Evaluation of Early Renal Allograft Dysfunction from Living Donors among Egyptian Patients (Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Study)

Maha Emad El-dein; Sawsan A. A. Fadda; Samia M. Gabal; Amr M. Shaker; Wael M. Mohamad

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2021.6081

Authors

Maha Emad El-dein Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Sawsan A. A. Fadda Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Samia M. Gabal Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Amr M. Shaker Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Wael M. Mohamad Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2021.6081

Keywords:

Acute rejection, Complement fragment 4d, Histopathology, Renal transplantation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Early renal graft dysfunction is a major problem in the early post-transplantation period and is considered a major cause of graft loss. Clinical diagnosis based on the clinical criteria alone is unreliable; therefore, biopsy remains the gold standard to differentiate between rejection and non-rejection causes.

AIM: This study was designed to identify and differentiate between causes of early graft dysfunction during the first post-transplantation month and to correlate between histological lesions and immunohistochemistry (IHC) for accurate diagnosis and a better outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 163 renal allograft biopsies, performed in the first post-transplantation month over 6 years, were included in the study. New sections were prepared from the paraffin blocks and stained with conventional stains. Additional sections were prepared and treated by complement fragment 4d (C4d) and cluster differentiation 3 (CD3) antibodies for IHC evaluation.

RESULTS: All the studied cases were from living donors. The mean patient age was 39 years with predominant males. The clinical indication for most biopsies (94.5%) was impaired graft function. Acute rejection (AR) was the main diagnostic category observed in (98/163, 60.1%); out of which, T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) was observed in (62/98, 63.2%). Drug toxicity was suspected in (53/163, 32.5%), acute tubular injury (ATI) not otherwise specified (nos) in (21/163, 12.9%), and other lesions including thrombotic microangiopathy were observed in the remaining biopsies. The most common cause of graft dysfunction in the 1st and 2nd weeks was AR representing. A significant correlation was seen between mild glomerulitis (g1) and mild peritubular capillaritis (PTC) 1, on the one side, and negative C4d staining, on the other side. No significant correlation was seen between moderate glomerulitis (g2) and moderate ptc2 at one side and positive C4d staining at the other side reflecting the poor association between the microvascular inflammation (“g” and “ptc” scores) and C4d positivity (r = 0.2). Missed mild tubulitis (t1) was found in a single case and missed moderate tubulitis (t2) was found in a single case detected by CD3 IHC.

CONCLUSION: AR and drug toxicity account for the majority of early graft dysfunction, however, other pathological lesions, per se or coincide with them may be the cause. The significance of g2 per se as a marker for diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection requires further study. Considering C4d score 1 (by IHC) positive; also requires further study with follow-up.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Kazi JI, Mubarak M. Biopsy findings in renal allograft dysfunction in a live related renal transplant program. J Transplant Technol Res. 2012;2:108.

Katsuma A, Yamakawa T, Nakada Y, Yamamoto I, Yokoo T. Histopathological findings in transplanted kidneys. Ren Replace Ther. 2017;3:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41100-016-0089-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41100-016-0089-0

Sigdel TK, Sarwal MM. Moving beyond HLA: A review of nHLA antibodies in organ transplantation. Hum Immunol. 2013;74(11):1486-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humimm.2013.07.001 PMid:23876683 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humimm.2013.07.001

Hart A, Smith JM, Skeans MA, Gustafson SK, Stewart DE, Cherikh WS, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2015 Annual data report: Kidney. Am J Transplant. 2017;17(1):21-116. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.14124 PMid:28052609 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.14124

Jiménez VL, Fuentes L, Jiménez T, León M, Garcia I, Sola E, et al. Transplant glomerulopathy: Clinical course and factors relating to graft survival. Transplant Proc. 2012;44(9):2599-600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.09.068 PMid:23146467 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.09.068

Solez K, Colvin RB, Racusen LC, Haas M, Sis B, Mengel M, et al. Banff 07 classification of renal allograft pathology: Updates and future directions. Am J Transplant. 2008;8(4):753-60. PMid:18294345 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02159.x

Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin RB, Bonsib SM, Castro MC, Cavallo T, et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int. 1999;55:713-23. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1755.1999.00299.x PMid:9987096 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1755.1999.00299.x

Racusen LC, Halloran PF, Banff SK. 2003 meeting report: New diagnostic insights and standards. Am J Transplant. 2004;4(10):1562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00585.x PMid:15367210 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00585.x

Feucht HE, Schneeberger H, Hillebrand G, Burkhardt K, Weiss M, Riethmüller G, et al. Capillary deposition of C4d complement fragment and early renal graft loss. Kidney Int. 1993;43(6):1333-8. PMid:8315947 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ki.1993.187

Chetty R, Gatter K. CD3: Structure, function, and role of immunostaining in clinical practice. J Pathol. 1994;173(4):303-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1711730404 PMid:7525907 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1711730404

Dominy KM, Willicombe M, Johani T, Beckwith H, Goodall D, Brookes P, et al. Molecular assessment of c4d-positive renal transplant biopsies without evidence of rejection. Kidney Int Rep. 2018;4(1):148-58. PMid:30596178 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ekir.2018.09.005

Kumar A, Giri SS, Bariar NK, Mysorekar VV. Association of c4d deposition in renal allograft biopsy with morphologic features in Banff diagnosis. Indian J Pathol Oncol. 2019;6(2):167-73. https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijpo.2019.033 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijpo.2019.033

Resch L, Yu W, Fraser RB, Lawen JG, Acott PD, Crocker JF, et al. T-cell/periodic acid-Schiff stain: A useful tool in the evaluation of tubulointerstitial infiltrates as a component of renal allograft rejection. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2002;6(2):122-4. https://doi.org/10.1053/adpa.2002.32378 PMid:12004361 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/adpa.2002.32378

Haas M, Loupy A, Lefaucheur C, Roufosse C, Glotz D, Seron D, et al. The banff 2017 kidney meeting report: Revised diagnostic criteria for chronic active T cell–mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and prospects for integrative endpoints for next generation clinical trials. Am J Transpl. 2018;18(2):293-307. PMid:29243394 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.14625

Naesens M, Kuypers DR, Sarwal M. Calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4(2):481-508. https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.04800908 PMid:19218475 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.04800908

Gwinner W, Hinzmann K, Erdbruegger U, Scheffner I, Broecker V, Vaske B, et al. Acute tubular injury in protocol biopsies of renal grafts: Prevalence, associated factors and effect on long-term function. Am J Transplant. 2008;8(8):1684- 93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02293.x PMid:18557733 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02293.x

Noris M, Remuzzi G. Thrombotic microangiopathy after kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2010;10(7):1517-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03156.x PMid:20642678 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03156.x

Saadi MG, El-Khashab SO, Mahmoud RM. Renal transplantation experience in Cairo University hospitals. Egypt J Intern Med. 2016;28:116-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1110-7782.200967

Puntambekar A, Parameswaran S, Rg N. Evaluation of clinico-pathological spectrum in renal allograft biopsies at JIPMER. J Kidney. 2017;3:149.

Barsoum RS. End stage renal disease in the developing world. 2002. Artif Organs. 2002;26(9):735-6. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1594.2002.07061.x PMid:12197923 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1594.2002.00916.x

Francis MR, Fadda SA. Spectrum of renal allograft dysfunction in the first post transplantation month from living donors: A histopathological study. Afr J Nephrol. 2003;2330:35-40.

Devadass CW, Vanikar AV, Nigam LK, Kanodia KV, Patel RD, Vinay KS, et al. Evaluation of renal allograft biopsies for graft dysfunction and relevance of C4d staining in antibody mediated rejection. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(3):EC11-5. PMid:27134877 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/16339.7433

Parajuli S, Aziz F, Garg N, Panzer SE, Joachim E, Muth B, et al. Histopathological characteristics and causes of kidney graft failure in the current era of immunosuppression. World J Transplant. 2019;9(6):123-33. PMid:31750089 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5500/wjt.v9.i6.123

Koshy PJ, Tripathy A, Vijayan M, Madhusudan V, Nair S, Yuvaraj A, et al. A multicentre study of the spectrum of histopathological changes in renal allograft biopsies over a period of nine years from South India. Immunopathol Persa. 2017;3(1):e05.

