Do We Have to Treat Subclinical Rejections in Early Protocol Renal Allograft Biopsies?

Transplantation Proceedings

Volumn 39, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 2550-2553

  Masin Spasovska, J ^a   Spasovski, G ^a   Dzikova, S ^a   Petrusevska, G ^a   Lekovski, Lj ^a   Ivanovski, N ^a   Popov, Z ^a  

^a SS CYRIL AND METHODIUS UNIVERSITY   (Macedonia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUTE GRAFT REJECTION; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CHRONIC ALLOGRAFT NEPHROPATHY; CHRONIC GRAFT REJECTION; CHRONICITY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; KIDNEY ALLOGRAFT; KIDNEY ALLOGRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY BIOPSY; KIDNEY DONOR; KIDNEY FUNCTION; LIVING DONOR; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TREATMENT PLANNING;

ADULT; CREATININE; GRAFT REJECTION; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MIDDLE AGED; PROTEINURIA; RENAL DIALYSIS; TIME FACTORS; TRANSPLANTATION, HOMOLOGOUS;

EID: 35348947539     PISSN: 00411345     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2007.08.023     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Isoniemi H.M., Krogerus L., von Willebrand E., et al. Histological findings in well-functioning, long term renal allografts. Kidney Int 41 (1992) 155
2. Rush D.N., Henry S.H., Jeffery J.R., et al. Histological findings in early routine biopsies of stable renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 57 (1994) 208
3. Rush D., Nickerson P., Gough J., et al. Beneficial effects of treatment of early subclinical rejection: a randomized study. J Am Soc Nephrol 9 (1998) 2129
4. Nickerson P., Jeffery J.R., Gough J., et al. Effect of increasing baseline immunosuppression on theprevalence of clinical and subclinical rejection: a pilot study. J Am Soc Nephrol 10 (1999) 1801
5. Shapiro R., Randhawa P., Jordan M., et al. An'analysis of early renal transplant protocol biopsies-the high incidence of subclinical tubulitis. Am J Transplant 1 (2001) 47
6. Saad R., Gritsch H., Shapiro R., et al. Clinical significance of renal allograft biopsies with "borderline changes," as defined in the Banff schema. Transplantation 64 (1997) 992
7. Morath C., Ritz E., and Zeier M. Protocol biopsy: what is the rationale and what is the evidence?. Nephrol Dial Transplant 18 (2003) 644
8. Rush D., Karpinski M., Nickerson P., et al. Does subclinical rejection contribute to chronic rejection in renal transplant patients?. Clin Transplant 13 (1999) 441
9. Rush D.N., Jeffery J.R., Trpkov K., et al. Effect of subclinical rejection on renal allograft histology and function at 6 months. Transplant Proc 28 (1996) 494
10. Nankivell B.J., Fenton-Lee C.A., et al. Effect of histological damage on long-term kidney transplant outcome. Transplantation 71 (2001) 515
11. Seron D., Moreso F., Bover J., et al. Early protocol renal allograft biopsies and graft outcome. Kidney Int 51 (1997) 310
12. Racusen L.C., Solez K., Colvin R.B., et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 55 (1999) 713
13. Kuypers D.R., Chapman J.R., O'Connell P.J., et al. Predictors of renal transplant histology at three months. Transplantation 75 (1999) 1222
14. Gough J., Rush D., Jeffery J., et al. Reproducibility of the Banff schema in reporting protocol biopsies of stable renal allografts. Nephrol Dial Transplant 17 (2002) 1081
15. Schweitzer E.J., Drachenberg C.B., Anderson L., et al. Significance of the Banff borderline biopsy. Am J Kidney Dis 28 (1996) 585
16. Gaber L.W., Moore L.W., Alloway R.R., et al. Correlation between Banff classification, acute renal rejection scores, and reversal of rejection. Transplant Proc 27 (1995) 1019