Skip to main content
Log in

Nierentransplantatpathologie

Kidney transplant pathology

  • Schwerpunkt
  • Published:
Der Pathologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die Nierenbiopsie der transplantierten Niere spielt in der Nachsorge und Betreuung nierentransplantierter Patienten eine wichtige Rolle. Sie stellt heutzutage eine Standardprozedur dar, die in der Frühphase zur diagnostischen Abklärung einer fehlenden Primärfunktion oder eines Kreatininanstiegs eingesetzt wird. Im weiteren Verlauf dient sie der Abklärung eines akuten oder schleichenden Kreatininanstiegs sowie der Diagnostik einer neu auftretenden Proteinurie oder Erythrozyturie. Weiterhin wichtig ist die Beurteilung der initialen Qualität des Nierentransplantats durch die Pathologie mittels einer intraoperativ gewonnenen Nierenbiopsie (Nullbiopsie). Dies ist angesichts der immer knapper werdenden Spenderorgane und der daraus resultierenden Notwendigkeit, auch grenzwertige Organe unter bestimmten Umständen wie z. B. im Rahmen der so genannten „Old-for-old-Programme“ zu transplantieren, notwendig. Des Weiteren werden heute in vielen Transplantationszentren so genannte Protokollbiopsien durchgeführt, d. h. Biopsien, die nicht akut indiziert sind, aber in einem bestimmten zeitlichen Abstand nach Nierentransplantation durchgeführt werden, um subklinische Abstoßungen sowie frühzeitige Veränderungen, die auf eine chronische Transplantatschädigung hinweisen, zu entdecken. Die Protokollbiopsien dienen außerdem dazu, wissenschaftliche Aspekte der Nierentransplantation systematisch zu untersuchen.

Abstract

Biopsy of the transplanted kidney plays an important role in the care and treatment of patients after kidney transplantation. Today the renal biopsy is a standard procedure which is performed early after renal transplantation in the case of a primary non-functioning graft or a significant rise in serum creatinine. On the other hand, a kidney biopsy is performed if an acute or creeping rise in serum creatinine or acute onset of proteinuria or erythrocyturia is observed during follow-up. Furthermore, zero biopsies or intraoperative biopsies of the graft are important in order to obtain information about the initial quality of the graft. This is particularly important in view of the shortage of donor organs and the resulting necessity to accept increasingly marginal organs, such as for example in the ESP program. In addition, an increasing number of transplant centres perform protocol biopsies, i.e. biopsies that are not based on clinical indication, but are performed at a certain time point after transplantation to detect subclinical rejections as well as histological alterations pointing to chronic allograft damage. Additionally, there is much scientific interest in protocol biopsies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6
Abb. 7

Literatur

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hohenstein B, Uder M, Willam C et al (2007) Transvenous renal biopsy of a kidney transplant in a patient with a suspected bleeding disorder. Am J Transplant 7:2052–2053.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin RB et al (1999) The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 55:713–723

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Racusen LC, Halloran PF, Solez K (2004) Banff 2003 meeting report: new diagnostic insights and standards. Am J Transplant 4:1562–1566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Racusen LC, Colvin RB, Solez K et al (2003) Antibody-mediated rejection criteria – an addition to the Banff 97 classification of renal allograft rejection. Am J Transplant 3:708–714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Solez K, Colvin RB, Racusen LC et al (2007) Banff ‚05 meeting report: differential diagnosis of chronic allograft injury and elimination of chronic allograft nephropathy (‚CAN‘). Am J Transplant 7:518–526

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Solez K, Colvin RB, Racusen LC et al (2008) Banff 07 classification of renal allograft pathology: updates and future directions. Am J Transplant 8:753–760

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Seemayer CA, Gaspert A, Nickeleit V, Mihatsch MJ (2007) C4d staining of renal allograft biopsies: a comparative analysis of different staining techniques. Nephrol Dial Transplant 22:568–576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mengel M, Sis B, Halloran PF (2007) SWOT analysis of Banff: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the international Banff consensus process and classification system for renal allograft pathology. Am J Transplant 7:2221–2226

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Banff Working Group, Demetris AJ, Adeyi O et al (2006) Liver biopsy interpretation for causes of late liver allograft dysfunction. Hepatology 44:489–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Drachenberg CB, Odorico J, Demetris AJ et al (2008) Banff schema for grading pancreas allograft rejection: working proposal by a multi-disciplinary international consensus panel. Am J Transplant 8:1237–1249

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Cendales LC, Kanitakis J, Schneeberger S et al (2008) The Banff 2007 working classification of skin-containing composite tissue allograft pathology. Am J Transplant 8:1396–1400

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Nickeleit V, Zeiler M, Gudat F et al (1998) Histological characteristics of interstitial renal allograft rejection. Kidney Blood Press Res 21:230–232

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Opelz G, Döhler B (2008) Collaborative transplant study report. Influence of time of rejection on long-term graft survival in renal transplantation. Transplantation 85:661–666

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Madden RL, Mulhern JG, Benedetto BJ et al (2000) Completely reversed acute rejection is not a significant risk factor for the development of chronic rejection in renal allograft recipients. Transpl Int 13:344–350

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Couser W (2005) Recurrent glomerulonephritis in the renal allograft: an update of selected areas. Exp Clin Transplant 3:283–288

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ivanyi B (2008) A primer on recurrent and de novo glomerulonephritis in renal allografts. Nat Clin Pract Nephrol 4:446–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Choy BY, Chan TM, Lai KN (2006) Recurrent glomerulonephritis after kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 6:2535–2542

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Floege J (2003) Recurrent glomerulonephritis following renal transplantation: an update. Nephrol Dial Transplant 18:1260–1265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. IJpelaar DH, Farris AB, Goemaere N et al (2008) Fidelity and evolution of recurrent FSGS in renal allografts. J Am Soc Nephrol 19:2219–2224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dharnidharka VR, Cherikh WS, Abbott KC (2009) An OPTN analysis of national registry data on treatment of BK virus allograft nephropathy in the United States. Transplantation 87:1019–1026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hirsch HH, Brennan DC, Drachenberg CB et al (2005) Polyomavirus-associated nephropathy in renal transplantation: interdisciplinary analyses and recommendations. Transplantation 79:1277–1286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schwimmer J, Nadasdy TA, Spitalnik PF et al (2003) De novo thrombotic microangiopathy in renal transplant recipients: a comparison of hemolytic uremic syndrome with localized renal thrombotic microangiopathy. Am J Kidney Dis 41:471–479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jaffe ES, Harris NL, Stein H, Vardiman J (2001) Tumours of the haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. IARC, Lyon, S 260

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Die korrespondierende Autorin gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Amann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Amann, K., Büttner, M., Benz, K. et al. Nierentransplantatpathologie. Pathologe 32, 124–134 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00292-010-1406-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00292-010-1406-y

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation