Mao, Michael A

Background: Contrast-induced encephalopathy (CIE) is an infrequent but serious neurological condition that occurs shortly after the administration of contrast during endovascular and angiography procedures. Patients suffering from chronic kidney disease (CKD) or end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) are considered to be at a higher risk of contrast medium neurotoxicity, due to the delayed elimination of the contrast medium. However, the occurrence and characteristics of CIE in CKD/ESKD patients have not been extensively investigated. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature search, utilizing databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, up to September 2022. The purpose was to identify documented cases of CIE among patients with CKD or ESKD. Employing a random-effects model, we calculated the pooled incidence and odds ratio (OR) of CIE in CKD/ESKD patients. Results: Our search yielded a total of eleven articles, comprising nine case reports and two observational studies. Among these studies, 2 CKD patients and 12 ESKD patients with CIE were identified. The majority of the CKD/ESKD patients with CIE (93%) had undergone intra-arterial contrast media and/or endovascular procedures to diagnose acute cerebrovascular disease, coronary artery disease, and peripheral artery disease. The male-to-female ratio was 64%, and the median age was 63 years (with an interquartile range of 55 to 68 years). In the two observational studies, the incidence of CIE was found to be 6.8% in CKD patients and 37.5% in ESKD patients, resulting in a pooled incidence of 16.4% (95% CI, 2.4%–60.7%) among the CKD/ESKD patients. Notably, CKD and ESKD were significantly associated with an increased risk of CIE, with ORs of 5.77 (95% CI, 1.37–24.3) and 223.5 (95% CI, 30.44–1641.01), respectively. The overall pooled OR for CIE in CKD/ESKD patients was 32.9 (95% CI, 0.89–1226.44). Although dialysis prior to contrast exposure did not prevent CIE, approximately 92% of CIE cases experienced recovery after undergoing dialysis following contrast exposure. However, the effectiveness of dialysis on CIE recovery remained uncertain, as there was no control group for comparison. Conclusions: In summary, our study indicates an association between CIE and CKD/ESKD. While patients with CIE showed signs of recovery after dialysis, further investigations are necessary, especially considering the lack of a control group, which made the effects of dialysis on CIE recovery uncertain.

Limited data are available on the utilization of sodium thiosulfate (STS) treatment for calciphylaxis in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, while it is well-studied in hemodialysis (HD) patients. A systematic literature search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, EBM Reviews—Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EBM Reviews—Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify reported cases of PD patients with calciphylaxis who received STS. The search covered the inception of the databases through August 2022. Across 19 articles, this review identified 30 PD patients with calciphylaxis who received STS. These included 15 case reports, 2 case series, and 2 cohort studies. The administration routes and doses varied depending on the study. For intravenous (IV) administration (n = 18), STS doses ranged from 3.2 g twice daily to 25 g three times weekly for 5 weeks to 8 months. Outcomes included 44% of patients experiencing successful wound healing, 6% discontinuing STS due to adverse effects, 67% transitioning to HD, and 50% dying from calciphylaxis complications. For intraperitoneal (IP) administration (n = 5), STS doses ranged from 12.5 to 25 g three to four times weekly for 12 h to 3 months. Results showed 80% of patients achieving successful wound healing, 80% discontinuing STS due to adverse effects, 40% transitioning to HD, and 20% dying from IP STS-related chemical peritonitis. In cases where patients switched from IV to IP STS (n = 3), doses ranged from 12.5 to 25 g two to three times weekly for 2.5 to 5 months. Among them, 67% experienced successful wound healing, while 33% died from sepsis. Two cases utilized oral STS at a dose of 1500 mg twice daily for 6 and 11 months, resulting in successful wound healing without adverse effects or need for HD. However, one patient (50%) died due to small bowel obstruction. This systematic review provides an overview of STS treatment for PD patients with calciphylaxis. Although successful treatment cases exist, adverse effects were significant. Further research, including larger clinical studies and pharmacokinetic data, is necessary to establish the optimal route, dose, and efficacy of STS in PD patients.

