No abstract

IMPORTANCEAlthough current guidelines suggest the use of regional citrate anticoagulation (which involves the addition of a citrate solution to the blood before the filter of the extracorporeal dialysis circuit) as first-line treatment for continuous kidney replacement therapy in critically ill patients, the evidence for this recommendation is based on few clinical trials and meta-analyses.OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of regional citrate anticoagulation, compared with systemic heparin anticoagulation, on filter life span and mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA parallel-group, randomized multicenter clinical trial in 26 centers across Germany was conducted between March 2016 and December 2018 (final date of follow-up, January 21, 2020). The trial was terminated early after 596 critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury or clinical indications for initiation of kidney replacement therapy had been enrolled. INTERVENTIONSPatients were randomized to receive either regional citrate anticoagulation (n = 300), which consisted of a target ionized calcium level of 1.0 to 1.40 mg/dL, or systemic heparin anticoagulation (n = 296), which consisted of a target activated partial thromboplastin time of 45 to 60 seconds, for continuous kidney replacement therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESCoprimary outcomes were filter life span and 90-day mortality. Secondary end points included bleeding complications and new infections. RESULTS Among 638 patients randomized, 596 (93.4%) (mean age, 67.5 years; 183 [30.7%] women) completed the trial. In the regional citrate group vs systemic heparin group, median filter life span was 47 hours (interquartile range [IQR], 19-70 hours) vs 26 hours (IQR, 12-51 hours) (difference, 15 hours [95% CI, 11 to 20 hours]; P < .001). Ninety-day all-cause mortality occurred in 150 of 300 patients vs 156 of 296 patients (Kaplan-Meier estimator percentages, 51.2% vs 53.6%; unadjusted difference, -2.4% [95% CI, -10.5% to 5.8%]; unadjusted hazard ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.72 to 1.13]; unadjusted P = .38; adjusted difference, -6.1% [95% CI, -12.6% to 0.4%]; primary adjusted hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.63 to 1.004]; primary adjusted P = .054). Of 38 prespecified secondary end points, 34 showed no significant difference. Compared with the systemic heparin group, the regional citrate group had significantly fewer bleeding complications (15/300 [5.1%] vs 49/296 [16.9%]; difference, -11.8% [95% CI, -16.8% to -6.8%]; P < .001) and significantly more new infections (204/300 [68.0%] vs 164/296 [55.4%]; difference, 12.6% [95% CI, 4.9% to 20.3%]; P = .002).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury receiving continuous kidney replacement therapy, anticoagulation with regional citrate, compared with systemic heparin anticoagulation, resulted in significantly longer filter life span. The trial was terminated early and was therefore underpowered to reach conclusions about the effect of anticoagulation strategy on mortality.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has a major impact on transplant recipients, with mortality rates up to 20%. Therefore, the effect of established messenger RNA (mRNA)-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have to be evaluated for solid organ transplant patients (SOT) since they are known to have poor responses after vaccination. We investigated the SARS-CoV-2 immune response via SARS-CoV-2 IgG detection in 23 renal transplant recipients after two doses of the mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine BNT162b2 following the standard protocol. The antibody response was evaluated once with an anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG CLIA 15.8 +/− 3.0 days after the second dose. As a control, SARS-CoV-2 IgG was determined in 23 healthcare workers (HCW) and compared to the patient cohort. Only 5 of 23 (22%) renal transplant recipients were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies after the second dose of vaccine. In contrast, all 23 (100%) HCWs were tested positive for antibodies after the second dose. Thus, the humoral response of renal transplant recipients after two doses of the mRNA-based vaccine BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech, Kronach, Germany) is impaired and significantly lower compared to healthy controls (22% vs. 100%; p = 0.0001). Individual vaccination strategies might be beneficial in these vulnerable patients.

mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines offer a preventive strategy against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections that is of interest in the care of patients on hemodialysis (HDP). We measured humoral immune responses in 72 HDP after standard vaccination with two doses of the mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech). Antibody responses were evaluated with an anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG ChemiLuminescent ImmunoAssay (CLIA) two weeks after the second dose. In addition, SARS-CoV-2 IgG was determined in a control of 16 healthy healthcare workers (HCW). The control group of HCW has shown a strong antibody response with a median (MD (Q1; Q3)) antibody titer of 800.0 AU/mL (520.5; 800.0). In comparison to HCW, HDP under 60 years of age responded equally (597.0 AU/mL (410.5; 800.0), p = 0.051). However, the antibody responses of the HDP negatively correlated with age (r2 = 0.2954 p < 0.0001), leading to significantly lower antibody titers in HDP over 60 years (280.0 AU/mL (45.7; 477.0), p < 0.0001). To thoroughly understand the immunogenicity of the new mRNA-based vaccines in HDP, longitudinal data on the effectiveness and durability of antibody responses are needed. Modifications of immunization schedules should be considered in HDP with low or without antibody responsiveness after standard vaccination to boost immune reactivity and prolong protective effects in these vulnerable patients.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection is currently approved and shows favorable outcomes, but little known about antibody responses in solid organ transplant recipients, since these patients are known to have an impaired immune response upon vaccination and have not been included in admission studies. We therefore analyzed immunogenicity in 43 liver transplant (LT) recipients in a median of 15 days (IQR, 12–24) after receiving two doses of the mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine BNT162b2 following the standard protocol, and compared these results to a control group consisting of 20 healthcare workers (HCWs). Thirty-four of the 43 (79%) LT recipients developed antibodies, compared to 20 out of 20 (100%) in the control group (p = 0.047). The median SARS-CoV-2 IgG titer was significantly lower in the LT recipients compared to the control group (216 vs. >2080 BAU/mL, p = 0.0001). Age and sex distribution was similar in the LT patients that developed antibodies after vaccination compared to those who did not. Interestingly, the patients who received mycophenolate mofetil exhibited a reduced vaccination response compared to the other LT patients (5 of 11 (45.5%) vs. 29 of 32 (90.6%), p = 0.004). In conclusion, our data reveal lower immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine BNT162b2 in LT patients compared to the control group, but still show superior results compared to other solid organ transplant recipients reported so far.