Is screening for Factor V Leiden and Prothrombin G20210A Mutations in Renal Transplantation worthwhile? Results of a large single-center U.K. study

This single center study is the largest series of renal transplant recipients and donors screened for the commonest prothrombotic genotypes. A total of 562 transplant recipients and 457 kidney donors were genotyped for the factor V Leiden and prothrombin G20210A mutations. The prevalence of heterozygous factor V Leiden was 3.4% and 2.6% and prothrombin G20210A was 2.0% and 1.1% in recipients and donors, respectively, similar frequencies to that of the general U.K. population. The 30-day and 1-year graft survival rates in recipients with thrombophilic mutations were 93% and 93%, compared with 88% and 82% in patients without these mutations (log-rank P =0.34). Thrombophilia in recipients (odds ratio 0.55; confidence interval 0.06-2.29; P =0.56) or in donors (odds ratio 1.53; confidence interval 0.27-5.74; P =0.46) did not correlate with graft loss at 30 days after transplantation. In contrast to recent reports, this study did not demonstrate an association between thrombophilia and renal allograft loss, and routine screening is not recommended.

Outcome of pregnancy following renal transplantation

Successful renal transplantation improves fertility with 1 in 50 women of childbearing age becoming pregnant. Pregnancy following renal transplantation is associated with increased maternal and fetal complications. In Belfast 118 women of childbearing age (15-45 yrs) have received a renal allograft and of these 14 (12%) have become pregnant. Twenty-seven pregnancies have resulted in 23 live births (including one set of identical twins), 1 still birth and 4 first trimester abortions. The most frequent complications were hypertension and prematurity. In this group of patients, whose sole immunosuppressive therapy was azathioprine and prednisolone, pregnancy post transplantation was associated with frequent successful outcome and a low incidence of maternal and fetal complications.

Tacrolimus is not associated with gingival overgrowth in renal transplant patients

BACKGROUND: Cyclosporin A is used extensively to prevent the rejection of allogenic renal transplants. However, it is associated with a variety of undesirable side effects including gingival overgrowth. Tacrolimus (FK506), has been marketed as an effective alternative immunosuppressant to cyclosporin A and recent subjective reports suggest patients taking it complain infrequently of gingival problems. This clinical investigation was undertaken to confirm whether or not tacrolimus adversely affected the gingival health of renal transplant recipients.

METHODS: Renal transplant patients (RTPs) under the care of the Renal Transplantation Service at the Manchester Royal Infirmary, who had received a renal allograft at least 18 months earlier, were recruited for this study. All but one of the RTPs had been taking tacrolimus since transplantation. The other had commenced tacrolimus therapy two months after receiving her allograft. A hospital based control group was recruited from non transplanted individuals attending the Turner Dental School, Manchester. Each patient underwent a detailed dental assessment and had dental impressions taken. The extent of gingival overgrowth was determined from plaster models.

RESULTS: 25 renal transplant recipients and 26 control patients were included in the study. None of the individuals in either the tacrolimus or control groups had clinically significant overgrowth. The patients in the tacrolimus group with the highest overgrowth scores were those also taking calcium antagonists as treatment for hypertension.

CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that tacrolimus has no adverse effects on the gingival tissues and thus has potential as an alternative immunosuppressant for individuals susceptible to developing cyclosporin A-induced gingival overgrowth.

Late referral for assessment of renal failure

It has been recommended that adult patients with a serum creatinine above 150 µmol/l should be referred to a nephrologist for specialist assessment. This study ascertained all patients in Northern Ireland with creatinine above this concentration in 2001 (n?=?19 286 ) to see if this triggered referral within the subsequent year. After exclusion of those who were already known to a nephrologist and those who had acute renal failure, it was found that younger patients and diabetic patients were more likely to be referred. There was no difference in referral rates between male and female patients. However, only 6.5% of all non-diabetic subjects and 19% of diabetic patients were referred within 12 months after a first increased serum creatinine test.

Association of Functional Heme Oxygenase-1 Gene Promoter Polymorphism with Renal Transplantation Outcomes

Heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) is a cytoprotective molecule and increased expression in experimental transplant models correlates with reduced graft injury. A functional dinucleotide repeat (GT)n polymorphism, within the HO-1 promoter, regulates gene expression; a short number of repeats (S-allele

Are gatekeepers to renal services referring patients equitably?

Objective: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) benefit from specialist interventions to retard progression of renal failure and prevent cardiovascular events. Certain patient groups have poor access to specialist renal services when dialysis is required. This study used a population-based laboratory database to investigate access to and timeliness of referral to renal specialists relatively early in the course of the disease.

Methods: All tests for serum creatinine and haemoglobin (Hb) A1c in Northern Ireland in a two-year period (2001 and 2002) were retrieved for 345,441 adults. Of these, 16,856 patients had at least one serum creatinine level above 150 µmol/L in 2001 not deemed to be due to acute renal failure (crude prevalence 1.42%). This cohort was followed until the end of 2002 and the differences in the time to referral to a specialist were assessed using Cox's proportional hazards regression.

Results: Diabetic patients, older patients and those living in deprived areas were significantly more likely to have serum creatinine testing, compared with non-diabetic, younger and those living in more affluent areas. Delays in referral to renal specialists for patients with raised serum creatinine levels were significantly shorter among diabetic patients, women, younger individuals, those living in rural areas, those living close to renal centres and those living in deprived areas. Overall, only 19% of diabetic patients and 6% of non-diabetic patients who had CKD had seen a renal specialist within 12 months of their index creatinine test.

Conclusion: Contrary to other diseases, disadvantaged patients do not seem to be under-investigated for renal disease compared with their more affluent neighbours and are generally referred earlier for specialist assessment. However, the absolute rate of timely specialist assessment is low. Recent changes in referral criteria for CKD will result in more referrals and will have serious resource implications. Opportunities for health gain among patients with declining renal function are being missed, particularly among the old and those living furthest from specialist centres.