Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE OF REVIEW/OBJECTIVE:This review provides a comprehensive examination of the current inequities and ethical challenges in kidney transplantation and highlights some of the most urgent issues related to organ allocation and emerging technologies. RECENT FINDINGS/RESULTS:Several recent news and media reports have significantly undermined public trust in the organ transplantation and allocation process. This review discusses some of these controversies and proposes strategies to restore confidence in the system. With advancements in gene editing, xenotransplantation is becoming a tangible reality, bringing forth new ethical challenges explored in this paper. Likewise, as artificial intelligence continues to permeate medicine and moves closer to integration within transplantation, proactive preparation and ethical foresight are essential. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS:In conclusion, we aim to draw attention to pressing ethical dilemmas in kidney transplantation and suggest actionable steps to restore trust.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged into a worldwide pandemic of epic proportion. Beyond pulmonary involvement in COVID-19, a significant subset of patients experiences acute kidney injury. Patients who die from severe disease most notably show diffuse acute tubular injury on postmortem examination with a possible contribution of focal macro- and microvascular thrombi. Renal biopsies in patients with proteinuria and hematuria have demonstrated a glomerular dominant pattern of injury, most notably a collapsing glomerulopathy reminiscent of findings seen in HIV in individuals with apolipoprotein L-1 (APOL-1) risk allele variants. Although various mechanisms have been proposed for the pathogenesis of acute kidney injury in SARS-CoV-2 infection, direct renal cell infection has not been definitively demonstrated and our understanding of the spectrum of renal involvement remains incomplete. Herein we discuss the biology, pathology and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated renal involvement. We discuss the molecular biology, risk factors and pathophysiology of renal injury associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We highlight the characteristics of specific renal pathologies based on native kidney biopsy and autopsy. Additionally, a brief discussion on ancillary studies and challenges in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is presented.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Patients with CKD ha ve impaired immunity, increased risk of infection-related mortality, and worsened COVID-19 outcomes. However, data comparing nondialysis CKD and ESKD are sparse. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Patients with COVID-19 admitted to three hospitals in the New York area, between March 2 and August 27, 2020, were retrospectively studied using electronic health records. Patients were classified as those without CKD, those with nondialysis CKD, and those with ESKD, with outcomes including hospital mortality, ICU admission, and mortality rates. Results/UNASSIGNED:Of 3905 patients, 588 (15%) had nondialysis CKD and 128 (3%) had ESKD. The nondialysis CKD and ESKD groups had a greater prevalence of comorbidities and higher admission D-dimer levels, whereas patients with ESKD had lower C-reactive protein levels at admission. ICU admission rates were similar across all three groups (23%-25%). The overall, unadjusted hospital mortality was 25%, and the mortality was 24% for those without CKD, 34% for those with nondialysis CKD, and 27% for those with ESKD. Among patients in the ICU, mortality was 56%, 64%, and 56%, respectively. Although patients with nondialysis CKD had higher odds of overall mortality versus those without CKD in univariate analysis (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.91), this was no longer significant in fully adjusted models (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.40). Also, ESKD status did not associate with a higher risk of mortality compared with non-CKD in adjusted analyses, but did have reduced mortality when compared with nondialysis CKD (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.95). Mortality rates declined precipitously after the first 2 months of the pandemic, from 26% to 14%, which was reflected in all three subgroups. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:In a diverse cohort of patients with COVID-19, we observed higher crude mortality rates for patients with nondialysis CKD and, to a lesser extent, ESKD, which were not significant after risk adjustment. Moreover, patients with ESKD appear to have better outcom es than those with nondialysis CKD.

