Kim Jeong Ho, Kim Young Soo, Choi Min Seok, Kim Young Ok, Yoon Sun Ae, Kim Ji-Il, Moon In Sung, Choi Bum Soon, Park Cheol Whee, Yang Chul Woo, Kim Yong-Soo, Chung Byung Ha
Transplant research center, Seoul, Korea.
Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, 505 Banpo-Dong, Seocho-Ku, 137-040, Seoul, Korea.
BMC Nephrol. 2017 Jan 27;18(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s12882-017-0461-5.
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is frequently detected in deceased donors (DDs), and it could be associated with adverse clinical outcomes in corresponding kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). In this regard, we sought to identify which criteria is better between the KDIGO and AKIN criteria for the diagnosis of AKI in DDs in the prediction of clinical outcomes after kidney transplantation (KT).
Two hundred eighty-five cases of deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) were included. We divided them into three groups; the non-AKI by both KDIGO and AKIN criteria group (n = 120), the AKI by KDIGO only group (n = 61), and the AKI by both criteria group (n = 104) according to the diagnosis of AKI using the KDIGO and AKIN criteria in the corresponding 205 DDs. We compared the development of delayed graft function (DGF), the change in allograft function, the allograft survival among the three groups.
The incidence of DGF was significantly higher in the AKI by KDIGO only and the AKI by both criteria groups than in the non-AKI by both criteria group (P < 0.05 each). But no difference was detected between the AKI by KDIGO only group and the AKI by both criteria group (P > 0.05). Therefore, the KDIGO criteria had a better predictive value for DGF occurrence than the AKIN criteria (Area under the curve = 0.72 versus 0.63, P < 0.05) in Receiver Operation Characteristic analysis. On comparison of allograft function, the AKI by KDIGO only and the AKI by both criteria groups showed a significantly deteriorating pattern by 6 months after KT in comparison with the non-AKI by both criteria group (P < 0.05). However, the differences disappeared at 1 year from KT and long-term allograft survival did not differ among the three groups. AKI stage either by KDIGO or AKIN in DDs did not affect long-term allograft survival in corresponding KTRs as well.
The KDIGO criteria may be more useful for predicting DGF than the AKIN criteria. However, AKI or AKI stage by either criteria in DDs failed to affect long-term allograft outcomes in KTRs.
急性肾损伤(AKI)在已故供体(DDs)中经常被检测到,并且它可能与相应肾移植受者(KTRs)的不良临床结局相关。在这方面,我们试图确定在预测肾移植(KT)后临床结局时,KDIGO标准和AKIN标准中哪一个在诊断DDs的AKI方面更好。
纳入285例已故供体肾移植(DDKT)病例。根据在205例DDs中使用KDIGO和AKIN标准对AKI的诊断,我们将它们分为三组:KDIGO和AKIN标准均诊断为非AKI组(n = 120)、仅KDIGO标准诊断为AKI组(n = 61)以及两种标准均诊断为AKI组(n = 104)。我们比较了三组中移植肾功能延迟恢复(DGF)的发生情况、移植肾功能的变化以及移植肾存活情况。
仅KDIGO标准诊断为AKI组和两种标准均诊断为AKI组的DGF发生率显著高于两种标准均诊断为非AKI组(每组P < 0.05)。但仅KDIGO标准诊断为AKI组和两种标准均诊断为AKI组之间未检测到差异(P > 0.05)。因此,在受试者工作特征分析中,KDIGO标准对DGF发生的预测价值优于AKIN标准(曲线下面积 = 0.72对0.63,P < 0.05)。在比较移植肾功能时,仅KDIGO标准诊断为AKI组和两种标准均诊断为AKI组在KT后6个月时与两种标准均诊断为非AKI组相比显示出显著恶化的模式(P < 0.05)。然而,在KT后1年时差异消失,并且三组之间的长期移植肾存活情况没有差异。DDs中KDIGO或AKIN标准的AKI分期也未影响相应KTRs的长期移植肾存活。
KDIGO标准在预测DGF方面可能比AKIN标准更有用。然而,DDs中任何一种标准的AKI或AKI分期均未影响KTRs的长期移植肾结局。