Background and objectives: In patients with kidney failure due to IgA nephropathy, IgA deposits can recur in a subsequent kidney transplant. The incidence, effect, and risk factors of IgA nephropathy recurrence is unclear, because most studies have been single center and sample sizes are relatively small. Design, setting, participants, & measurements: We performed a multicenter, international, retrospective study to determine the incidence, risk factors, and treatment response of recurrent IgA nephropathy after kidney transplantation. Data were collected from all consecutive patients with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy transplanted between 2005 and 2015, across 16 “The Post-Transplant Glomerular Disease” study centers in Europe, North America, and South America. Results: Out of 504 transplant recipients with IgA nephropathy, recurrent IgA deposits were identified by kidney biopsy in 82 patients; cumulative incidence of recurrence was 23% at 15 years (95% confidence interval, 14 to 34). Multivariable Cox regression revealed a higher risk for recurrence of IgA deposits in patients with a pre-emptive kidney transplant (hazard ratio, 3.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.31 to 9.17) and in patients with preformed donor-specific antibodies (hazard ratio, 2.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.09 to 6.19). After kidney transplantation, development of de novo donor-specific antibodies was associated with subsequent higher risk of recurrence of IgA nephropathy (hazard ratio, 6.65; 95% confidence interval, 3.33 to 13.27). Immunosuppressive regimen was not associated with recurrent IgA nephropathy in multivariable analysis, including steroid use. Graft loss was higher in patients with recurrence of IgA nephropathy compared with patients without (hazard ratio, 3.69; 95% confidence interval, 2.04 to 6.66), resulting in 32% (95% confidence interval, 50 to 82) graft loss at 8 years after diagnosis of recurrence. Conclusions: In our international cohort, cumulative risk of IgA nephropathy recurrence increased after transplant and was associated with a 3.7-fold greater risk of graft loss.

Utilization of temporary mechanical circulatory support, including veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation as a bridge to heart transplantation (HT) has increased significantly under the revised United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) donor heart allocation system. The revised heart allocation system aimed to lower waitlist times and mortality for the most critically ill patients requiring biventricular, nondischargeable, mechanical circulatory support. While previous reports have shown improved 1-year post-HT survival in the current era, 3-year survival and factors associated with mortality among bridge-to-transplant (BTT) extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients are not well described. We queried the UNOS database for all adult (age ≥ 18 years) heart-only transplants performed between 2010 and 2019. Patients were stratified as either pre- (January 2010-September 2018; era 1) or post-allocation change (November 2018-December 2019; era 2) cohort based on their HT date. Baseline recipient characteristics and post-transplant outcomes were compared. A Cox regression analysis was performed to explore risk factors for 3-year mortality among BTT-ECMO patients in era 2. For each era, 3-year mortality was also compared between BTT ECMO patients and those transplanted without ECMO support. During the study period, 116 patients were BTT ECMO during era 1 and 154 patients during era 2. Baseline recipient characteristics were similar in both groups. Median age was 48 (36-58 interquartile range (IQR)) years in era 2, while it was 51 (27-58 IQR) years in era 1. The majority of BTT-ECMO patients were males in both era 2 and era 1 (77.7% vs 71.5%, p = 0.28). Median ECMO run times while listed for HT were significantly shorter (4 days vs 7 days, p < 0.001) in era 2. Waitlist mortality among BTT ECMO patients was also significantly lower in era 2 (6.3% vs 19.3%, p < 0.001). Post-HT survival at 6 months (94.2% vs 75.9%, p < 0.001), 1 year (90.3% vs 74.2%, p < 0.001), and 3 years (87% vs 66.4%, p < 0.001) was significantly improved in era 2 as compared to era 1. Graft failure at 1 year (10.3% vs 25.8%, p = 0.0006) and 3 years (13.6% vs 33.6%, p = 0.0001) was also significantly lower in era 2 compared to era 1. Three-year survival among BTT ECMO patients in era 2 was similar to that of patients transplanted in era 2 without ECMO support (87% vs 85.7%, p = 0.75). In multivariable analysis of BTT-ECMO patients in era 2, every 1 kg/m² increase in body mass index was associated with higher mortality at 3 years (hazard ratio (HR) 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.15, p = 0.006). Similarly, both post-HT stroke (HR 5.58, 95% CI 2.57-12.14, p < 0.001) and post-HT renal failure requiring hemodialysis (HR 4.36, 95% CI 2.43-7.82, p < 0.001) were also associated with 3-year mortality. Three years post-HT survival in patients bridged with ECMO has significantly improved under the revised donor heart allocation system compared to prior system. BTT ECMO recipients under the revised system have significantly shorter ECMO waitlist run times, lower waitlist mortality and 3-year survival similar to those not bridged with ECMO. Overall, the revised allocation system has allowed more rapid transplantation of the sickest patients without a higher post-HT mortality.

There are numerous case reports and a handful of single^1–5 center studies reporting on COVID‐19 in kidney transplant recipients. Most reports arise from the epicenters of where the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus was first detected such as New York City^1,2,5 and Europe^3,4. We in UNOS Region 1 experienced COVID‐19 weeks to a month later and questioned whether our experience was different. The programs within UNOS Region 1 have had a long history of sharing information in an attempt to mitigate the effect of viruses on our patients.