Background and objectives Vascular calcification (VC) is common in CKD, but little is known about its prognostic effect on patients with nondialysis CKD. The prevalence of VC and its ability to predict death, time to hospitalization, and renal progression were assessed.Design, setting, participants, & measurements The Study of Mineral and Bone Disorders in CKD in Spain is a prospective, observational, 3-year follow-up study of 742 patients with nondialysis CKD stages 3-5 from 39 centers in Spain from April to May 2009. VC was assessed using Adragao (AS; x-ray pelvis and hands) and Kauppila (KS; x-ray lateral lumbar spine) scores from 572 and 568 patients, respectively. The primary end point was death. Secondary outcomes were hospital admissions and appearance of a combined renal end point (beginning of dialysis or drop .30% in eGFR). Factors related to VC were assessed by logistic regression analysis. Survival analysis was assessed by Cox proportional models.Results VC was present in 79% of patients and prominent in 47% (AS$3 or KS.6). Age (odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.02 to 1.07; P,0.001), phosphorous (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.28 to 2.20; P,0.001), and diabetes (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.32 to 3.35; P=0.002) were independently related to AS$3. After a median followup of 35 months (interquartile range=17-36), there were 70 deaths (10%). After multivariate adjustment for age, smoking, diabetes, comorbidity, renal function, and level of phosphorous, AS$3 but not KS.6 was independently associated with all-cause (hazard ratio [HR], 2.07; 95% CI, 1.07 to 4.01; P=0.03) and cardiovascular (HR, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.27 to 9.45; P=0.02) mortality as well as a shorter hospitalization event-free period (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.22; P,0.001). VC did not predict renal progression.Conclusions VC is highly prevalent in patients with CKD. VC assessment using AS independently predicts death and time to hospitalization. Therefore, it could be a useful index to identify patients with CKD at high risk of death and morbidity as previously reported in patients on dialysis.

New-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) contributes to the risk for cardiovascular disease and infection, reducing graft and patient survival. For improvement of the outcome of kidney transplant recipients, it is of great interest to know precisely the risk factors that contribute to NODAT development. Nonmodifiable risk factors for development of NODAT are age, race, genetic background, family history of diabetes, and previous glucose intolerance. Modifiable risk factors are obesity and overweight, hepatitis C virus and cytomegalovirus infections, and immunosuppressive drugs. Both steroids and calcineurin inhibitors influence the appearance of NODAT, whereas the role of sirolimus in glucose metabolism currently is controversial.

Delayed graft function (DGF) is a common complication after renal transplant, affecting its outcome. A common definition of DGF is the need for dialysis within the first week of transplantation, but this criterion has its drawbacks. We tried to validate an earlier and better defined parameter of DGF based on the creatinine reduction ratio on post-transplant day 2 (CRR2).

Immune status monitoring of transplant recipients could identify patients at risk of acute rejection, infection, and cancer, which are important sources of morbidity and mortality in these patients. The ImmuKnow assay provides an objective assessment of the cellular immune function of immunosuppressed patients. Inconclusive results concerning the ability of the ImmuKnow test to predict acute rejection and infection have raised concerns about the predictive value of ImmuKnow in liver transplant recipients. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify studies published up to March 2012 that documented the use of ImmuKnow for monitoring immune function in liver transplant recipients. The study quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 score. We identified 5 studies analyzing ImmuKnow performance for infection and 5 studies analyzing ImmuKnow performance for acute rejection. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve were 83.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) ¼ 78.5%-88.3%], 75.3% (95% CI ¼ 70.9%-79.4%), 3.3 (95% CI ¼ 2.8-4.0), 14.6 (95% CI ¼ 9.6-22.3), and 0.824 6 0.034, respectively, for infection and 65.6% (95% CI ¼ 55.0%-75.1%), 80.4% (95% CI ¼ 76.4%-83.9%), 3.4 (95% CI ¼ 2.4-4.7), 8.8 (95% CI ¼ 3.1-24.8), and 0.835 6 0.060, respectively, for acute rejection. Heterogeneity was low for infection studies and high for acute rejection studies. In conclusion, the ImmuKnow test is a valid tool for determining the risk of further infection in adult liver transplant recipients. Significant heterogeneity across studies precludes the conclusion that ImmuKnow identifies liver transplant patients at risk for rejection. Liver Transpl 18:1245-1253, 2012. V C 2012 AASLD.Received April 18, 2012; accepted June 16, 2012.In the field of solid organ transplantation, the maintenance of an adequate level of immunosuppression is of the greatest importance. On the one hand, overimmunosuppression can promote the appearance of infection, cancer, and other undesirable secondary effects. Infectious diseases remain an important source of morbidity and mortality for all types of transplant patients. 1 Up to two-thirds of all liver Abbreviations: AUC, area under the curve; AUC-ROC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; CI, confidence interval; df, degrees of freedom; DOR, diagnostic odds ratio; HCV, hepatitis C virus; iATP, intracellular adenosine triphosphate; QUADAS-2, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2; SE, standard error; SROC, summary receiver operating characteristic.