Biopsie renálních štěpů: průvodce spletitými detaily pro získání nejlepších výsledků

Nejlepším diagnostickým nástrojem pro vyšetření typu a stupně poškození štěpu ledviny zůstává biopsie. Pokud je vyhodnocena dobře, poskytuje terapeutické a prognostické informace zhodnocením rozsahu nevratného chronického poškození tkáně. Tento přehled se soustředí na odpovídající aspekty ve vztahu k tomu, jak získat optimální bioptické vzorky, a také jak interpretovat diagnózu. Patologům a klinikům jsou k dispozici shrnující informace a praktické typy, jak co udělat a naopak čeho se vyvarovat a co mít na paměti.

Klíčová slova:
štěp ledviny – biopsie štěpu ledviny – diagnostický přístup

Autoři: Volker Nickeleit
Vyšlo v časopise: Čes.-slov. Patol., 51, 2015, No. 4, p. 181-186
Kategorie: Přehledový článek

Souhrn

Klíčová slova:
štěp ledviny – biopsie štěpu ledviny – diagnostický přístup

Zdroje

1. Nickeleit V, Singh HK. Polyomaviruses and disease: is there more to know than viremia and viruria? Current opinion in organ transplantation 2015; 20(3): 348-358.

2. Waltzer WC, Miller F, Arnold A, et al. Value of percutaneous core needle biopsy in the differential diagnosis of renal transplant dysfunction. J Urol 1987; 137(6): 1117-1121.

3. Matas AJ, Tellis VA, Sablay L, et al. The value of needle renal allograft biopsy. III. A prospective study. Surgery 1985; 98(5): 922-926.

4. Nickeleit V, Mihatsch MJ. Polyomavirus nephropathy in native kidneys and renal allografts: an update on an escalating threat. Transpl Int 2006; 19(12): 960-73.

5. Nickeleit V. Pathology: donor biopsy evaluation at time of renal grafting. Nature reviews. Nephrology 2009; 5(5): 249-251.

6. Parfrey PS, Kuo YL, Hanley JA, et al. The diagnostic and prognostic value of kidney transplant biopsy. Transplantation 1984; 38: 586-593.

7. Kiss D, Landman J, Mihatsch M, et al. Risks and benefits of graft biopsy in renal transplantation under cyclosporin-A. Clinical Nephrol 1992; 38(3): 132-134.

8. Manfro RC, Lee JY, Lewgoy J, et al. The role of percutaneous renal biopsy in kidney transplant. Revista Da Associacao Medica Brasileira 1994; 40(2): 108-112.

9. Kon SP, Templar J, Dodd SM, et al. Diagnostic contribution of renal allograft biopsies at various intervals after transplantation. Transplantation 1997; 63(4): 547-550.

10. Pascual M, Vallhonrat H, Cosimi AB, et al. The clinical usefulness of the renal allograft biopsy in the cyclosporine era: a prospective study. Transplantation 1999; 67(5): 737-741.

11. Al-Awwa IA, Hariharan S, First MR. Importance of allograft biopsy in renal transplant recipients: correlation between clinical and histological diagnosis. Am J Kidney Dis 1998; 31(6 Suppl 1): S15-18.

12. Nickeleit V. Foretelling the future: predicting graft outcome by evaluating kidney baseline transplant biopsies. J Am Soc Nephrol 2013; 24(11): 1716-1719.

13. Buehrig CK, Lager DJ, Stegall MD, et al. Influence of surveillance renal allograft biopsy on diagnosis and prognosis of polyomavirus-associated nephropathy. Kidney Int 2003; 64(2): 665-673.

14. Haas M, Montgomery RA, Segev DL, et al. Subclinical acute antibody-mediated rejection in positive crossmatch renal allografts. Am J Transplant 2007; 7(3): 576-585.

15. Nast CC, Blifeld C, Danovitch GM, et al. Needle biopsy of renal allografts: comparison of two techniques. Radiology 1990; 174(1): 273-275.

16. Mahoney MC, Racadio JM, Merhar GL, et al. Safety and efficacy of kidney transplant biopsy: Tru-Cut needle vs sonographically guided Biopty gun. Am J Roentgenol 1993; 160(2): 325-326.

17. Haas M, Sis B, Racusen LC, et al. Banff 2013 meeting report: inclusion of c4d-negative antibody-mediated rejection and antibody-associated arterial lesions. Am J Transplant 2014; 14(2): 272-283.

18. Liapis H, Singh HK, Derebail VK, et al. Diagnostic significance of peritubular capillary basement membrane multilaminations in kidney allografts: old concepts revisited. Transplantation 2012; 94(6): 620-629.

