Association of Early Kidney Allograft Failure with Preformed IgA Antibodies to β2-Glycoprotein I

In the current immunosuppressive therapy era, vessel thrombosis is the most common cause of early graft loss after renal transplantation. The prevalence of IgA anti–β₂-glycoprotein I antibodies (IgA-aB2GPI-ab) in patients on dialysis is elevated (>30%), and these antibodies correlate with mortality and cardiovascular morbidity. To evaluate the effect of IgA-aB2GPI-ab in patients with transplants, we followed all patients transplanted from 2000 to 2002 in the Hospital 12 de Octubre prospectively for 10 years. Presence of IgA-aB2GPI-ab in pretransplant serum was examined retrospectively. Of 269 patients, 89 patients were positive for IgA-aB2GPI-ab (33%; group 1), and the remaining patients were negative (67%; group 2). Graft loss at 6 months post-transplant was significantly higher in group 1 (10 of 89 versus 3 of 180 patients in group 2; P=0.002). The most frequent cause of graft loss was thrombosis of the vessels, which was observed only in group 1 (8 of 10 versus 0 of 3 patients in group 2; P=0.04). Multivariate analysis showed that the presence of IgA-aB2GPI-ab was an independent risk factor for early graft loss (P=0.04) and delayed graft function (P=0.04). There were no significant differences regarding patient survival between the two groups. Graft survival was similar in both groups after 6 months. In conclusion, patients with pretransplant IgA-aB2GPI-ab have a high risk of early graft loss caused by thrombosis and a high risk of delayed graft function. Therefore, pretransplant IgA-aB2GPI-ab may have a detrimental effect on early clinical outcomes after renal transplantation.     

The impact of low-dose versus high-dose antibiotic prophylaxis regimens on surgical site infection rates after cesarean delivery

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics - The objective of this study was to determine if high-dose antibiotic prophylaxis with cefazolin decreases the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) after a...     

Comparison of outcomes between minimally invasive and median sternotomy for double and triple valve surgery: A meta-analysis

Background

Limited data exists demonstrating the efficacy of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared to median sternotomy (MS) for multiple valvular disease (MVD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare operative and peri-operative outcomes of MIS vs MS in MVD.

Methods

PubMed, Ovid, and Embase were searched from inception until August 2019 for randomized and observational studies comparing MIS and MS in patients with MVD. Clinical outcomes of intra- and postoperative times, reoperation for bleeding and surgical site infection were evaluated.

Results

Five observational studies comparing 340 MIS vs 414 MS patients were eligible for qualitative and quantitative review. The quality of evidence assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was good for all included studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated increased cardiopulmonary bypass time for MIS patients (weighted mean difference [WMD], 0.487; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.365-0.608; P < .0001). Similarly, aortic cross-clamp time was longer in patients undergoing MIS (WMD, 0.632; 95% CI, 0.509-0.755; P < .0001). No differences were found in operative mortality, reoperation for bleeding, surgical site infection, or hospital stay.

Conclusions

MIS for MVD have similar short-term outcomes compared to MS. This adds value to the use of minimally invasive methods for multivalvular surgery, despite conferring longer operative times. However, the paucity in literature and learning curve associated with MIS warrants further evidence, ideally randomized control trials, to support these findings.