An evaluation of the Banff classification of early renal allograft biopsies and correlation with outcome

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation

Volumn 14, Issue 10, 1999, Pages 2364-2369

  Bates, William D ^a,c   Davies, David R ^a   Welsh, Ken ^a   Gray, D W R ^a,b   Fuggle, Susan V ^a   Morris, Peter J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b JOHN RADCLIFFE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY   (South Africa)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AZATHIOPRINE; CYCLOSPORIN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENT; STEROID;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FOLLOW UP; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; KIDNEY ALLOGRAFT; KIDNEY ALLOGRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY BIOPSY; KIDNEY NECROSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

EVALUATION STUDIES; GRAFT REJECTION; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMANS; KIDNEY; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; KIDNEY TUBULES; NECROSIS; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; RENAL CIRCULATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TRANSPLANTATION, HOMOLOGOUS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VASCULITIS;

EID: 0032843717     PISSN: 09310509     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ndt/14.10.2364     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Gray DW, Richardson A, Hughes D, Fuggle S, Dunnill M, Higgins R, McWhinnie D, Morris PJ. A prospective, randomised, blind comparison of 3 biopsy techniques in the management of patients after renal transplantation. Transplantation 1992; 53:1226-1232
2. Solez K, Axelsen RA, Benediktsson H et al. International standardisation of criteria for the histologic diagnosis of renal allograft rejection: the Banff working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Kidney Int 1993; 44: 411-422
3. Dooper MM, Hoitsma AJ, Koene RA, Bogman MJ. Evaluation of the Banff criteria for the histological diagnosis of rejection in renal allograft biopsies. Transplant Proc 1995;27(1): 1005-1006
4. Gaber LW, Moore LW, Alloway RR, Flax SD, Shokouh-Amiri MH, Schroder T, Gaber AO. Correlation between Banff classification, acute renal rejection scores and reversal of rejection. Kidney Int 1996; 49: 481-487
5. Gaber LW, Moore LW, Gaber AO et al. Utility of standardized histological classification in the management of acute rejection. 1995 Efficacy Endpoints Conference. Transplantation 1998; 64(3): 376-380
6. Nickerson P, Jeffery J, Gough J et al. Identification of clinical and histopathologic risk factors for diminished renal function 2 years posttransplant. J Am Soc Nephrol 1998; 9(3): 482-487
7. Rush DN, Henry SF, Jeffery JR, Schroeder TJ, Gough J. Histological findings in early routine biopsies of stable renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 1994; 57(2): 208-211
8. Rush DN, Jeffery JR, Gough J. Sequential protocol biopsies in renal transplant patients. Clinico-pathological correlations using the Banff schema. Transplantation 1995; 59(4): 511-514
9. Solez K, Benediktsson H, Cavallo T et al. Report of the third Banff Conference on allograft pathology (July 20-24, 1995) on classification and lesion scoring in renal allograft pathology. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 441-444
10. Solez K, Racusen L, Rayner D, Olsen S, Halloran P. The Banff schema four years later. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 450-452
11. Racusen LC. Improvement of lesion quantitation for the Banff Schema for renal allograft rejection. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 489-490
12. Racusen L, Rayner D, Trokov K, Olsen S, Solez K. The Banff classification of renal allograft pathology: Where do we go from here? Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 486-488
13. Colvin RB. The renal allograft biopsy. Kidney Int 1996; 50:1069-1082
14. Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin RB et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 1999; 55: 713-723
15. Van Sasse JLCM. Van der Woude F, Thorogood J et al. The relation between acute vascular and interstitial renal allograft rejection and subsequent chronic rejection. Transplantation 1995; 59: 1-6