19. Solez K, Axelsen RA, Benediktsson H, et al. International standardization of criteria for the histologic diagnosis of renal allograft rejection: the Banff working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Kidney Int 1993; 44(2): 411-422.

20. Colvin RB, Cohen AH, Saiontz C, et al. Evaluation of pathologic criteria for acute renal allograft rejection: reproducibility, sensitivity, and clinical correlation. J Am Soc Nephrol 1997; 8(12): 1930-1941.

21. Hanas E, Larsson E, Fellström B, et al. Safety aspects and diagnostic findings of serial renal allograft biopsies, obtained by an automatic technique with a midsize needle. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1992; 26(4): 413-420.

22. Wilczek HE. Percutaneous needle biopsy of the renal allograft. A clinical safety evaluation of 1129 biopsies. Transplantation 1990; 50(5): 790-797.

23. Furness PN, Philpott CM, Chorbadjian MT, et al. Protocol biopsy of the stable renal transplant: a multicenter study of methods and complication rates. Transplantation 2003; 76(6): 969-973.

24. Benfield MR, Herrin J, Feld L, et al. Safety of kidney biopsy in pediatric transplantation: a report of the Controlled Clinical Trials in Pediatric Transplantation Trial of Induction Therapy Study Group. Transplantation 1999; 67(4): 544-547.

25. Schwarz A, Gwinner W, Hiss M, et al. Safety and adequacy of renal transplant protocol biopsies. Am J Transplant 2005; 5(8): 1992-1996.

26. Merkus JW, Zeebregts CJ, Hoitsma AJ, et al. High incidence of arteriovenous fistula after biopsy of kidney allografts. Br J Surg 1993; 80(3): 310-312.

27. Schwarz A, Hiss M, Gwinner W, et al. Course and relevance of arteriovenous fistulas after renal transplant biopsies. Am J Transplant 2008; 8(4): 826-831.

28. Beckingham IJ, Nicholson ML, Kirk G, et al. Comparison of three methods to obtain percutaneous needle core biopsies a renal allograft. Br J Surg 1994; 81(6): 898-899.

29. Sorof JM, Vartanian RK, Olson JL, et al. Histopathological concordance of paired renal allograft biopsy cores. Effect on the diagnosis and management of acute rejection. Transplantation 1995; 60(11): 1215-1219.

30. Wilczek HE, Groth CG, Bohman SO. Effect of reduced cyclosporin dosage on long-term renal allograft histology. Transplant Int 1992; 5(2): 65-70.

31. Wang H, Nanra RS, Carney SL, et al. The renal medulla in acute renal allograft rejection: comparison with renal cortex. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1995; 10(8): 1428-1431.

32. Munivenkatappa RB, Schweitzer EJ, Papadimitriou JC, et al. The Maryland aggregate pathology index: a deceased donor kidney biopsy scoring system for predicting graft failure. Am J Transplant 2008; 8(11): 2316-2324.

33. De Vusser K, Lerut E, Kuypers D, et al. The predictive value of kidney allograft baseline biopsies for long-term graft survival. J Am Soc Nephrol 2013; 24(11): 1913-1923.

34. Rosenberg HG, Martinez PS, Vaccarezza AS, et al. Morphological findings in 70 kidneys of living donors for renal transplant. Pathol Res Pract 1990; 186(5): 619-624.

35. Cosyns JP, Malaise J, Hanique G, et al. Lesions in donor kidneys: nature, incidence, and influence on graft function. Transplant Int 1998; 11(1): 22-27.

36. Ji S, Liu M, Chen J, et al. The fate of glomerular mesangial IgA deposition in the donated kidney after allograft transplantation. Clin Transplant 2004; 18(5): 536-540.

37. Silva FG, Chandler P, Pirani CL, et al. Disappearance of glomerular mesangial IgA deposits after renal allograft transplantation. Transplantation 1982; 33(214): 214-216.

38. Tolkoff-Rubin NE, Cosimi AB, Fuller T, et al. IgA nephropathy in HLA-identical siblings. Transplantation 1978; 26(6): 430-433.

39. Sanfilippo F, Croker BP, Bollinger RR. Fate of four cadaveric donor renal allografts with mesangial IgA deposits. Transplantation 1982; 33(370): 370-372.

40. Curschellas E, Landmann J, Durig M, et al. Morphologic findings in “zero-hour” biopsies of renal transplants. Clin Nephrol 1991; 36(5): 215-222.

41. Wieczorek G, Bigaud M, Menninger K, et al. Acute and chronic vascular rejection in nonhuman primate kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 2006; 6(6): 1285-1296.