Digital pathology evaluation of complement C4d component deposition in the kidney allograft biopsies is a useful tool to improve reproducibility of the scoring

Diagnostic Pathology

Volumn 6, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2011, Pages

  Brazdziute, Ernesta ^a   Laurinavicius, Arvydas ^a  

^a VILNIUS UNIVERSITY   (Lithuania)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPLEMENT COMPONENT C4;

ALGORITHM; ALLOTRANSPLANTATION; ARTICLE; BIOPSY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; GRAFT REJECTION; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; KIDNEY; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ALGORITHMS; BIOPSY; COMPLEMENT C4; GRAFT REJECTION; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; KIDNEY; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TRANSPLANTATION, HOMOLOGOUS;

EID: 79953140156     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17461596     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1746-1596-6-S1-S5     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Regele H, Böhmig GA, Habicht A, Gollowitzer D, Schillinger M, Rockenschaub S, Watschinger B, Kerjaschki D, Exner M. Capillary deposition of complement split product C4d in renal allografts is associated with basement membrane injury in peritubular and glomerular capillaries: a contribution of humoral immunity to chronic allograft rejection. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002, 13:2371-2380. 10.1097/01.ASN.0000025780.03790.0F, 12191982.
2. Herzenberg AM, Gill JS, Djurdjev O, Magil AB. C4d deposition in acute rejection: an independent long-term prognostic factor. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002, 13:234-241.
3. Solez K, Colvin RB, Racusen LC, Haas M, Sis B, Mengel M, Halloran PF, Baldwin W, Banfi G, Collins AB, Cosio F, David DSR, Drachenberg C, Einecke G, Fogo AB, Gibson IW, Glotz D, Iskandar SS, Kraus E, Lerut E, Mannon RB, Mihatsch M, Nankivell BJ, Nickeleit V, Papadimitriou JC, Randhawa P, Regele H, Renaudin K, Roberts I, Seron D, Smith RN, Valente M. Banff 07 Classification of Renal Allograft Pathology: Updates and Future Directions. Am J Transplant 2008, 8:753-760. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02159.x, 18294345.
4. Furness P, Taub N, Assmann K, Banfi G, Cosyns J, Dorman A, Hill C, Kapper S, Waldherr R, Laurinavicius A, Marcussen N, Martins AP, Nogueira M, Regele H, Seron D, Carrera M, Sund S, Taskinen E, Paavonen T, Tihomirova T, Rosenthal R. International Variation in Histologic Grading Is Large, and Persistent Feedback Does Not Improve Reproducibility. Am J Surg Pathol 2003, 27(6):805-10. 10.1097/00000478-200306000-00012, 12766585.
5. Gibson IW, Gwinner W, Brocker V, Sis B, Riopel J, Roberts ISD, Scheffner I, Jhangri GS, Mengel M. Peritubular capillaritis in renal allografts: prevalence, scoring system, reproducibility and clinicopathological correlates. Am J Transplant 2008, 8:819-825. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2007.02137.x, 18261174.
6. Christian SA, Gaspert A, Nickeleit V, Mihatsch MJ. C4d staining of renal allograft biopsies: a comparative analysis of different staining techniques. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007, 22:568-576.
7. Sund S, Grimm P, Reisaeter AV, Torstein H. Computerized image analysis vs semiquantitative scoring in evaluation of kidney allograft fibrosis and prognosis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2004, 19:2838-2845. 10.1093/ndt/gfh490, 15385637.
8. Garro R, Moradi E, Kambham N, Grimm P. Development of computerized image analysis to enhance the reliability and reproducibility of renal allograft rejection quantification. Am J Transplant 2010, 10(4):37-212.