Detection of Subclinical Rejection in Pediatric Kidney Transplantation: Current and Future Practices
Rattachement africain : us, ca. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
INTRODUCTION: The successes in the field of pediatric kidney transplantation over the past 60 years have been extraordinary. Year over year, there have been significant improvements in short-term graft survival. However, improvements in longer-term outcomes have been much less apparent. One important contributor has been the phenomenon of low-level rejection in the absence of clinical manifestations-so-called subclinical rejection (SCR). METHODS: Traditionally, rejection has been diagnosed by changes in clinical parameters, including but not limited to serum creatinine and proteinuria. This review examines the shortcomings of this approach, the effects of SCR on kidney allograft outcome, the benefits and drawbacks of surveillance biopsies to identify SCR, and new urine and blood biomarkers that define the presence or absence of SCR. RESULTS: Serum creatinine is an unreliable index of SCR. Surveillance biopsies are the method most utilized to detect SCR. However, these have significant drawbacks. New biomarkers show promise. These biomarkers include blood gene expression profiles and donor derived-cell free DNA; urine gene expression profiles; urinary cytokines, chemokines, and metabolomics; and other promising blood and urine tests. CONCLUSION: Specific emphasis is placed on studies carried out in pediatric kidney transplant recipients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03719339.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Detection of Subclinical Rejection in Pediatric Kidney Transplantation: Current and Future Practices
- Date Crossref
- 15/08/2024
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.