These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Impact of human leukocyte antigen matching and recipients' panel reactive antibodies on two-year outcome in presensitized renal allograft recipients. Author: Meng HL, Jin XB, Li XT, Wang HW, Lü JJ. Journal: Chin Med J (Engl); 2009 Feb 20; 122(4):420-6. PubMed ID: 19302748. Abstract: BACKGROUND: Renal transplantation in sensitized candidates remains a highly significant challenge worldwide. The production of panel reactive antibody (PRA) against human leukocyte antigen (HLA) is a major risk factor in presensitized recipients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of HLA matching and recipients' PRA on two-year outcome in presensitized renal allograft recipients. METHODS: We determined the percentage of panel reactivity and specificity of anti-HLA immunoglobulin (Ig) G antibodies in 73 presensitized renal allograft recipients compared with 81 unsensitized recipients (control group). HLA genotyping of both recipients and corresponding donors was performed by PCR with sequence-specific primers (PCR-SSP). We analyzed the factors influencing the early graft outcome (two-year rejection rates and survival rates of the grafts), including HLA mismatching, class and degree of panel reactivity, and target antigen of donors. RESULTS: Presensitized recipients had a worse two-year outcome than unsensitized recipients (P = 0.019 for rejection rate, P = 0.01 for survival rate). The difference in number of HLA-mismatched alleles with either 6-antigen matching (Ag M) standard or amino acid residue matching (Res M) standard was not significant between the rejection and non-rejection groups of presensitized recipients or between the graft survival group and graft loss group. Compared with the control group, recipients with both PRA-I and PRA-II antibodies had a significantly worse two-year outcome (P = 0.001 for rejection rate, P = 0.002 for survival rate). The two-year outcomes of the peak PRA >/= 50% group and its subgroup, at-transplant PRA > or = 50% group, were significantly worse compared with the control group (P = 0.025 and P = 0.001 for rejection rate, P = 0.043 and P = 0.024 for survival rate). The rejection rates of the at-transplant target antigen positive group and its subgroup, HLA-I target antigen positive group, were significantly higher than the control group (P = 0.001 and P = 0.001), target antigen negative group (P = 0.003 and P = 0.001), and peak target antigen positive with negative at-transplant target antigen group (P = 0.024 and P = 0.002). Two-year graft survival rates of the target antigen positive group and HLA-I target antigen positive group were significantly lower than the control group (P = 0.012 and P = 0.001). The two-year outcome of target antigen unknown group was similar to that of the target antigen positive group. Presensitized recipients with pre-transplant plasmapheresis or immunoadsorption (PRA prepared group) had a better but non-significant two-year outcome than the control group. However, the PRA unprepared presensitized recipients were different to the control group (P = 0.004 for rejection rate and P = 0.005 for survival rate). Hyperacute rejection (HR) occurred in three recipients with positive HLA-I target antigen and without mismatch according to Res M and in one case with positive PRA-II (for an unknown target antigen). No HR occurred in eight cases with positive HLA-II target antigens. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-transplant PRA preparations might improve the access of presensitized patients to renal donors. Avoiding antigen-positive donors remains a fundamental measure in preventing HR and early rejections.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]