Browsing by Author "Anderson, Melissa D."
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Bamlanivimab for Mild to Moderate COVID-19 in Kidney Transplant Recipients(Elsevier, 2021-09) Jan, Muhammad Y.; Sayegh, Skye E.; Webb, Hanna T.; Adebiyi, Oluwafisayo; Anderson, Melissa D.; Mishler, Dennis P.; Yaqub, Muhammad S.; Taber, Tim; Sharfuddin, Asif A.; Medicine, School of MedicineKidney transplant recipients (KTRs) are at an increased risk of hospitalization, complications, and mortality from COVID-19 compared with the general population.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Among KTRs with COVID-19 in the United States, studies have shown hospitalization rates ranging from 32% to 100%,1,3, 4, 5, 6 intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates from 20% to 61%,2,4 and overall mortality of 13% to 39%.1,2,4, 5, 6 A high incidence of acute kidney injury was noted, ranging from 30% to 89%,2,4, 5, 6 while renal replacement therapy was required in 13% to 21% of patients.1,7 Given the natural history of COVID-19 pneumonia, most of these complications occurred ≥1 week after the diagnosis of COVID-19. Given the high impact of COVID-19 infection on KTRs, early COVID-19–directed therapies are critical. Bamlanivimab (LY-CoV555) was given Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the US Food and Drug Administration on November 9, 2020.8 It is a neutralizing IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds to the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, inhibiting attachment to human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor. This EUA was given for treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in patients ≥12 years of age weighing >40 kg who are positive with a direct viral testing for SARS-CoV-2 and have high risk for progressing to severe COVID-19 and/or hospitalization.8 KTRs with COVID-19 are considered high risk because of immunosuppressive medication use.9 Studies on the use of bamlanivimab among KTRs are limited. To provide more insight on the use of bamlanivimab in KTRs we report our experience with 24 KTRs.Item BK Virus Nephropathy in the Native Kidney of a Liver Transplant Recipient(Elsevier, 2021-03-30) Sekulic, Miroslav; Sloan, Richard; Guo, Shunhua; Anderson, Melissa D.; Markowitz, Glen S.; Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of MedicineItem Healthcare outcomes in undocumented immigrants undergoing two emergency dialysis approaches(Dustri-Verlag, 2017-10) Sher, S. Jawad; Aftab, Waqas; Moorthi, Ranjani N.; Moe, Sharon M.; Weaver, Christopher S.; Messina, Frank C.; Martinez-Hoover, Nancy M.; Anderson, Melissa D.; Eadon, Michael T.; Emergency Medicine, School of MedicineBACKGROUND: Current estimates suggest 6,500 undocumented end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients in the United States are ineligible for scheduled hemodialysis and require emergent dialysis. In order to remain in compliance with Emergency Medicaid, an academic health center altered its emergency dialysis criteria from those emphasizing interdialytic interval to a set emphasizing numerical thresholds. We report the impact of this administrative change on the biochemical parameters, utilization, and adverse outcomes in an undocumented patient cohort. METHODS: This retrospective case series examines 19 undocumented ESRD patients during a 6-month transition divided into three 2-month periods (P1, P2, P3). In P1, patients received emergent dialysis based on interdialytic interval and clinical judgment. In P2 (early transition) and P3 (equilibrium), patients were dialyzed according to strict numerical criteria coupled with clinical judgment. RESULTS: Emergent criteria-based dialysis (P2 and P3) was associated with increased potassium, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and acidosis as compared to P1 (p < 0.05). Overnight hospitalizations were more common in P2 and P3 (p < 0.05). More frequent adverse events were noted in P2 as compared to P1 and P3, with an odds ratio (OR) for the composite endpoint (intubation, bacteremia, myocardial infarction, intensive care unit admission) of 48 (5.9 - 391.2) and 16.5 (2.5 - 108.6), respectively. Per-patient reimbursement-to-cost ratios increased during criteria-based dialysis periods (P1: 1.49, P2: 2.3, P3: 2.49). DISCUSSION: Strict adherence to criteria-based dialysis models increases biochemical abnormalities while improving Medicaid reimbursement for undocumented immigrants. Alternatives to emergent dialysis are required which minimize cost, while maintaining dignity, safety, and quality of life.Item A National Survey of Practice Patterns for Accepting Living Kidney Donors With Prior COVID-19(Science Direct, 2021-08-01) Jan, Muhammad Y.; Jawed, Areeba T.; Barros, Nicolas; Adebiyi, Oluwafisayo; Diez, Alejandro; Fridell, Jonathan A.; Goggins, William C.; Yaqub, Muhammad S.; Anderson, Melissa D.; Mujtaba, Muhammad A.; Taber, Tim E.; Mishler, Dennis P.; Kumar, Vineeta; Lentine, Krista L.; Sharfuddin, Asif A.; Medicine, School of MedicineIntroduction A critical question facing transplant programs is whether, when, and how to safely accept living kidney donors (LKDs) who have recovered from