Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (17)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haas, M.
Right arrow Articles by Druml, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Haas, M.
Right arrow Articles by Druml, W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant (2002) 17: 1503-1508
© 2002 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association

Peri-operative immunoadsorption in sensitized renal transplant recipients

Martin Haas1,, Georg A. Böhmig1, Zdenka Leko-Mohr1, Markus Exner2, Heinz Regele3, Kurt Derfler1, Walter H. Hörl1 and Wilfred Druml1

1 Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Department of Internal Medicine III, University of Vienna, Austria, 2 Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Vienna, Austria and 3 Division of Ultrastructural Pathology and Cell Biology, Department of Pathology, University of Vienna, Austria

Background. Re-transplanted kidney allograft recipients with high levels of panel reactive antibodies (PRA) are at increased risk of early immunologic graft loss. In these patients, prophylactic peri-operative antibody depletion by immunoadsorption (IA) could prevent humoral graft injury and thus, in combination with anti-cellular rejection therapy, improve graft survival.

Methods. Twenty re-transplanted and broadly immunized cadaver kidney recipients (median PRA reactivity 87%, range 55–100%) were treated with IA (protein A) immediately before transplantation and during the early post-transplantation period (median number of IA sessions 11, range 1–24). Patients received additional prophylactic anti-lymphocyte antibody therapy. Nineteen patients had a negative pre-transplant cross-match. In one patient, a positive cross-match was rendered negative by the pre-transplant IA session.

Results. One-year graft survival was 80% and patient survival 95%. Median (range) serum creatinine in functioning grafts was 1.6 (0.8–2.7) mg/dl at discharge and 1.5 (1.0–5.8) mg/dl at 1 year. Two grafts were lost due to acute vascular rejection, whereby one rejection occurred after withdrawal of immunosuppression due to septicaemia. One patient had acute cellular rejection, which was reversed by a second course of anti-lymphocyte antibody therapy. Thrombotic microangiopathy and surgical complications were the causes for one graft loss each. Retrospective immunohistochemistry revealed peritubular C4d staining, a presumed marker for humoral alloreactivity, in 12 out of 15 biopsies.

Conclusions. These results suggest that prophylactic peri-operative IA and anti-lymphocyte antibody therapy might be an effective therapeutic strategy for the prevention of early graft failure in sensitized re-transplant recipients.

Keywords: HLA-antibodies; humoral response; hypersensitized patients; immunoadsorption; kidney re-transplant; kidney transplantation; renal graft rejection

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Martin Haas, MD, Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Department of Internal Medicine III, University of Vienna, Währinger Guertel 18–20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Email: martin.haas{at}akh\|[hyphen]\|wien.ac.at


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
W. Sulowicz and T. Stompor
LDL-apheresis and immunoadsorption: novel methods in the treatment of renal diseases refractory to conventional therapy
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., July 1, 2003; 18(90005): v59 - 62.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.