No abstract

Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is one of the most devastating sequalae of kidney transplantation. A number of published articles have covered either de novo or recurrent TMA in an isolated manner. We have, hereby, in this article endeavored to address both types of TMA in a comparative mode. We appreciate that de novo TMA is more common and its prognosis is poorer than recurrent TMA; the latter has a genetic background, with mutations that impact disease behavior and, consequently, allograft and patient survival. Post-transplant TMA can occur as a recurrence of the disease involving the native kidney or as de novo disease with no evidence of previous involvement before transplant. While atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome is a rare disease that results from complement dysregulation with alternative pathway overactivity, de novo TMA is a heterogenous set of various etiologies and constitutes the vast majority of post-transplant TMA cases. Management of both diseases varies from simple maneuvers, e.g., plasmapheresis, drug withdrawal or dose modification, to lifelong complement blockade, which is rather costly. Careful donor selection and proper recipient preparation, including complete genetic screening, would be a pragmatic approach. Novel therapies, e.g., purified products of the deficient genes, though promising in theory, are not yet of proven value.

The glomerular diseases after renal transplantation can occur de novo, i.e., with no relation to the native kidney disease, or more frequently occur as a recurrence of the original disease in the native kidney. There may not be any difference in clinical features and histological pattern between de novo glomerular disease and recurrence of original glomerular disease. However, structural alterations in transplanted kidney add to dilemma in diagnosis. These changes in architecture of histopathology can happen due to: (1) exposure to the immunosuppression specifically the calcineurin inhibitors (CNI); (2) in vascular and tubulointerstitial alterations as a result of antibody mediated or cell-mediated immunological onslaught; (3) post-transplant viral infections; (4) ischemia-reperfusion injury; and (5) hyperfiltration injury. The pathogenesis of the de novo glomerular diseases differs with each type. Stimulation of B-cell clones with subsequent production of the monoclonal IgG, particularly IgG3 subtype that has higher affinity to the negatively charged glomerular tissue, is suggested to be included in PGNMID pathogenesis. De novo membranous nephropathy can be seen after exposure to the cryptogenic podocyte antigens. The role of the toxic effects of CNI including tissue fibrosis and the hemodynamic alterations may be involved in the de novo FSGS pathophysiology. The well-known deleterious effects of HCV infection and its relation to MPGN disease are frequently reported. The new concepts have emerged that demonstrate the role of dysregulation of alternative complement pathway in evolution of MPGN that led to classifying into two subgroups, immune complex mediated MPGN and complement-mediated MPGN. The latter comprises of the dense deposit disease and the C3 GN disease. De novo C3 disease is rather rare. Prognosis of de novo diseases varies with each type and their management continues to be empirical to a large extent.

For decades, kidney diseases related to inappropriate complement activity, such as atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome and C3 glomerulopathy (a subtype of membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis), have mostly been complicated by worsened prognoses and rapid progression to end-stage renal failure. Alternative complement pathway dysregulation, whether congenital or acquired, is well-recognized as the main driver of the disease process in these patients. The list of triggers include: surgery, infection, immunologic factors, pregnancy and medications. The advent of complement activation blockade, however, revolutionized the clinical course and outcome of these diseases, rendering transplantation a viable option for patients who were previously considered as non-transplantable cases. Several less-costly therapeutic lines and likely better efficacy and safety profiles are currently underway. In view of the challenging nature of diagnosing these diseases and the long-term cost implications, a multidisciplinary approach including the nephrologist, renal pathologist and the genetic laboratory is required to help improve overall care of these patients and draw the optimum therapeutic plan.

The risk of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) in renal transplant recipients is increased in diabetics, patients with impaired basal kidney function, patients in shock, patients presenting with acute emergency and in old age recipients. Approximately one-third of all hospitalized patients with acute kidney injury is attributed to CIN. In the United States, it is the third leading cause of hospital-acquired renal failure. Therefore, efforts should be directed to minimize CIN-related morbidity and mortality as well as to shorten hospital stay. While the role of peri-procedural prophylactic hydration with saline is unequivocal; the use of acetyl cysteine is not based on robust evidence. The utility of theophylline, aminophylline, calcium channel blockers, natriuretic peptide, and diuretics does not have proven role in attenuating CIN incidence. We aim to analyze the evidence for using various protocols in published literature to limit CIN-associated morbidity and mortality, particularly during surveillance of the renal allograft survival.