Nephron · 2017
Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome and Kidney Transplantation: A Case Series and Review of the Literature.
Клинический случайСтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Milan Manani Sabrina, Virzì Grazia Maria, Giuliani Anna, Clementi Anna, Brocca Alessandra, Dissegna Daniela, Martino Francesca, d''Amore Emanuele Stefano Giovanni, Ronco Claudio
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) can be triggered by Shiga toxin producing Escherichia coli (STEC) infection or it can be defined as atypical HUS (aHUS) if it is related to uncontrolled complement activation. aHUS is characterized by a high incidence of recurrence after kidney transplantation, and it can also occur de novo in transplant recipients. Eculizumab is used both to prevent and to treat aHUS following kidney transplantation. In this paper, we report our centre experience and we present 4 cases of HUS in patients who underwent kidney transplantation.
METHODS: This is a single-center experience about HUS development in transplanted patients.
RESULTS: Patient 1 with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) due to STEC-HUS undergoing kidney transplantation without prophylactic therapy with eculizumab. Patient 2 with HUS secondary to an episode of diarrhea at 8 years old. After a slow progression to ESRD, she underwent kidney transplantation and she received prophylactic therapy with eculizumab due to the presence of anti-complement factor H antibodies. Patient 3 underwent pre-emptive living donor ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation and developed HUS secondary to antibody-mediated rejection. Patient 4 developed de novo HUS 16 years after kidney transplantation without a known cause.
CONCLUSION: The correct diagnosis of HUS and the identification of the complement component alterations in case of aHUS are important parameters required to predict the risk of post-transplant recurrence of the disease. In the cases we reported, eculizumab has been found to be effective both to prevent and to treat aHUS following kidney transplantation.
METHODS: This is a single-center experience about HUS development in transplanted patients.
RESULTS: Patient 1 with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) due to STEC-HUS undergoing kidney transplantation without prophylactic therapy with eculizumab. Patient 2 with HUS secondary to an episode of diarrhea at 8 years old. After a slow progression to ESRD, she underwent kidney transplantation and she received prophylactic therapy with eculizumab due to the presence of anti-complement factor H antibodies. Patient 3 underwent pre-emptive living donor ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation and developed HUS secondary to antibody-mediated rejection. Patient 4 developed de novo HUS 16 years after kidney transplantation without a known cause.
CONCLUSION: The correct diagnosis of HUS and the identification of the complement component alterations in case of aHUS are important parameters required to predict the risk of post-transplant recurrence of the disease. In the cases we reported, eculizumab has been found to be effective both to prevent and to treat aHUS following kidney transplantation.