Clinical outcomes of deceased donor kidney transplants coming from diabetic donors currently remain inconsistent, possibly due to high heterogeneities in this population. Our study aimed to cluster recipients of diabetic deceased donor kidney transplants using an unsupervised machine learning approach in order to identify subgroups with high risk of inferior outcomes and potential variables associated with these outcomes. Consensus cluster analysis was performed based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 7876 recipients of diabetic deceased donor kidney transplants from 2010 to 2019 in the OPTN/UNOS database. We determined the important characteristics of each assigned cluster and compared the post-transplant outcomes between the clusters. Consensus cluster analysis identified three clinically distinct clusters. Recipients in cluster 1 (n = 2903) were characterized by oldest age (64 ± 8 years), highest rate of comorbid diabetes mellitus (55%). They were more likely to receive kidney allografts from donors that were older (58 ± 6.3 years), had hypertension (89%), met expanded criteria donor (ECD) status (78%), had a high rate of cerebrovascular death (63%), and carried a high kidney donor profile index (KDPI). Recipients in cluster 2 (n = 687) were younger (49 ± 13 years) and all were re-transplant patients with higher panel reactive antibodies (PRA) (88 [IQR 46, 98]) who received kidneys from younger (44 ± 11 years), non-ECD deceased donors (88%) with low numbers of HLA mismatch (4 [IQR 2, 5]). The cluster 3 cohort was characterized by first-time kidney transplant recipients (100%) who received kidney allografts from younger (42 ± 11 years), non-ECD deceased donors (98%). Compared to cluster 3, cluster 1 had higher incidence of primary non-function, delayed graft function, patient death and death-censored graft failure, whereas cluster 2 had higher incidence of delayed graft function and death-censored graft failure but comparable primary non-function and patient death. An unsupervised machine learning approach characterized diabetic donor kidney transplant patients into three clinically distinct clusters with differing outcomes. Our data highlight opportunities to improve utilization of high KDPI kidneys coming from diabetic donors in recipients with survival-limiting comorbidities such as those observed in cluster 1.

Background and Objectives: The aim of our study was to categorize very highly sensitized kidney transplant recipients with pre-transplant panel reactive antibody (PRA) ≥ 98% using an unsupervised machine learning approach as clinical outcomes for this population are inferior, despite receiving increased allocation priority. Identifying subgroups with higher risks for inferior outcomes is essential to guide individualized management strategies for these vulnerable recipients. Materials and Methods: To achieve this, we analyzed the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN)/United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database from 2010 to 2019 and performed consensus cluster analysis based on the recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 7458 kidney transplant patients with pre-transplant PRA ≥ 98%. The key characteristics of each cluster were identified by calculating the standardized mean difference. The post-transplant outcomes were compared between the assigned clusters. Results: We identified two distinct clusters and compared the post-transplant outcomes among the assigned clusters of very highly sensitized kidney transplant patients. Cluster 1 patients were younger (median age 45 years), male predominant, and more likely to have previously undergone a kidney transplant, but had less diabetic kidney disease. Cluster 2 recipients were older (median 54 years), female predominant, and more likely to be undergoing a first-time transplant. While patient survival was comparable between the two clusters, cluster 1 had lower death-censored graft survival and higher acute rejection compared to cluster 2. Conclusions: The unsupervised machine learning approach categorized very highly sensitized kidney transplant patients into two clinically distinct clusters with differing post-transplant outcomes. A better understanding of these clinically distinct subgroups may assist the transplant community in developing individualized care strategies and improving the outcomes for very highly sensitized kidney transplant patients.

Background: Better understanding of the different phenotypes/subgroups of non-U.S. citizen kidney transplant recipients may help the transplant community to identify strategies that improve outcomes among non-U.S. citizen kidney transplant recipients. This study aimed to cluster non-U.S. citizen kidney transplant recipients using an unsupervised machine learning approach; Methods: We conducted a consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant- related characteristics in non-U.S. citizen kidney transplant recipients in the United States from 2010 to 2019 in the OPTN/UNOS database using recipient, donor, and transplant-related characteristics. Each cluster’s key characteristics were identified using the standardized mean difference. Post-transplant outcomes were compared among the clusters; Results: Consensus cluster analysis was performed in 11,300 non-U.S. citizen kidney transplant recipients and identified two distinct clusters best representing clinical characteristics. Cluster 1 patients were notable for young age, preemptive kidney transplant or dialysis duration of less than 1 year, working income, private insurance, non-hypertensive donors, and Hispanic living donors with a low number of HLA mismatch. In contrast, cluster 2 patients were characterized by non-ECD deceased donors with KDPI <85%. Consequently, cluster 1 patients had reduced cold ischemia time, lower proportion of machine-perfused kidneys, and lower incidence of delayed graft function after kidney transplant. Cluster 2 had higher 5-year death-censored graft failure (5.2% vs. 9.8%; p < 0.001), patient death (3.4% vs. 11.4%; p < 0.001), but similar one-year acute rejection (4.7% vs. 4.9%; p = 0.63), compared to cluster 1; Conclusions: Machine learning clustering approach successfully identified two clusters among non-U.S. citizen kidney transplant recipients with distinct phenotypes that were associated with different outcomes, including allograft loss and patient survival. These findings underscore the need for individualized care for non-U.S. citizen kidney transplant recipients.

