Chakkera, Harini A

Introduction Problematic alcohol use negatively impacts individuals, families and communities. While perceptions regarding alcohol use are likely vital to mitigating problematic alcohol use at the population level, little is known. Perceptions that demarcate normative versus problematic use may be relevant for interventions in communities with normative alcohol use. Our study explores ethnocentric perceptions of alcohol use in a community where alcohol use is historically integrated into its social fabric. Methods Mixed-methods study design using a culturally curated online survey with closed and open-ended responses assessed perceptions regarding alcohol use. Participants were members of the Kodava community: an affluent ethno-linguistic community in Southern India with an international presence. For Kodavas, alcohol consumption is normative and socially sanctioned. We studied perceptions of alcohol use among family members, including factors influencing its use and the impact of problematic alcohol drinking on immediate and extended family in three domains: health, finances and relationships. Results Of 711 total respondents, a small minority of 11.4% (n=81) stated that at least one immediate family member experienced negative impacts of alcohol use. Among respondents who reported on their extended family (n=639), 52.1% (n=333) endorsed at least one member experienced negative impacts. The integration of quantitative and qualitative data elucidates negative impacts of alcohol use within and at the intersections of health, relationships and finances. Conclusions First study to employ social media (WhatsApp) to survey a globally dispersed ethnic community on alcohol use impacts among family members. Interventions tailored to these perceptions, in culturally embedded communities, may improve outcomes. The framework and approach of this study can be replicated globally.

ABSTRACTThis single‐center retrospective study investigated subclinical rejection prevalence and significance in simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplant (SPKT) recipients. We analyzed 352 SPKT recipients from July 2003 to April 2022. Our protocol included pancreas allograft surveillance biopsies at 1, 4, and 12months post‐transplant. After excluding 153 patients unable to undergo pancreas biopsy, our study cohort comprised 199 recipients. Among the 199 patients with protocol pancreas biopsies, 107 had multiple protocol pancreas biopsies in the first year, totaling 323. Subclinical rejection was identified in 132 episodes (41%). Of these, 72% were Grade 1, 20% were indeterminate, and 8% were Banff Grade 2 or higher. All episodes of subclinical rejection were treated. Rates of pancreas graft loss (10% vs. 7%) and clinical rejection (21% vs. 20%) at 3 years were similar between those with and without subclinical rejection. Subclinical rejection Banff Grade 2 or more was associated with poor pancreas graft survival HR of 5.5 (95% CI: 1.24–24.37, p = 0.025). Of 236 simultaneous protocol kidney and pancreas biopsies, 102 (43%) showed pancreas subclinical rejection, while only 17% had concurrent kidney subclinical rejection. Our findings suggest limited predictive value of pancreatic enzymes and euglycemia in detecting pancreas rejection. Furthermore, poor concordance existed between pancreas and kidney subclinical rejection.

AbstractIntroductionInpatient hyperglycemia is an established independent risk factor among several patient cohorts for hospital readmission. This has not been studied after kidney transplantation. Nearly one‐third of patients who have undergone a kidney transplant reportedly experience 30‐day readmission.MethodsData on first‐time solitary kidney transplantations were retrieved between September 2015 and December 2018. Information was linked to the electronic health records to determine diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and extract glucometric and insulin therapy data. Univariate logistic regression analysis and the XGBoost algorithm were used to predict 30‐day readmission. We report the average performance of the models on the testing set on bootstrapped partitions of the data to ensure statistical significance.ResultsThe cohort included 1036 patients who received kidney transplantation; 224 (22%) experienced 30‐day readmission. The machine learning algorithm was able to predict 30‐day readmission with an average area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) of 78% with (76.1%, 79.9%) 95% confidence interval (CI). We observed statistically significant differences in the presence of pretransplant diabetes, inpatient‐hyperglycemia, inpatient‐hypoglycemia, minimum and maximum glucose values among those with higher 30‐day readmission rates. The XGBoost model identified the index admission length of stay, presence of hyper‐ and hypoglycemia, the recipient and donor body mass index (BMI) values, presence of delayed graft function, and African American race as the most predictive risk factors of 30‐day readmission. Additionally, significant variations in the therapeutic management of blood glucose by providers were observed.ConclusionsSuboptimal glucose metrics during hospitalization after kidney transplantation are associated with an increased risk for 30‐day hospital readmission. Optimizing hospital blood glucose management, a modifiable factor, after kidney transplantation may reduce the risk of 30‐day readmission.