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Reports from the United States suggest that acute kidney injury (AKI) frequently complicates COVID-19, but understanding of AKI risks and outcomes is incomplete. Additionally, whether kidney outcomes have evolved during the course of the pandemic is unknown. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We used electronic records to identify COVID-19 patients with and without AKI admitted to 3 New York Hospitals between March 2 and August 25, 2020. Outcomes included AKI overall and according to admission week, AKI stage, the requirement for new renal replacement therapy (RRT), mortality and recovery of kidney function. Logistic regression was utilized to assess associations of patient characteristics and outcomes. Results/UNASSIGNED:Out of 4732 admissions 1386 (29.3%) patients had AKI. Among those with AKI, 717 (51.7%) had Stage 1, 132 (9.5%) Stage 2, 537 (38.7%) stage 3, and 237 (17.1%) required RRT initiation. In March 536/1648 (32.5%) of patients developed AKI compared with 15/87 (17.2%) in August (P<0.001 for monthly trend) whereas RRT initiation was required in 6.9% and 0% of admission, in March and August respectively. Mortality was higher with than without AKI (51.6% vs 8.6%) and was 71.9% in individuals requiring RRT. However, most patients with AKI who survived hospitalization (77%) recovered to within 0.3 mg/dL of baseline creatinine. Among those surviving to discharge, 62% discontinued RRT. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:AKI impacts a high proportion of admitted COVID-19 patients and is associated with high mortality, particularly when RRT is required. AKI incidence appears to be decreasing over time and kidney function frequently recovers in those who survive.

Background:The COVID-19 pandemic strained hospital resources in New York City, including those for providing dialysis. New York University Medical Center and affiliations, including New York City Health and Hospitals/Bellevue, developed a plan to offset the increased needs for KRT. We established acute peritoneal dialysis (PD) capability, as usual dialysis modalities were overwhelmed by COVID-19 AKI. Methods:Observational study of patients requiring KRT admitted to Bellevue Hospital during the COVID surge. Bellevue Hospital is one of the largest public hospitals in the United States, providing medical care to an underserved population. There were substantial staff, supplies, and equipment shortages. Adult patients admitted with AKI who required KRT were considered for PD. We rapidly established an acute PD program. A surgery team placed catheters at the bedside in the intensive care unit; a nephrology team delivered treatment. We provided an alternative to hemodialysis and continuous venovenous hemofiltration for treating patients in the intensive-care unit, demonstrating efficacy with outcomes comparable to standard care. Results:From April 8, 2020 to May 8, 2020, 39 catheters were placed into ten women and 29 men. By June 10, 39% of the patients started on PD recovered kidney function (average ages 56 years for men and 59.5 years for women); men and women who expired were an average 71.8 and 66.2 years old. No episodes of peritonitis were observed; there were nine incidents of minor leaking. Some patients were treated while ventilated in the prone position. Conclusions:Demand compelled us to utilize acute PD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our experience is one of the largest recently reported in the United States of which we are aware. Acute PD provided lifesaving care to acutely ill patients when expanding current resources was impossible. Our experience may help other programs to avoid rationing dialysis treatments in health crises.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The presence of a donor-specific positive crossmatch has been considered to be a contraindication to kidney transplantation because of the risk of hyperacute rejection. Desensitization is the process of removing hazardous preformed donor-specific antibody (DSA) in order to safely proceed with transplant. Traditionally, this involves plasmapheresis and intravenous immune globulin treatments that occur over days to weeks, and has been feasible when there is a living donor and the date of the transplant is known, allowing time for pre-emptive treatments. For sensitized patients without a living donor, transplantation has been historically difficult. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:IdeS (imlifidase) is an endopeptidase derived from Streptococcus pyogenes which has specificity for human IgG, and when infused intravenously results in rapid cleavage of IgG. METHODS:Here we present our single-center's experience with 7 highly sensitized (cPRA98-100%) kidney transplant candidates who had DSA resulting in positive crossmatches with their donors (5 deceased, 2 living) who received IdeS within 24 hours prior to transplant. RESULTS:All pre-IdeS crossmatches were positive and would have been prohibitive for transplantation. All crossmatches became negative post-IdeS and the patients underwent successful transplantation. Three patients had DSA rebound and antibody-mediated rejection, which responded to standard of care therapies. Three patients had delayed graft function, which ultimately resolved. No serious adverse events were associated with IdeS. All patients have functioning renal allografts at a median follow-up of 235 days. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:IdeS may represent a groundbreaking new method of desensitization for patients who otherwise might have no hope for receiving a lifesaving transplant.