Defining the Etiology of Renal Allograft Dysfunction Using Banff 2019 Classification: Correlation with Post-Transplant Duration and Creatinine Levels-A Comprehensive Analysis of 200 Renal Biopsies at a Tertiary Care Medical Center Hospital.

OBJECTIVE

Chronic kidney disease is a growing global health issue, contributing significantly to morbidity and mortality. The incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is approximately 100 per million population. Renal transplantation remains the cornerstone treatment for ESRD, with a projected 20-year survival rate of 60%. We aim to define the etiology of renal allograft dysfunction using the Banff 2019 classification by analyzing 200 renal allograft biopsies in correlation with creatinine levels across post-transplant time frames.

METHODOLOGY

200 renal allograft biopsies are analyzed using the recent Banff 2019 classification with creatinine levels and post-transplant duration correlation.

RESULTS

The study included 150 (75%) male patients and 50 (25%) female patients, with the majority 78 (39%) representing the age group of 16-30 years. 36 (18%) biopsies were within 3-month post-transplant, while 92 (46%) were 2-year post-transplant. According to the Banff 2019 classification, 92 (46.0%) transplant rejection biopsies were identified, with most 54 (27%) exhibiting antibody-mediated rejection (Category 2), including 40 (20%) active acute antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) and 14 (7.0%) chronic active ABMR. T-cell-mediated rejection (TCMR; Category 4) represented 12 (6%) biopsies, including 10 (5%) acute TCMR and 2 (1%) chronic active TCMR. Category 5, the miscellaneous group, represented 100 (50%) biopsies, out of which 32 (16%) exhibited calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) toxicity, 38 (19%) acute tubular necrosis, and 8 (4%) thrombotic microangiopathy. A notable variation in the dysfunction distribution across different post-transplant time frames indicated a temporal evolution in the underlying causes of allograft dysfunction. Specific Banff categories showed a robust association with renal dysfunction, potentially contributing to the elevation of creatinine levels and renal function deterioration.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the intricate pathophysiology of renal allograft dysfunction. Most biopsies were attributed to ABMR whereas one-third of biopsies exhibited mixed lesions (ABMR and TCMR or ABMR and calcineurin inhibitor toxicity (CNIT)). Additionally, this study suggests that renal allograft rejection remains a significant contributor to graft dysfunction. A complex interplay between histological findings, Banff classification, and renal function is noted. A significant difference in the distribution of dysfunction across post-transplant time frames is noted suggesting a temporal evolution in the etiology of allograft dysfunction. Certain Banff categories demonstrate a stronger association with renal dysfunction that may influence creatinine level increase and renal function deterioration. In correspondence to the recent Banff 2019 guidelines for diagnosing ABMR, we emphasize the role of C4d staining on immunofluorescence or immunohistochemistry in allograft biopsies as imperative for timely diagnosis and immunosuppressant therapy adjustment, ultimately enhancing graft survival. Further research is needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms driving renal dysfunction in different Banff categories, ultimately informing personalized management strategies for patients with renal allograft dysfunction. In line with the Banff 2019 guidelines for diagnosing ABMR, this study highlights the critical role of C4d staining through immunofluorescence or immunohistochemistry in allograft biopsies for early diagnosis and timely adjustment of immunosuppressive therapy, ultimately improving graft survival.