Subclinical rejection in tacrolimus-treated renal transplant recipients

  • James M. Gloor
  • , Ari J. Cohen
  • , Donna J. Lager
  • , Joseph P. Grande
  • , Mary E. Fidler
  • , Jorge A. Velosa
  • , Timothy S. Larson
  • , Thomas R. Schwab
  • , Matthew D. Griffin
  • , Mikel Prieto
  • , Scott L. Nyberg
  • , Sylvester Sterioff
  • , Walter K. Kremers
  • , Mark D. Stegall

Research output: Contribution to a Journal (Peer & Non Peer)Articlepeer-review

105 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Subclinical rejection, defined as histologic acute rejection in the absence of graft dysfunction, has been suggested as a cause of chronic allograft rejection. In cyclosporine-treated patients, the incidence of subclinical rejection 3 months after transplant is reported to be approximately 30%. The intent of our study was to determine the incidence of subclinical rejection in tacrolimus-treated renal allograft recipients. Methods. We prospectively studied the incidence of subclinical rejection on surveillance biopsies performed 3 months after transplantation in 114 patients transplanted between September 1, 1998 and November 30, 2000. All patients received tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone, and 56% received antibody induction. Results. Subclinical rejection was detected in 2.6% of patients (3/114, 95% confidence interval 0.5-7.5%). Borderline changes were detected in 11% (12/114). Subclinical rejections were treated with bolus methylprednisolone. Conclusions. The incidence of subclinical rejection early after kidney transplantation is extremely low in tacrolimus-treated patients in whom early rejections are aggressively treated, suggesting that surveillance biopsies may not be necessary with this regimen.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1965-1968
Number of pages4
JournalTransplantation
Volume73
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 27 Jun 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Subclinical rejection in tacrolimus-treated renal transplant recipients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this