切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华移植杂志(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (02) : 78 -82. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3903.2022.02.003

论著

供肾Remuzzi评分对肾移植受者预后的指导作用
孔晨阳1, 邱涛1, 刘一霆1, 陈忠宝1, 马枭雄1, 王天宇1, 张亚龙1, 喻博1, 周江桥1,()   
  1. 1. 430060 武汉大学人民医院器官移植科
  • 收稿日期:2022-02-27 出版日期:2022-04-25
  • 通信作者: 周江桥
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(8187067,82170664); 武汉市科技计划项目(2020020601012213)

The guiding effect of donor kidney Remuzzi score on the prognosis of kidney transplant recipients

Chenyang Kong1, Tao Qiu1, Yiting Liu1, Zhongbao Chen1, Xiaoxiong Ma1, Tianyu Wang1, Yalong Zhang1, bo Yu1, Jiangqiao Zhou1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Organ Transplantation, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430060, China
  • Received:2022-02-27 Published:2022-04-25
  • Corresponding author: Jiangqiao Zhou
引用本文:

孔晨阳, 邱涛, 刘一霆, 陈忠宝, 马枭雄, 王天宇, 张亚龙, 喻博, 周江桥. 供肾Remuzzi评分对肾移植受者预后的指导作用[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(02): 78-82.

Chenyang Kong, Tao Qiu, Yiting Liu, Zhongbao Chen, Xiaoxiong Ma, Tianyu Wang, Yalong Zhang, bo Yu, Jiangqiao Zhou. The guiding effect of donor kidney Remuzzi score on the prognosis of kidney transplant recipients[J]. Chinese Journal of Transplantation(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(02): 78-82.

目的

分析不同Remuzzi评分供肾移植后受者/移植肾预后情况。

方法

回顾性分析武汉大学人民医院2018年11月至2020年8月接受单肾移植的81例受者临床资料。根据供肾Remuzzi评分将81例受者分为低分组(Remuzzi评分0~3分,n=38)及高分组(43例)(Remuzzi评分4~6分,n=43)。正态分布计量资料采用两独立样本t检验比较;非正态分布计量资料采用Mann-Whitney U检验比较。计数资料采用χ2检验或Fisher确切概率法比较。采用Graphpad 8.0.2绘制受者/移植肾生存曲线,并采用log-rank检验比较。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

低分组38例受者供肾Remuzzi评分为(2.23±0.87)分,高分组43例受者供肾Remuzzi评分为(4.56±0.66)分,差异有统计学意义(t=-13.449,P<0.05)。低分组术后1、3个月血清肌酐分别为(143±92)和(136±75) μmol/L,高分组分别为(138±80)和(123±39) μmol/L,差异均无统计学意义(t=0.237和1.031,P均>0.05)。低分组术后6个月血清肌酐[107.5(60,821) μmol/L]低于高分组[113.0 (67,224) μmol/L],差异有统计学意义(U=-0.371,P<0.05)。低分组术后1、3和6个月估算肾小球滤过率分别为(60±24)、(59±26)和(61±27)mL/min,高分组分别为(64±25)、(64±21)和(66±20)mL/min,差异均无统计学意义(t=-0.823、-0.903和-0.756,P均>0.05)。截至2022年2月14日,受者随访时间(29±6)个月(1~36个月)。低分组16例受者(42.1%)移植术后发生移植肾功能延迟恢复(DGF),高分组12例受者(27.9%)移植术后发生DGF,差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.180,P>0.05)。两组受者术后生存率差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.668,P>0.05)。两组受者移植肾存活率差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.078,P<0.05)。低分组发生DGF、低分组未发生DGF、高分组发生DGF和高分组未发生DGF受者术后生存率及移植肾存活率差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。

结论

Remuzzi评分作为供肾病理学评估的重要部分,为肾移植受者术后治疗提供一定指导,评分较高供肾移植后受者也能获得良好预后。

Objective

To analyze the prognosis of kidney recipients and transplanted kidneys after donor kidney transplantation with different Remuzzi scores.