Patients with IgA nephropathy (IgAN), including Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis (HSP), who present with rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis (RPGN) have a poor prognosis despite aggressive immunosuppressive therapy. The utility of plasmapheresis/plasma exchange (PLEX) for IgAN/HSP is not well established. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy of PLEX for IgAN and HSP patients with RPGN. A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and through Cochrane Database from inception through September 2022. Studies that reported outcomes of PLEX in IgAN or HSP patients with RPGN were enrolled. The protocol for this systematic review is registered with PROSPERO (no. CRD42022356411). The researchers systematically reviewed 38 articles (29 case reports and 9 case series articles) with a total of 102 RPGN patients (64 (62.8%) had IgAN and 38 (37.2%) had HSP). The mean age was 25 years and 69% were males. There was no specific PLEX regimen utilized in these studies, but most patients received at least 3 PLEX sessions that were titrated based on the patient’s response/kidney recovery. The number of PLEX sessions ranged from 3 to 18, and patients additionally received steroids and immunosuppressive treatment (61.6% of patients received cyclophosphamide). Follow-up time ranged from 1 to 120 months, with the majority being followed for at least 2 months after PLEX. Among IgAN patients treated with PLEX, 42.1% (n = 27/64) achieved remission; 20.3% (n = 13/64) achieved complete remission (CR) and 18.7% (n = 12/64) partial remission (PR). 60.9% (n = 39/64) progressed to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Among HSP patients treated with PLEX, 76.3% (n = 29/38) achieved remission; of these, 68.4% (n = 26/38) achieved CR and 7.8% achieved (n = 3/38) PR. 23.6% (n = 9/38) progressed to ESKD. Among kidney transplant patients, 20% (n = 1/5) achieved remission and 80% (n = 4/5) progressed to ESKD. Adjunctive plasmapheresis/plasma exchange with immunosuppressive therapy showed benefits in some HSP patients with RPGN and possible benefits in IgAN patients with RPGN. Future prospective, multi-center, randomized clinical studies are needed to corroborate this systematic review’s findings.

Background: The utilization of multi-dimensional patient data to subtype hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) can individualize patient care. Machine learning (ML) consensus clustering may identify HRS subgroups with unique clinical profiles. In this study, we aim to identify clinically meaningful clusters of hospitalized patients for HRS using an unsupervised ML clustering approach. Methods: Consensus clustering analysis was performed based on patient characteristics in 5564 patients primarily admitted for HRS in the National Inpatient Sample from 2003–2014 to identify clinically distinct HRS subgroups. We applied standardized mean difference to evaluate key subgroup features, and compared in-hospital mortality between assigned clusters. Results: The algorithm revealed four best distinct HRS subgroups based on patient characteristics. Cluster 1 patients (n = 1617) were older, and more likely to have non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, cardiovascular comorbidities, hypertension, and diabetes. Cluster 2 patients (n = 1577) were younger and more likely to have hepatitis C, and less likely to have acute liver failure. Cluster 3 patients (n = 642) were younger, and more likely to have non-elective admission, acetaminophen overdose, acute liver failure, to develop in-hospital medical complications and organ system failure, and to require supporting therapies, including renal replacement therapy, and mechanical ventilation. Cluster 4 patients (n = 1728) were younger, and more likely to have alcoholic cirrhosis and to smoke. Thirty-three percent of patients died in hospital. In-hospital mortality was higher in cluster 1 (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.31–1.79) and cluster 3 (OR 7.03; 95% CI 5.73–8.62), compared to cluster 2, while cluster 4 had comparable in-hospital mortality (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.97–1.32). Conclusions: Consensus clustering analysis provides the pattern of clinical characteristics and clinically distinct HRS phenotypes with different outcomes.

