Citations

AbstractWell‐selected patients with kidney disease and diabetes mellitus who undergo simultaneous kidney‐pancreas transplantation often experience dramatic improvements in quality of life and long‐term survival compared to those who remain on medical therapy. Over the past several years the importance of frailty in the pancreas transplant candidate and recipient populations has grown. More patients with advanced age have entered the waitlist, and complications from prolonged diabetes, even in younger patients, have created increased evidence of risk for frailty. Given these concerns, and the broad challenges facing pancreas transplantation volumes overall, we generated this review to help establish the impact and implications. We summarize the interplay of immunological factors, aging, environmental factors, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease that put these patients at risk for frailty. We discuss its measurement and recommend a combination of two instruments (both well‐validated and one entirely objective). We describe the outcomes for patients before and after pancreas transplantation who may have frailty, and what interventions can be taken to mitigate its effects. Broader investigation into frailty in the pancreas transplant population is needed to better understand how to select patients for pancreas transplantation and to how manage its consequences thereafter.

AbstractBackgroundDue to a substantial decline in pancreas transplantation (PT) across the United States over the past 15 years, we sought to understand the perceptions and practices of US PT programs.MethodsSurveys were sent to members of the American Society of Transplantation Surgeons and the American Society of Transplantation by email and professional society postings between August 2019 and November 2019.ResultsOne hundred twenty three responses were recorded from 56 unique programs. Program characteristics were obtained from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Respondents were transplant surgeons (71%), transplant nephrologists (17%), trainees (9%), and allied professionals (3%). Programs were defined according to annual volume as: low (<5 PT/year), intermediate (6–20), or high (>20). High‐volume programs reported that these factors were most important for increased PT: expansion of recipient selection, more aggressive donor utilization, and hiring of PT program‐specific personnel. At both the program and national level, the vast majority (82% and 79%, respectively) felt the number of PTs currently performed are not in balance with patients' needs.ConclusionsOverall, programs reported that the option of PT is not offered adequately to diabetic patients and that strategies to maintain higher PT volume are most evident at intermediate, and especially, high‐volume programs.

AbstractObjectiveCannabis is the most commonly used recreational drug in the United States, and transplant acceptability for cannabis using candidates varies among transplant centers. However, the prevalence and impact of cannabis use on outcomes of kidney transplant recipients remain unclear. This study aimed to summarize the prevalence and impact of cannabis use on outcomes after kidney transplantation.MethodsA literature search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library Databases from inception until September 2019 to identify studies assessing the prevalence of cannabis use among kidney transplant recipients, and reported adverse outcomes after kidney transplantation. Effect estimates from the individual studies were obtained and combined utilizing random‐effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian‐Laird.ResultsA total of four cohort studies with a total of 55 897 kidney transplant recipients were enrolled. Overall, the pooled estimated prevalence of cannabis use was 3.2% (95% CI 0.4%‐20.5%). While the use of cannabis was not significantly associated with all‐cause allograft failure (OR = 1.31, 95% CI 0.70‐2.46) or mortality (OR = 1.52, 95% CI 0.59‐3.92), the use of cannabis among kidney transplant recipients was significantly associated with increased death‐censored graft failure with pooled OR of 1.72 (95% CI 1.13‐2.60).ConclusionsThe overall estimated prevalence of cannabis use among kidney transplant recipients is 3.2%. The use of cannabis is associated with increased death‐censored graft failure, but not mortality after kidney transplantation.

Patient monitoring after kidney transplantation (KT) for early detection of allograft rejection remains key in preventing allograft loss. Serum creatinine has poor predictive value to detect ongoing active rejection as its increase is not sensitive, nor specific for acute renal allograft rejection. Diagnosis of acute rejection requires allograft biopsy and histological assessment, which can be logistically challenging in some cases and carries inherent risk for complications related to procedure. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), DNA of donor origin in the blood of KT recipient arising from cells undergoing injury and death, has been examined as a potential surrogate marker for allograft rejection. A rise in dd-cfDNA levels precedes changes in serum creatinine allows early detections and use as a screening tool for allograft rejection. In addition, when used in conjunction with donor-specific antibodies (DSA), it increases the pre-biopsy probability of antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) aiding the decision-making process. Advancements in noninvasive biomarker assays such as dd-cfDNA may offer the opportunity to improve and expand the spectrum of available diagnostic tools to monitor and detect risk for rejection and positively impact outcomes for KT recipients. In this this article, we discussed the evolution of dd-cfDNA assays and recent evidence of assessment of allograft rejection and injury status of KT by the use of dd-cfDNA.