AbstractThe objective of this study was to compare the long‐term outcomes of Hispanic versus white recipients who underwent simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation (SPKT). This single‐center study, conducted from 2003 to 2022, had a median follow‐up of 7.5 years. The study included 91 Hispanic and 202 white SPKT recipients. The mean age (44 vs. 46 years), percentage of males (67% vs. 58%), and body mass index (BMI) (25.6 vs. 25.3 kg/m2) were similar between the Hispanic and white groups. The Hispanic group had more recipients with type 2 diabetes (38%) compared to the white group (5%, p < .001). The duration of dialysis was longer in Hispanics (640 vs. 473 days, p = .02), and fewer patients received preemptive transplants (10% vs. 29%, p < .01) compared to whites. Hospital length of stay, rates of BK Viremia, and acute rejection episodes within 1 year were similar between the groups. The estimated 5‐year kidney, pancreas, and patient survival rates were also similar between the groups, 94%, 81%, and 95% in Hispanics, compared to 90%, 79%, and 90% in whites. Increasing age and longer duration of dialysis were risk factors for death. Although Hispanic recipients had a longer duration on dialysis and fewer preemptive transplants, the survival rates were similar to those of white recipients. However, referring providers and many transplant centers continue to overlook pancreas transplants for appropriately selected patients with type 2 diabetes, particularly among minority populations. As a transplant community, it is crucial that we make efforts to comprehend and tackle these obstacles to transplantation.

Background. Nephrolithiasis in living kidney donors is concerning due to the potential impact on long-term postdonation kidney function. Methods. We performed a cohort study of living kidney donors from 2 centers with a baseline computed tomography scan and implantation renal biopsy. Donors (>5 y since donation) completed a follow-up survey or underwent chart review to assess eGFR and incident hypertension. Stone formers were classified as symptomatic if they had a past symptomatic episode or asymptomatic if only incidental radiographic kidney stones were identified during donor evaluation. We compared baseline clinical, imaging, and biopsy characteristics by stone former status including review of metabolic evaluations in stone formers. Long-term risks of renal complications (low eGFR and hypertension) by stone former status were evaluated. Results. There were 12 symptomatic and 76 asymptomatic stone formers among 866 donors. Overall, baseline clinical characteristics and implantation biopsy findings were similar between stone formers and non-stone formers. After a median follow-up of 10 y, stone former status was not associated with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2, or hypertension. Conclusions. Both asymptomatic and symptomatic SF have favorable histology findings at baseline. Long-term kidney outcomes were favorable in select stone formers with no evident increased long-term risk for decreased kidney function or hypertension after donation.

Background. Improving both patient and graft survival after kidney transplantation are major unmet needs. The goal of this study was to assess risk factors for specific causes of graft loss to determine to what extent patients who develop either death with a functioning graft (DWFG) or graft failure (GF) have similar baseline risk factors for graft loss. Methods. We retrospectively studied all solitary renal transplants performed between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2018, at 3 centers and determined the specific causes of DWFG and GF. We examined outcomes in different subgroups using competing risk estimates and cause-specific Cox models. Results. Of the 5752 kidney transplants, graft loss occurred in 21.6% (1244) patients, including 12.0% (691) DWFG and 9.6% (553) GF. DWFG was most commonly due to malignancy (20.0%), infection (19.7%), cardiac disease (12.6%) with risk factors of older age and pretransplant dialysis, and diabetes as the cause of renal failure. For GF, alloimmunity (38.7%), glomerular diseases (18.6%), and tubular injury (13.9%) were the major causes. Competing risk incidence models identified diabetes and older recipients with higher rates of both DWFG and nonalloimmune GF. Conclusions. These data suggest that at baseline, 2 distinct populations can be identified who are at high risk for renal allograft loss: a younger, nondiabetic patient group who develops GF due to alloimmunity and an older, more commonly diabetic population who develops DWFG and GF due to a mixture of causes—many nonalloimmune. Individualized management is needed to improve long-term renal allograft survival in the latter group.