Methods

The clinical data of 81 recipients of single kidney transplantation in Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University from November 2018 to August 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The recipients were divided into low-scoring group (38 cases, Remuzzi score 0-3 points) and high-scoring group (43 cases, Remuzzi score 4-6 points). Measurement data with normal distribution were compared using two independent samples t test. Measurement data with nonnormal distribution were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. The counting data were compared using the chi-squared test or fisher′s exact probability method. Graphpad 8.0.2 was used to plot the recipient/transplant kidney survival curve, and the log-rank test was used to compare the survival rate. P<0.05 for the difference was considered statistically significant.

Results

The donor kidney Remuzzi score of 38 recipients in the low-scoring group was (2.23±0.87) and the donor kidney Remuzzi score of 43 recipients in the high-scoring group was (4.56±0.66), and the difference was statistically significant (t=-13.449, P<0.05). Serum levels of creatinine of the low-scoring group at 1, 3 months postoperatively were (143±92) and (136±75) μmol/L, respectively, while the high-scoring group were (138±80) and (123±39) μmol/L, respectively, and the differences were not statistically significant (t=0.237 and 1.031, all P>0.05). Serum levels of creatinine of the low-scoring group at 6 months after transplantation was 107.5 (60, 821) μmol/L, which was lower than the high-scoring group [113.0 (67, 224) μmol/L], the difference was statistically significant (U=-0.371, P<0.05). The estimated glomerular filtration rates were (60±24), (59±26) and (61±27) mL/min at the 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery in the low-scoring group, and the high-scoring group were (64±25), (64±21) and (66±20) mL/min, respectively, and the differences were not statistically significant (t=-0.823, -0.903 and -0.756, all P>0.05). The recipients were followed up for (29±6) months (1-36 months) by February 14, 2022. Delayed graft function (DGF) occurred in 16 recipients in the low-scoring group (42.1%), and DGF occurred in 12 recipients in the high-scoring group (27.9%), and the difference was not statistically significant (χ2=0.180, P>0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative survival rate of recipients between the 2 groups (χ2=0.668, P>0.05). The difference in transplant kidney survival rate between the 2 groups was statistically significant (χ2=4.078, P<0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative survival rates and transplanted kidney survival rates among recipients with DGF or without DGF in low-scoring and high-scoring groups (all P>0.05).

Conclusions

The Remuzzi score, as an important part of the assessment of donor renal pathology, provides some guidance for kidney recipients′ later treatment, and donor kidneys with higher scores can also receive a good prognosis for recipients.