Background: The Mediterranean, Dietary Approach to Stop Hypertension (DASH), and plant-based diets may provide cardiovascular benefit to the general population. However, data on their effect on end stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients are limited. This systematic review aims to assess the impact of Mediterranean, DASH, and plant-based diets on outcomes among ESKD patients. Methods: A literature review was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases from inception through September 2022 to identify studies that assess the clinical outcomes of Mediterranean, DASH, or plant-based diets on ESKD patients on hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). Effect estimates from the individual studies were derived utilizing the random-effect, generic inverse variance approach of DerSimonian and Laird. Results: Seven studies with 9400 ESKD patients (8395 HD and 1005 PD) met the eligibility criteria and were included in the data analysis. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) of mortality for ESKD patients who adhered to the Mediterranean versus plant-based diet were 0.49 (95% CI: 0.07–3.54; two studies, I2 = 67%) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.75–1.01; two studies, I2 = 0%), respectively. Data on mortality for ESKD patients on a DASH diet were limited to one study with an OR of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.89–1.12). The pooled OR of cardiovascular mortality among ESKD patients who adhered to a plant-based diet was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.68–1.08; two studies, I2 = 0%), compared to those who did not. Data on cardiovascular mortality among those with Mediterranean and DASH diet were limited to one study with ORs of 1.14 (95% CI: 0.90–1.43) and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.99–1.43), respectively. Mediterranean diet adherence was found to be associated with reduced risk of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) with an OR of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.68–0.99) in a study including 127 ESKD patients. The risk of hyperkalemia was not significant among those with a plant-based diet with an OR of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.94–1.07) in a study including 150 ESKD patients. Conclusions: While our systematic review demonstrated no significant associations of Mediterranean, DASH, and plant-based diets with reduced all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality, there was also no evidence that suggested harmful effects of these diets to ESKD patients.

Background and Objectives: Our study aimed to cluster dual kidney transplant recipients using an unsupervised machine learning approach to characterize donors and recipients better and to compare the survival outcomes across these various clusters. Materials and Methods: We performed consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 2821 dual kidney transplant recipients from 2010 to 2019 in the OPTN/UNOS database. We determined the important characteristics of each assigned cluster and compared the post-transplant outcomes between clusters. Results: Two clinically distinct clusters were identified by consensus cluster analysis. Cluster 1 patients was characterized by younger patients (mean recipient age 49 ± 13 years) who received dual kidney transplant from pediatric (mean donor age 3 ± 8 years) non-expanded criteria deceased donor (100% non-ECD). In contrast, Cluster 2 patients were characterized by older patients (mean recipient age 63 ± 9 years) who received dual kidney transplant from adult (mean donor age 59 ± 11 years) donor with high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) score (59% had KDPI ≥ 85). Cluster 1 had higher patient survival (98.0% vs. 94.6% at 1 year, and 92.1% vs. 76.3% at 5 years), and lower acute rejection (4.2% vs. 6.1% within 1 year), when compared to cluster 2. Death-censored graft survival was comparable between two groups (93.5% vs. 94.9% at 1 year, and 89.2% vs. 84.8% at 5 years). Conclusions: In summary, DKT in the United States remains uncommon. Two clusters, based on specific recipient and donor characteristics, were identified through an unsupervised machine learning approach. Despite varying differences in donor and recipient age between the two clusters, death-censored graft survival was excellent and comparable. Broader utilization of DKT from high KDPI kidneys and pediatric en bloc kidneys should be encouraged to better address the ongoing organ shortage.

Background: Our study aimed to characterize kidney transplant recipients who received high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) kidneys using unsupervised machine learning approach. Methods: We used the OPTN/UNOS database from 2010 to 2019 to perform consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 8935 kidney transplant recipients from deceased donors with KDPI ≥ 85%. We identified each cluster’s key characteristics using the standardized mean difference of >0.3. We compared the posttransplant outcomes among the assigned clusters. Results: Consensus cluster analysis identified 6 clinically distinct clusters of kidney transplant recipients from donors with high KDPI. Cluster 1 was characterized by young, black, hypertensive, non-diabetic patients who were on dialysis for more than 3 years before receiving kidney transplant from black donors; cluster 2 by elderly, white, non-diabetic patients who had preemptive kidney transplant or were on dialysis less than 3 years before receiving kidney transplant from older white donors; cluster 3 by young, non-diabetic, retransplant patients; cluster 4 by young, non-obese, non-diabetic patients who received dual kidney transplant from pediatric, black, non-hypertensive non-ECD deceased donors; cluster 5 by low number of HLA mismatch; cluster 6 by diabetes mellitus. Cluster 4 had the best patient survival, whereas cluster 3 had the worst patient survival. Cluster 2 had the best death-censored graft survival, whereas cluster 4 and cluster 3 had the worst death-censored graft survival at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Cluster 2 and cluster 4 had the best overall graft survival at 1 and 5 years, respectively, whereas cluster 3 had the worst overall graft survival. Conclusions: Unsupervised machine learning approach kidney transplant recipients from donors with high KDPI based on their pattern of clinical characteristics into 6 clinically distinct clusters.