AbstractThe OPTN/UNOS utilizes the calculated estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) score as the measure of post‐kidney transplant survival to guide allocation of deceased donor kidney transplantation. This score does not include any metric of functional capacity. Peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak), is an established predictor of survival among both the general and diseased populations. We assessed the association and discriminative capacity of VO2peak and that of EPTS score and all‐cause mortality post‐kidney transplant. Additionally, we assessed the “mortality risk” lower VO2peak conferred on those patients with low EPTS score. Among a cohort of 293 transplant recipients with at least 3‐years post‐transplant follow‐up, the median VO2peak was 15.0 ml/Kg/min. Lower pre‐transplant VO2peak and higher EPTS score conferred higher risk of post‐transplant mortality. Among the cohort of “low‐risk” patients (patients with EPTS score < 50) those with lower VO2peak had significantly higher risk of mortality (log rank p = 0.045). In fact, the mortality risk among those with low‐EPTS (< 50) and low VO2peak < 12 ml/Kg/min was equivalent to those with high EPTS (> 80) score. We concluded functional capacity as defined by VO2peak is an important reflection of post‐transplant survival. VO2peak is able to identify those with low EPTS who have similar survival to that of high EPTS phenotype.

Background. The study aims is to use the fragility index (FI) to examine the strength of evidence of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the last decade on kidney transplantation. Methods. We searched MEDLINE for studies on kidney transplantation. We included the RCTs that compared 2 groups with 1:1 randomization and reported significant P values (<0.05) for a dichotomous outcome and were published in the top 10 transplant journals. We calculated the FI; a calculation used to determine the minimum number of subjects needed to change from a nonevent to an event to make the study results nonsignificant (P ≥ 0.05). Results. Fifty-seven RCTs met our inclusion criteria. The median sample size was 100 participants in each arm, the median number of events was 16 (interquartile range, 8–30) in the intervention group. Among the included trials, 79% were industry-funded, 93% involved medications, and the majority were open label. The median FI was 3 (interquartile range, 1–11). In 43% of the trials, the number of patients reported lost to follow-up was higher than or equal to the FI. Only 4% of the RCTs imputed a value for the missing dichotomous outcome. Furthermore, the median number of subjects who discontinued the trial because of adverse effects was 21, which was greater than the FI in 60% of the RCTs. Conclusions. The arbitrary classification of results into “significant” and “nonsignificant” based on P value <0.05 should perhaps be interpreted with the help of other statistical parameters and FI is one of them.

Background. Participant withdrawal from clinical trials occurs for various reasons, predominantly adverse effects or intervention inefficacy. Because these missing participant data can have implications for the validity, reproducibility, and generalizability of study results, when conducting a systematic review, it is important to collect and appropriately analyze missing data information to assess its effects on the robustness of the study results. Methods. In this methodologic survey of missing participant data reporting and handling in systematic reviews, we included meta-analyses that provided pooled estimates of at least 1 dichotomous intervention outcome of a randomized controlled trial performed in adult kidney transplant subjects. Results. Eighty-three systematic reviews (17 Cochrane and 66 non-Cochrane reviews) met the inclusion criteria. The most common intervention was drugs (80%), with the majority involving immunosuppressant drugs 55% (n = 46), followed by surgery in 14% (n = 12). The median follow-up duration was 12 months (maximum, 240 mo). Intention-to-treat or modified intention-to-treat analysis was reported in 24% (n = 20) of the reviews (76% of Cochrane and 10% of non-Cochrane). Overall, the majority of systematic reviews did not quantify (90% [n = 60] non-Cochrane and 29% [n = 5] Cochrane) or include the reasons for missing participant data (88% [n = 58] non-Cochrane and 24% [n = 4] Cochrane). Eleven percent (n = 9) handled missing participant data, 5% (n = 4) justified the analytical method(s) used to handle it, and 2% (n = 2) performed a sensitivity analysis for it. Conclusions. Systematic reviews of kidney transplantation provide inadequate information on missing participant data and usually do not handle or discuss the associated risk of bias with it.