表1 供肾Remuzzi评分低分组和高分组肾移植受者一般资料比较
图1 供肾Remuzzi评分低分组和高分组移植肾术后生存曲线注:低分组. Remuzzi评分0~3分;高分组. Remuzzi评分4~6分
图2 供肾Remuzzi评分低分组和高分组受者术后生存曲线注:低分组. Remuzzi评分0~3分;高分组. Remuzzi评分4~6分
图3 供肾Remuzzi评分低分组与高分组发生或未发生DGF受者生存曲线注:低分组. Remuzzi评分0~3分;高分组. Remuzzi评分4~6分;DGF.移植肾功能延迟恢复
图4 供肾Remuzzi评分低分组与高分组发生或未发生DGF受者移植肾生存曲线注:低分组. Remuzzi评分0~3分;高分组. Remuzzi评分4~6分;DGF.移植肾功能延迟恢复
1
Hart A, Smith JM, Skeans MA, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2016 annual data report: kidney HHS public access[J]. Am J Transpl, 2018, 18(Suppl 1):S18-S113.
2
孔晨阳,邱涛,周江桥. 死亡捐献供肾质量评估研究进展[J/CD]. 实用器官移植电子杂志2021, 9(5):415-420.
3
Remuzzi G, Grinyò J, Ruggenenti P, et al. Early experience with dual kidney transplantation in adults using expanded donor criteria. Double Kidney Transplant Group (DKG) [J]. J Am Soc Nephrol, 199910(12):2591-2598.
4
Ma YC, Zuo L, Chen JH, et al. Modified glomerular filtration rate estimating equation for Chinese patients with chronic kidney disease[J]. J Am Soc Nephrol, 200617(10):2937-2944.
5
Mallon DH, Summers DM, Bradley JA, et al. Defining delayed graft function after renal transplantation: simplest is best[J]. Transplantation, 2013, 96(10): 885-889.
6
Kosmoliaptsis V, Salji M, Bardsley V, et al. Baseline donor chronic renal injury confers the same transplant survival disadvantage for DCD and DBD kidneys[J]. Am J Transplant, 201515(3):754-763.
7
Snoeijs MG, Buurman WA, Christiaans MH, et al. Histological assessment of preimplantation biopsies may improve selection of kidneys from old donors after cardiac death[J]. Am J Transplant, 2008, 8(9):1844-1851.
8
Ojo AO, Wolfe RA, Held PJ, et al. Delayed graft function: risk factors and implications for renal allograft survival[J]. Transplantation1997, 63(7):968-974.
9
Sung RS, Christensen LL, Leichtman AB, et al. Determinants of discard of expanded criteria donor kidneys: impact of biopsy and machine perfusion[J]. Am J Transplant, 2008, 8(4):783-792.
10
Losappio V, Stallone G, Infante B, et al. A single-center cohort study to define the role of pretransplant biopsy score in the long-term outcome of kidney transplantation[J]. Transplantation, 2014, 97(9):934-939.
11
Chen GD, Shiu-Chung Ko D, Wang CX, et al. Kidney transplantation from donors after cardiac death: an initial report of 71 cases from China[J]. Am J Transplant, 201313(5):1323-1326.
12
夏秋翔,王淼,李恒,等. 供肾移植前病理结果与移植后短期肾功能的关系[J]. 中华器官移植杂志2019, 40(4):231-236.
[1] 李俊, 彭健韵, 邱婉冰, 窦倩怡, 潘福顺, 梁瑾瑜. 甲状腺结节恶性风险分层(指南):ACR TI-RADS与C-TIRADS诊断效能及不同医师使用指南一致性的多中心回顾性比较研究[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 401-407.
[2] 彭文翰. 肾移植受者早期霉酚酸强化剂量长期有效性和安全性的研究[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 0-.
[3] 中华医学会器官移植学分会, 中国医师协会器官移植医师分会, 上海医药行业协会. 中国肝、肾移植受者霉酚酸类药物应用专家共识(2023版)[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 257-272.
[4] 彭雨诗, 苗芸, 严紫嫣. 宏基因组高通量测序诊断肾移植术后华支睾吸虫感染一例[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 297-299.
[5] 吴建永. 单中心2 000例心脏死亡器官捐献肾移植发展与创新[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 0-.
[6] 戚若晨, 马帅军, 韩士超, 王国辉, 刘克普, 张小燕, 杨晓剑, 秦卫军. 肾移植术后新型冠状病毒感染单中心诊疗经验[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 232-239.
[7] 胡皓翀, 刘一霆, 郭嘉瑜, 邹寄林, 陈忠宝, 周江桥, 邱涛. 肾移植术后耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯菌感染的诊疗分析[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 246-249.
[8] 朱伟芳, 陈琳, 乔建军. 激光联合光动力疗法治疗肾移植后鲍恩样丘疹病一例[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 250-252.
[9] 康海, 谭武宾, 周松, 毛正, 米泽振, 李铁求. 膀胱癌根治术后阴茎转移一例报告[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 523-525.
[10] 南方护骨联盟前列腺癌骨转移专家组. 前列腺癌骨转移诊疗专家共识(2023版)[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 201-208.
[11] 陈秀山, 张婷婷, 杨栓盈, 高娜. 低剂量CT扫描在肺部同轴穿刺活检中的临床应用[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 587-588.
[12] 杜静怡, 徐兴祥. 循环肿瘤细胞在非小细胞肺癌中的研究进展[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 596-600.
[13] 王楚风, 蒋安. 原发性肝癌的分子诊断[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 499-503.
[14] 鄂一民, 孙司正, 范小彧, 喻春钊. 结直肠癌粪便筛查的现状与展望[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 331-336.
[15] 吕东, 朱盛, 胡秋平, 邹松, 黄文强, 唐全进, 黄海. 基于增强CT与增强MRI融合的3D打印导板辅助脑肿瘤穿刺活检一例报道[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 251-254.
阅读次数
全文


摘要