Significance of Perivascular Aggregates in Kidney Allografts: Evaluation of 1-Year Protocol Biopsies Using Recent Banff Classification.

BACKGROUND

Perivascular aggregates (PVAs) often occur in kidney allografts; however, their significance needs to be re-evaluated in light of changes in the concept and criteria of allograft rejection.

METHODS

We reviewed 1-year protocol biopsies in 258 patients with kidney transplants to identify PVAs and concurrent pathology based on the Banff 2017 classification, including revised criteria for chronic active T-cell mediated rejection (CA-TCMR). We investigated the incidence of PVA, concurrent allograft lesions, diagnosis, and graft survival. No prisoners were used in this study, and no participants were coerced or paid.

RESULTS

We identified PVA in 81 biopsies (31.4%). The incidence of previous rejection (32.1% vs 12.4%, P= .0003) and total inflammation (1.3 ± 0.8 vs 0.6 ± 0.8, P < .0001), inflammation (0.7 ± 0.8 vs 0.2 ± 0.5, P < .0001), inflammation in the area of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (1.3 ± 1.2 vs 0.7 ± 0.9, P < .0001), tubulitis (1.4 ± 1.1 vs 0.6 ± 0.9, P < .0001), and interstitial fibrosis scores (1.2 ± 0.9 vs 0.9 ± 0.9, P= .01) were higher in PVA-positive compared with patients with PVA-negative. Diagnoses in the PVA-positive group revealed no rejection in 49.4%, CA-TCMR in 21.0%, borderline changes in 18.5%, and acute TCMR in 6.2%. CA-TCMR was more frequent in patients with PVA-positive (21.0% vs 4.0%, P < .0001). Graft survival was similar in both groups among all patients, no-rejection, any type of rejection, and CA-TCMR subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

PVAs occur heterogeneously and are associated with previous rejection or concurrent CA-TCMR. The prognostic significance of PVAs in kidney transplantation is inconclusive, and further investigations are needed.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.