre-transplant biopsy, those 32 who donated were more frequently hypertensive (p = 0.003), but had similar eGFR [61.3 (±10.4) vs. 61.9 (±13.8), p = 0.866] after a follow-up of 79 (36–114) months. Renal biopsy is a useful tool in the evaluation of prospective LKD. Thorough assessment of donors with isolated urine abnormalities and marginal donors is critical to ensure good post-donation outcomes

    Kidney transplantation and kidney donation do not affect short-term blood pressure variability

    No full text
    Purpose Blood pressure variability (BPV) is an independent cardiovascular risk factor in CKD. Kidney transplantation (KTx) is associated with improved BP levels for kidney transplant recipient (KTRs), without evoking significant changes in donors. The aim of this study was to assess the short- and mid-time effects of KTx and donation on short-term BPV in KTRs and their respective living kidney donors. Materials and Methods Forty KTRs and their respective donors were evaluated with 24-h ABPM (Mobil-O-Graph-NG) at baseline (1 month before), 3-months and 12-months after KTx. Standard-deviation (SD), weighted-SD (wSD), coefficient-of-variation (CV), average-real-variability (ARV) and variability independent of mean (VIM) for SBP/DBP were calculated with validated formulas Results All 24-h systolic and diastolic BPV indexes studied did not change significantly from baseline to 3-month (SBP-wSD: 12.8 ± 3.0 vs 13.2 ± 3.4 mmHg, p = 0.608; SBP-ARV: 10.3 ± 2.4 vs 10.8 ± 2.6 mmHg, p = 0.463) and 12-month evaluation (SBP-wSD 12.8 ± 3.0 vs 12.1 ± 2.8; p = 0.424 and SBP-ARV: 10.3 ± 2.4 vs 10.2 ± 2.5; p = 0.615) after kidney transplantation in the KTRs.In kidney donors, all 24-h systolic BPV indices displayed a trend towards higher values at 3 months compared to baseline, but without reaching statistical significance (SBP-wSD: 12.2 ± 2.8 vs 13.6 ± 4.2 mmHg, p = 0.107 and SBP-ARV: 10.1 ± 2.1 vs 11.2 ± 3.1 mmHg, p = 0.099), the levels of 24-h systolic SBP indices at 12-months were almost identical to baseline values. 24-h diastolic BPV indices at 3-month and 12-month evaluation were similar to baseline. Conclusion Short-term BPV did not change significantly 3 and 12 months after kidney transplantation/donation neither in KTRs nor in living kidney donors. Longitudinal studies examining associations of BPV with adverse outcomes in these individuals are needed

    Hypocomplementemia at Diagnosis of Pauci-immune Glomerulonephritis Is Associated With Advanced Histopathological Activity Index and High Probability of Treatment Resistance

    No full text
    Introduction: Recent evidence suggests that complement activation is important in the pathogenesis of pauci-immune (PI) vasculitis. This is a retrospective investigation of the frequency of hypocomplementemia at pauci-immune glomerulonephritis (PIGN) diagnosis, in relation to vasculitic manifestations, renal histopathology, and treatment outcomes. Methods: A total of 115 patients with biopsy-proven PIGN were categorized based on their serum complement C3 (sC3). Histopathology evaluation included activity and chronicity indexes. The primary outcome of interest was treatment resistance, defined as a progressive decline in kidney function, with persistently active urine sediment, leading to dialysis dependency or vasculitis-related death. Results: In all, 20.9% of patients had low sC3 levels associated with more advanced renal impairment (P &lt; 0.01), requiring acute dialysis (P &lt; 0.01) more frequently compared to patients with normal sC3. Within 1 year, 85.7% of patients with normal sC3 responded to therapy, versus 58.3% of those with low sC3 (P = 0.001). The probability of treatment resistance was strongly associated with low sC3 (P = 0.004), high serum creatinine (P &lt; 0.001), acute dialysis requirement (P &lt; 0.001), and high histopathological score of chronicity (P &lt; 0.01). Advanced histopathological activity was related to more intense interstitial leukocyte infiltration (P = 0.005) and higher likelihood of fibrinoid necrosis documentation in a vessel wall (P = 0.02). The probability of treatment resistance was higher in patients with low sC3 (odds ratio [OR] = 6.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.47-28.35, P = 0.013), oliguria (OR = 29.57, 95% CI = 4.74-184, P &lt; 0.0001), and high chronicity score (OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.23-2.54, P = 0.002). Conclusion: Low sC3 is emerging as an independent predictor of treatment resistance in patients with PIGN associated with higher index of histopathological activity at diagnosis compared to normal sC3

    Sex differences in ambulatory blood pressure levels, control, and phenotypes of hypertension in kidney transplant recipients.

    No full text
    OBJECTIVES Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control is worse in men compared with women with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and this may partially explain the faster CKD progression in men. This is the first study investigating possible sex differences in prevalence, control and phenotypes of hypertension in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with office-BP and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). METHODS This cross-sectional study included 136 male and 69 female stable KTRs who underwent office-BP measurements and 24-h ABPM. Hypertension thresholds for office and ambulatory BP were defined according to the 2017 ACC/AHA and 2021 KDIGO guidelines for KTRs. RESULTS Age, time from transplantation, eGFR and history of major comorbidities did not differ between groups. Office SBP/DBP levels were insignificantly higher in men than women (130.3 ± 16.3/77.3 ± 9.4 vs. 126.4 ± 17.8/74.9 ± 11.5 mmHg; P = 0.118/0.104) but daytime SBP/DBP was significantly higher in men (128.5 ± 12.1/83.0 ± 8.2 vs. 124.6 ± 11.9/80.3 ± 9.3 mmHg; P = 0.032/P = 0.044). No significant between-group differences were detected for night-time BP. The prevalence of hypertension was similar by office-BP criteria (93.4 vs. 91.3%; P = 0.589), but higher in men than women with ABPM (100 vs. 95.7%; P = 0.014). The use of ACEIs/ARBs and CCBs was more common in men. Office-BP control was similar (43.3 vs. 44.4%, P = 0.882), but 24-h control was significantly lower in men than women (16.9 vs. 30.3%; P = 0.029). White-coat hypertension was similar (5.1 vs. 7.6%; P = 0.493), whereas masked hypertension was insignificantly more prevalent in men than women (35.3 vs. 24.2%; P = 0.113). CONCLUSION BP levels, hypertension prevalence and control are similar by office criteria but significantly different by ABPM criteria between male and female KTRs. Worse ambulatory BP control in male compared with female KTRs may interfere with renal and cardiovascular outcomes
    corecore