Background Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) is the drug of choice for anti- Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PcP) prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients (KTR). Post-transplant management balances preventing PcP with managing TMP-SMX-related adverse effects. TMP-SMX dose reduction addresses adverse effects but its implications to incident PcP are unclear. Methods We performed a retrospective review of all patients transplanted between 2011 and 2015 prescribed daily single strength TMP-SMX for twelve months post-transplantation as PcP prophylaxis. Actual TMP-SMX dose and duration, adverse effects, number of dose reductions and reasons, and PcP events were captured. Multivariate logistic regression analyses for risk factors associated with dose reduction were performed. Results Of 438 KTR, 233 (53%) maintained daily TMP-SMX and 205 (47%) sustained ≥1 dose reduction, with the point prevalence of a reduced dose regimen being between 18 and 25%. Median duration for daily TMP-SMX was 8.45/12 months, contributing 4137 patient-months daily TMP-SMX and 1110 patient-months with a reduced dose. PcP did not occur in any patients. There were 84 documented dose reductions for hyperkalemia and 102 for leukopenia, with 12 and 7 patients requiring TMP-SMX cessation. In multivariate analysis, a living donor transplant protected against hyperkalemia (Odds Ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.26–0.83, p < 0.01) while acute rejection risked leukopenia (Odds Ratio 3.31, 95% CI 1.39–7.90, p = 0.006). Conclusions TMP-SMX dose reduction is frequent in the first post-transplant year but PcP does not occur. To limit the need for TMP-SMX dose reduction due to adverse effects, a clinical trial comparing daily to thrice weekly single strength TMP-SMX in de-novo KTR is justified.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Studies published from centers across India have reported different and contradicting patterns of glomerular disease. In this retrospective study, we report our experience from a Tertiary Care Center in Northwest India. A total of 702 renal biopsies performed between 2008 and 2013 were reviewed of which 80 were excluded from the study because of having insufficient records or if the biopsies were taken from an allograft. The study included 411 males (66.1 %) and 211 females (33.9%) with an age range of 12-70 years (mean 30.34 ± 7.04 years). Majority of the biopsies (93.9%) showed some form of glomerulonephritis (GN), either primary (79.4%) or secondary glomerular disease (SGD) (14.5%). Minimal change disease (MCD) was the most common type of primary GN (26.5% of primary GN), followed by membranous nephropathy (MN; 18.8%) and focal and segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS; 13.2%). Lupus nephritis (LN) was the most frequent SGD (52.2% of secondary GN). Amyloidosis was found in 41.1% and diabetic glomerulosclerosis in 4.4%. LN was also the second most common diagnosis in females after MCD, seen in 19.4% of females. MCD followed by membranoproliferative GN and diffuse proliferative GN were the most common entities in individuals <20 years of age. In the 20-39 years age group, MN was the most common pathology seen. MN was again the most common pathology seen in patients aged above 40 years followed by amyloidosis and FSGS. In this study, MCD was the most common primary GN observed overall from this part of India. MN was the most common GN in individuals above 20 years of age presenting with the nephrotic syndrome. The geographical and regional differences in the pattern of GNs point to the necessity of having a central biopsy registry.

C3 glomerulopathy has recently been described as a distinct entity. The underlying mechanism is unregulated activation of the alternate pathway of the complement system. The most common presentation is with an acute nephritic syndrome. The diagnosis is made on immunofluoroscence by the presence of isolated or dominant C3 staining. In this retrospective study, renal biopsy data were collected from 2010 to 2013 patients with C3 glomerulopathy identified and their clinical and biochemical parameters analyzed. Out of 514 biopsies available for analysis, the incidence of C3 glomerulopathy was 1.16% (n = 6). The mean age of the presentation was 26 years and the average estimated glomerular filtration rate was 30.65 ml/min/1.73 m2. The most common histopathological pattern was membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (n = 4).

Internal jugular (IJ) catheter insertion for hemodialysis (HD) is an indispensable procedure in the management of patients with renal failure. The central approach is favored over posterior approach to insert IJ catheters. There are no studies comparing the outcomes between the two approaches. The aim of this study was to compare central approach with posterior approach for IJ HD catheter insertion and to analyze various outcomes like procedure-related complication rates, catheter insertion failure rates, interruptions during dialysis due to blood flow obstruction and catheter infection rates between the two methods among patients receiving HD. All patients requiring IJ HD catheter insertion during a 1-month period were randomly assigned to undergo catheter insertion via either conventional central approach or posterior approach. Patients were followed-up till the removal of the catheter. Among 104 patients included in the study, 54 were assigned to the central approach group and 50 to the posterior approach group. The central approach group had higher rate of procedure-related complications (14.81% vs. 6%, P = 0.04). Catheter insertion failure rates were marginally higher in posterior approach group (20% vs. 12.96%, P = 0.07). One or more instance of interruption during HD due to obstruction in blood flow was more common in posterior approach (46% vs. 9.25%, P < 0.01). Catheter infection rates were similar between the two groups; 16.66% (n = 9) in central group vs. 14% (n = 7) in posterior group. Posterior approach is a reasonable alternative to conventional central approach in IJ cannulation for HD catheter. It is, however, associated with a significantly high rate of interruption in HD blood flow and catheter insertion failure rates. The posterior approach can be used in patients with local exit site infection or in failed attempts to cannulate IJ vein via the conventional central approach.