COVID-19 infection. The purpose of the study is to understand current practices related to accepting these LKDs. Methods We surveyed US transplant programs from 3 September through 3 November 2020. Center level and participant level responses were analyzed. Results A total of 174 respondents from 115 unique centers responded, representing 59% of US LKD programs and 72.4% of 2019 and 72.5% of 2020 LKD volume (Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network-OPTN 2021). In all, 48.6% of responding centers had received inquiries from such LKDs, whereas 44.3% were currently evaluating. A total of 98 donors were in the evaluation phase, whereas 27.8% centers had approved 42 such donors to proceed with donation. A total of 50.8% of participants preferred to wait >3 months, and 91% would wait at least 1 month from onset of infection to LD surgery. The most common reason to exclude LDs was evidence of COVID-19−related AKI (59.8%) even if resolved, followed by COVID-19−related pneumonia (28.7%) and hospitalization (21.3%). The most common concern in accepting such donors was kidney health postdonation (59.2%), followed by risk of transmission to the recipient (55.7%), donor perioperative pulmonary risk (41.4%), and donor pulmonary risk in the future (29.9%). Conclusion Practice patterns for acceptance of COVID-19−recovered LKDs showed considerable variability. Ongoing research and consensus building are needed to guide optimal practices to ensure safety of accepting such donors. Long-term close follow-up of such donors is warranted.Item Nondirected Living Kidney Donation and Recipient Outcomes in the United States: A 20-Year Review(Elsevier, 2022-03-22) Jan, Muhammad Y.; Yaqub, Muhammad S.; Adebiyi, Oluwafisayo O.; Taber, Tim E.; Anderson, Melissa D.; Mishler, Dennis P.; Burney, Heather N.; Li, Yang; Li, Xiaochun; Sharfuddin, Asif A.; Medicine, School of MedicineIntroduction: Nondirected donation (NDD) of the kidneys is a growing practice where donors who do not have any genetic or emotional relationship are selected to donate to a wide variety of recipients with a range of selection criteria and decisions which are left up to individual transplant centers. Methods: We review all adult living kidney donor-recipient (DR) pairs and outcomes from NDDs who were recorded in United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database as code 10 (anonymous) from October 1997 to September 2017 for demographics and outcomes. Results: A total of 2174 DR pairs were identified. The number of NDDs increased from 18 in 2000 to 256 in 2016. Survival analysis showed higher death-censored-graft survival (DC-GS) when recipient was 20 years or more older than donor followed by recipient-donor within 20 years of age and lowest when donor was 20 years or more older than recipient (P = 0.0114). Conclusion: Overall, the number of NDDs has increased significantly in the 20-year review period. Transplants from NDDs have excellent long-term outcomes. Better matching of controllable DR factors, such as age and body mass index (BMI), could further improve GS. Further research is needed to incorporate these DR factors into paired kidney donation programs potentially enhancing the utility and beneficence of this invaluable donation.Item Vasopressin for Post-kidney Transplant Hypotension(Elsevier, 2022-04-07) Jan, Muhammad Y.; Moe, Sharon M.; Adebiyi, Oluwafisayo; Chen, Jeannie; Powelson, John; Burney, Heather N.; Yaqub, Muhammad S.; Mishler, Dennis P.; Moorthi, Ranjani N.; Taber, Tim E.; Anderson, Melissa D.; Li, Yang; Li, Xiaochun; Fridell, Jonathan A.; Goggins, William C.; Sharfuddin, Asif A.; Medicine, School of MedicineIntroduction: Hypotension after deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) is a risk factor for delayed graft function (DGF) and poor graft survival (GS). We hypothesize that vasopressin use in hypotensive DDKT recipients (DDKTRs) to increase blood pressure (BP) reduces DGF rates and is safe without increasing mortality. Methods: Group with vasopressin "study group" (n = 45) was defined as DDKTRs between 2012 and 2017 who required vasopressin for hypotension systolic BP (SBP) <120 mm Hg or diastolic BP (DBP) <60 mm Hg. DDKTRs with no-vasopressin "comparison group" (n = 90) were propensity score-matched DDKTRs between 2012 and 2017 without vasopressin use. Primary outcomes were GS, creatinine and allograft biopsy rate at 1 year, DGF rate, and death during transplant hospitalization. Results: Vasopressin group had lower mean maximum and minimum SBP and DBP in the operating room (OR). Median vasopressin start time post-DDKT was 2 hours (interquartile range [IQR] 1-6), and duration of use was 42 hours (IQR 24-63). DGF, creatinine at 1 year, and allograft biopsy rates were comparable. No deaths occurred during transplant hospitalization. Multivariable analysis did not find an effect of vasopressin use on GS. Conclusion: Treatment of hypotensive DDKTRs with vasopressin is safe and facilitated similar graft function and survival with that of nonhypotensive patients. In the absence of a randomized control trial, our study supports the safety of vasopressin therapy to prevent the adverse effects of hypotension.