Loupy A, Hill GS, Jordan SC. The impact of donor-specific anti- HLA antibodies on late kidney allograft failure. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2012;8(6):348-57. PMid:22508180 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneph.2012.81

Haas M, Sis B, Racusen LC, Solez K, Glotz D, Colvin RB, et al. Banff 2013 meeting report: Inclusion of C4d-negative antibody-mediated rejection and antibody-associated arterial lesions. Am J Transplant. 2014;14(2):272-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.12590 PMid:24472190 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.12590

Sis B, Jhangri GS, Riopel J, Chang J, De Freitas DG, et al. A new diagnostic algorithm for antibody-mediated microcirculation inflammation in kidney transplants. Am J Transplant. 2012;12(5):1168-79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03931.x PMid:22300601 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03931.x

Nickeleit V, Mihatsch MJ. Kidney transplants, antibodies and rejection: Is C4d a magic marker? Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2003;18(11):2232-39. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfg304 PMid:14551348 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfg304

Pichhadze RS, Curran SP, John R, Tricco AC, Uleryk E, Laupacis A, et al. A systematic review of the role of C4d in the diagnosis of acute antibody-mediated rejection. Kidney Int. 2015;87(1):182-194. https://doi.org/10.1038/ki.2014.166 PMid:24827778 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ki.2014.166

Seemayer CA, Gaspert A, Nickeleit V, Mihatsch MJ. C4d staining of renal allograft biopsies: A comparative analysis of different staining techniques. Nephrol Dial Transpl. 2007;22(2):568-76. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfl594 PMid:17164320 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfl594

Haas M. The significance of C4d staining with minimal histologic abnormalities, Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2010;5(1):21-7. PMid:19907328 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MOT.0b013e3283342ebd

Ranjan P, Nada R, Jha V, Sakhuja V, Joshi K. The role of C4d immunostaining in the evaluation of the causes of renal allograft dysfunction. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2008;23:1735-41. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfm843 PMid:18065805 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfm843

Cheunsuchon B, Vongwiwatana A, Premasathian N, Shayakul C, Parichatikanond P. The prevalence of C4dpositive renal allografts in 134 consecutive biopsies in Thai patients. Tansplant Proc. 2009;41(9):3697-700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2009.04.015 PMid:19917370 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2009.04.015

Mengel M, Sis B, Haas M, Colvin RB, Halloran PF, Racusen LC, et al. Banff 2011 Meeting report: New concepts in antibody-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant. 2012;2(3):563. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03926.x PMid:22300494 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03926.x

Tariq H, Nassir H. Frequency of acute antibody mediated rejection in renal allograft biopsies as detected by morphological findings and C4d immunostaining. J Renal Injury Prev. 2018;7:89-196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15171/jrip.2018.45

Kulkarni P, Uppin MS, Prayaga AK, Das U, Murthy KV. Renal allograft pathology with C4d immunostaining in patients with graft dysfunction. Indian J Nephrol. 2011;21(4):239-44. PMid:22022083 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-4065.85481

Philip KJ, Calton N, Pawar B. Non-rejection pathology of renal allograft biopsies: 10 years experience from a tertiary care center in North India. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2011;54(4):700-5. PMid:22234094

Aryal G, Shah DS. Histopathological evaluation of renal allograft biopsies in Nepal: Interpretation and significance. J Pathol Nepal. 2012;2:172-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/jpn.v2i3.6016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3126/jpn.v2i3.6016

Racusen LC. Improvement of lesion quantitation for the Banff schema for renal allograft rejection. Transplant Proc. 1996;28(1):489-90. PMid:8644323

Elshafie M, Furness PN. Identification of lesions indicating rejection in kidney transplant biopsies: Tubulitis is severely under-detected by conventional microscopy. Nephrol Dial Transpl. 2011;27(3):1252-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfr473 PMid:21862457 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfr473