Transplantation Proceedings
Volume 40, Issue 6 , Pages 1839-1843 , July 2008

Clinical Significance of a Positive Flow Crossmatch on the Outcomes of Cadaveric Renal Transplants

  • M.A. Ilham

      Affiliations

    • Transplant Unit, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to Mohamed A. Ilham, Transplant Unit, University Hospital of Wales, Heath Park, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom, CF14 4XW.
    • ,
  • S. Winkler

      Affiliations

    • Welsh Transplantation and Immunogenetics Laboratory, Welsh Blood Service, Pontyclun, Wales, United Kingdom.
    • ,
  • E. Coates

      Affiliations

    • Welsh Transplantation and Immunogenetics Laboratory, Welsh Blood Service, Pontyclun, Wales, United Kingdom.
    • ,
  • A. Rizzello

      Affiliations

    • Transplant Unit, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
    • ,
  • T.J. Rees

      Affiliations

    • Welsh Transplantation and Immunogenetics Laboratory, Welsh Blood Service, Pontyclun, Wales, United Kingdom.
    • ,
  • A. Asderakis

      Affiliations

    • Transplant Unit, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom

References 

  1. Patel R, Terasaki PI. Significance of the positive crossmatch test in kidney transplantation. N Engl J Med. 1969;280:735
  2. Cross DE, Whittier FC, Weaver P, et al. A comparison of the antiglobulin versus extended incubation time crossmatch: results in 223 renal transplants. Transplant Proc. 1977;9:1803
  3. Ross J, Dickerson T, Perkins HA. Two techniques to make the lymphocytotoxic crossmatch more sensitive: prolonged incubation and the antiglobulin test. Tissue Antigens. 1975;6:129
  4. Zachary AA, Klingman L, Thorne N, et al. Variations of the lymphocytotoxicity test (An evaluation of sensitivity and specificity). Transplantation. 1995;60:498
  5. De Meester J, Doxiadis II, Persijn GG, et al. Renal transplantation of highly sensitised patients via prioritised renal allocation programs (Shorter waiting time and above-average graft survival). Nephron. 2002;92:111
  6. Soosay A, O'Neill D, Counihan A, et al. Causes of sensitisation in patients awaiting renal transplantation in Ireland. Ir Med J. 2003;96:109
  7. Cho YW, Cecka JM, Gjertson DW, et al. The UNOS Scientific Renal Transplant Registry: multistep regression models on kidney graft survival. Clin Transpl. 1990;397
  8. Garovoy M, Rheinschmidt MA, Bigos M, et al. Flow cytometry analysis: a high technology crossmatch technique facilitating transplantation. Transplant Proc. 1983;15:1939
  9. Cook DJ, Terasaki PI, Iwaki Y, et al. The flow cytometry crossmatch in kidney transplantation. Clin Transpl. 1987;409
  10. Kerman RH, Van Buren CT, Lewis RM, et al. Improved graft survival for flow cytometry and antihuman globulin crossmatch-negative retransplant recipients. Transplantation. 1990;49:52
  11. Kerman RH, Susskind B, Buyse I, et al. Flow cytometry-detected IgG is not a contraindication to renal transplantation: IgM may be beneficial to outcome. Transplantation. 1999;68:1855
  12. Christiaans MH, Overhof R, ten Haaft A, et al. No advantage of flow cytometry crossmatch over complement-dependent cytotoxicity in immunologically well-documented renal allograft recipients. Transplantation. 1996;62:1341
  13. Karpinski M, Rush D, Jeffery J, et al. Flow cytometric crossmatching in primary renal transplant recipients with a negative anti-human globulin enhanced cytotoxicity crossmatch. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2001;12:2807
  14. Bryan CF, Baier KA, Nelson PW, et al. Long-term graft survival is improved in cadaveric renal retransplantation by flow cytometric crossmatching. Transplantation. 1998;66:1827
  15. Mahoney RJ, Ault KA, Given SR, et al. The flow cytometric crossmatch and early renal transplant loss. Transplantation. 1990;49:527
  16. Mahoney RJ, Norman DJ, Colombe BW, et al. Identification of high- and low-risk second kidney grafts. Transplantation. 1996;61:1349
  17. Walford R. Discussion in histocompatibility. In: Videbaek  editors. Histocompatibility Testing. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 1965;
  18. Terasaki PI, McClelland JD. Microdroplet assay of human serum cytotoxins. Nature. 1964;204:998
  19. Cook D, Terasaki P, Iwaki Y, et al. An approach to reducing early kideny transplant failure by flow cytometry crossmatching. Clin Transpl. 1987;1:253
  20. Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin RB, et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int. 1999;55:713
  21. Matas AJ, Gillingham KJ, Sutherland DE. Half-life and risk factors for kidney transplant outcome—importance of death with function. Transplantation. 1993;55:757
  22. Martin S, Liggett H, Robson A, et al. The association between a positive T and B cell flow cytometry crossmatch and renal transplant failure. Transpl Immunol. 1993;1:270
  23. Halloran P, Mathew T, Tomlanovich S, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil in renal allograft recipients: a pooled efficacy analysis of three randomized, double-blind, clinical studies in prevention of rejection (The International Mycophenolate Mofetil Renal Transplant Study Groups). Transplantation. 1997;63:39
  24. Webster AC, Playford EG, Higgins G, et al. Interleukin 2 receptor antagonists for renal transplant recipients: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Transplantation. 2004;77:166
  25. Fuggle SV, Belger MA, Johnson RJ, et al. A new national allocation scheme for adult kidneys in the United Kingdom (United Kingdom Transplant Support Service Authority (UKTSSA) Users' Kidney Advisory Group and Its Task Forces). Clin Transpl. 1998;107

PII: S0041-1345(08)00592-7

doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.05.009

Transplantation Proceedings
Volume 40, Issue 6 , Pages 1839-1843 , July 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution