Laia Oliveras, Pamela López-Vargas, Edoardo Melilli, Sergi Codina, Ana Royuela, Ana Coloma López, Alexandre Favà, Anna Manonelles, Carlos Couceiro, Nuria Lloberas, Josep M Cruzado, Nuria Montero
{"title":"延迟启动或降低初始剂量的钙调磷酸酶抑制剂对肾移植受者延迟移植功能的高风险。","authors":"Laia Oliveras, Pamela López-Vargas, Edoardo Melilli, Sergi Codina, Ana Royuela, Ana Coloma López, Alexandre Favà, Anna Manonelles, Carlos Couceiro, Nuria Lloberas, Josep M Cruzado, Nuria Montero","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD014855.pub2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Kidney transplantation is the preferred therapy for many patients with kidney failure. Delayed graft function (DGF) is more common in donors after cardiac death (DCD), especially those with older age, longer cold ischemia time, or higher creatinine levels. Currently, there is no agreement on the optimal immunosuppressive approach for patients at increased risk of DGF. Strategies include delaying the introduction of calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) or using an initial low dose of CNI.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the benefits and harms of delayed initiation of CNI or reduced CNI dose as initial immunosuppression therapy for kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies was searched up to 11 December 2024 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating delayed versus early initiation of CNI or reduced versus standard initial dose of CNI in kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Three authors independently assessed study eligibility, and two assessed the risk of bias, certainty of evidence, extracted the data, and performed the analysis. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using the random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool 1.0, and the certainty of the evidence according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods, which are presented in the summary of findings tables.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>We included 12 studies (2230 randomised participants). All studies were performed in Europe. Around 60% of the participants were males, reflecting the expected proportion in the population on kidney replacement therapy in Europe. Most studies had insufficient information to judge adequate random sequence generation and, or allocation concealment. All studies were unblinded, and judged as high risk of bias for DGF if the definition was based on need for dialysis, and for acute rejection if the diagnosis did not require a biopsy. Overall, the level of certainty was low, and reasons to downgrade were mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision. Delayed versus early initiation of CNI There may be little or no difference in DGF between the groups (6 studies, 905 recipients: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.12; low certainty evidence) or in acute rejection (8 studies, 1295 recipients: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.40; low certainty evidence). Delaying the initiation of CNI probably makes little or no difference to eGFR (6 studies, 851 recipients: MD -0.81 mL/min, 95% CI -3.33 to 1.72; moderate certainty evidence). Delaying the initiation of CNI may make little or no difference to graft loss censored for death (8 studies, 1295 recipients: RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.65; very low certainty evidence) or to all-cause death (8 studies, 907 recipients: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.14; very low certainty evidence) although the evidence is very uncertain. There is probably little or no difference in all infections between the groups (6 studies, 1226 recipients: RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.25; moderate certainty evidence). Low versus standard initial dose of CNI There may be little or no difference to DGF between the groups (5 studies, 983 recipients: RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.50; low certainty evidence) or in acute rejection (5 studies, 947 recipients: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.30; low certainty evidence). Starting CNI at a lower dose may make little or no difference to eGFR (5 studies, 935 recipients: MD 4.06 mL/min, 95% CI -1.36 to 9.48, low certainty evidence). Starting CNI at a lower dose may make little or no difference to graft loss censored for death, although the evidence is very uncertain (5 studies, 983 recipients: RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.71; very low certainty evidence), or to all-cause death (4 studies, 521 recipients: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.47; low certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in all infections between the groups (4 studies, 828 recipients: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07; moderate certainty evidence).</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>There may be little or no difference in DGF or acute rejection when delaying the start of CNI or when starting it at a lower dose in kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF. The available data are of low certainty.</p>","PeriodicalId":10473,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","volume":"4 ","pages":"CD014855"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11977049/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Delayed initiation or reduced initial dose of calcineurin-inhibitors for kidney transplant recipients at high risk of delayed graft function.\",\"authors\":\"Laia Oliveras, Pamela López-Vargas, Edoardo Melilli, Sergi Codina, Ana Royuela, Ana Coloma López, Alexandre Favà, Anna Manonelles, Carlos Couceiro, Nuria Lloberas, Josep M Cruzado, Nuria Montero\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/14651858.CD014855.pub2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Kidney transplantation is the preferred therapy for many patients with kidney failure. Delayed graft function (DGF) is more common in donors after cardiac death (DCD), especially those with older age, longer cold ischemia time, or higher creatinine levels. Currently, there is no agreement on the optimal immunosuppressive approach for patients at increased risk of DGF. Strategies include delaying the introduction of calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) or using an initial low dose of CNI.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the benefits and harms of delayed initiation of CNI or reduced CNI dose as initial immunosuppression therapy for kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies was searched up to 11 December 2024 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating delayed versus early initiation of CNI or reduced versus standard initial dose of CNI in kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Three authors independently assessed study eligibility, and two assessed the risk of bias, certainty of evidence, extracted the data, and performed the analysis. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using the random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool 1.0, and the certainty of the evidence according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods, which are presented in the summary of findings tables.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>We included 12 studies (2230 randomised participants). All studies were performed in Europe. Around 60% of the participants were males, reflecting the expected proportion in the population on kidney replacement therapy in Europe. Most studies had insufficient information to judge adequate random sequence generation and, or allocation concealment. All studies were unblinded, and judged as high risk of bias for DGF if the definition was based on need for dialysis, and for acute rejection if the diagnosis did not require a biopsy. Overall, the level of certainty was low, and reasons to downgrade were mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision. Delayed versus early initiation of CNI There may be little or no difference in DGF between the groups (6 studies, 905 recipients: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.12; low certainty evidence) or in acute rejection (8 studies, 1295 recipients: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.40; low certainty evidence). Delaying the initiation of CNI probably makes little or no difference to eGFR (6 studies, 851 recipients: MD -0.81 mL/min, 95% CI -3.33 to 1.72; moderate certainty evidence). Delaying the initiation of CNI may make little or no difference to graft loss censored for death (8 studies, 1295 recipients: RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.65; very low certainty evidence) or to all-cause death (8 studies, 907 recipients: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.14; very low certainty evidence) although the evidence is very uncertain. There is probably little or no difference in all infections between the groups (6 studies, 1226 recipients: RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.25; moderate certainty evidence). Low versus standard initial dose of CNI There may be little or no difference to DGF between the groups (5 studies, 983 recipients: RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.50; low certainty evidence) or in acute rejection (5 studies, 947 recipients: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.30; low certainty evidence). Starting CNI at a lower dose may make little or no difference to eGFR (5 studies, 935 recipients: MD 4.06 mL/min, 95% CI -1.36 to 9.48, low certainty evidence). Starting CNI at a lower dose may make little or no difference to graft loss censored for death, although the evidence is very uncertain (5 studies, 983 recipients: RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.71; very low certainty evidence), or to all-cause death (4 studies, 521 recipients: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.47; low certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in all infections between the groups (4 studies, 828 recipients: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07; moderate certainty evidence).</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>There may be little or no difference in DGF or acute rejection when delaying the start of CNI or when starting it at a lower dose in kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF. The available data are of low certainty.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"CD014855\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11977049/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014855.pub2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014855.pub2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:肾移植是许多肾衰竭患者的首选治疗方法。延迟移植功能(DGF)在心脏死亡(DCD)后的供体中更为常见,尤其是年龄较大、冷缺血时间较长或肌酐水平较高的供体。目前,对于DGF风险增加患者的最佳免疫抑制方法尚无一致意见。策略包括延迟引入钙调磷酸酶抑制剂(CNI)或使用初始低剂量的CNI。目的:评估延迟开始CNI或减少CNI剂量作为初始免疫抑制治疗对高危DGF肾移植受者的利与弊。检索方法:通过与信息专家联系,使用与本综述相关的检索词,检索到2024年12月11日为止的Cochrane肾脏和移植研究登记册。通过CENTRAL、MEDLINE和EMBASE、会议记录、国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)搜索门户和clinicaltrials .gov的搜索来确定注册中的研究:选择标准:所有随机对照试验(rct)和准rct评估DGF高风险肾移植受者延迟和早期开始CNI或减少与标准初始剂量的CNI。数据收集和分析:三位作者独立评估研究资格,两位作者评估偏倚风险、证据确定性、提取数据并进行分析。结果以风险比(RR)和95%置信区间(CI)对二分类结局进行报告,以平均差(MD)对连续结局进行报告,95%置信区间为CI。采用随机效应模型进行统计分析。采用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具1.0评估偏倚风险,依据推荐、评估、发展和评价等级(GRADE)方法评估证据的确定性,结果总结表中列出了这些方法。主要结果:我们纳入12项研究(2230名随机受试者)。所有研究均在欧洲进行。大约60%的参与者是男性,反映了在欧洲接受肾脏替代治疗的人群中预期的比例。大多数研究没有足够的信息来判断是否足够的随机序列生成和或分配隐藏。所有的研究都是非盲法的,如果DGF的定义是基于透析的需要,则判定为高风险偏倚,如果诊断不需要活检,则判定为急性排斥反应。总体而言,确定性水平较低,降级的原因主要是由于存在偏差和不精确的风险。两组间DGF的差异可能很小或没有差异(6项研究,905名受者:RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76至1.12;低确定性证据)或急性排斥反应(8项研究,1295名受体:RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.75至1.40;低确定性证据)。延迟CNI启动可能对eGFR影响很小或没有影响(6项研究,851名受体:MD -0.81 mL/min, 95% CI -3.33至1.72;中等确定性证据)。延迟启动CNI可能对死亡的移植物损失影响很小或没有影响(8项研究,1295名受体:RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.68至3.65;极低确定性证据)或导致全因死亡(8项研究,907名受试者:RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.54至2.14;非常低的确定性证据),尽管证据非常不确定。两组之间所有感染的差异可能很小或没有差异(6项研究,1226名接受者:RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.97至1.25;中等确定性证据)。两组间DGF的差异可能很小或没有差异(5项研究,983名受者:RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90至1.50;低确定性证据)或急性排斥反应(5项研究,947例受体:RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.52至1.30;低确定性证据)。以较低剂量开始CNI可能对eGFR影响很小或没有影响(5项研究,935名接受者:MD 4.06 mL/min, 95% CI -1.36至9.48,低确定性证据)。以较低剂量开始CNI可能对死亡的移植物损失影响很小或没有影响,尽管证据非常不确定(5项研究,983名受者:RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64至1.71;极低确定性证据),或导致全因死亡(4项研究,521名受试者:RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.41至2.47;低确定性证据)。两组之间所有感染的差异可能很小或没有差异(4项研究,828名接受者:RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71至1.07;中等确定性证据)。作者的结论是:在DGF高风险的肾移植受者中,延迟CNI开始或以较低剂量开始CNI时,DGF或急性排斥反应可能很少或没有差异。现有数据的确定性很低。
Delayed initiation or reduced initial dose of calcineurin-inhibitors for kidney transplant recipients at high risk of delayed graft function.
Background: Kidney transplantation is the preferred therapy for many patients with kidney failure. Delayed graft function (DGF) is more common in donors after cardiac death (DCD), especially those with older age, longer cold ischemia time, or higher creatinine levels. Currently, there is no agreement on the optimal immunosuppressive approach for patients at increased risk of DGF. Strategies include delaying the introduction of calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) or using an initial low dose of CNI.
Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of delayed initiation of CNI or reduced CNI dose as initial immunosuppression therapy for kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF.
Search methods: The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies was searched up to 11 December 2024 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Selection criteria: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating delayed versus early initiation of CNI or reduced versus standard initial dose of CNI in kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF.
Data collection and analysis: Three authors independently assessed study eligibility, and two assessed the risk of bias, certainty of evidence, extracted the data, and performed the analysis. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using the random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool 1.0, and the certainty of the evidence according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods, which are presented in the summary of findings tables.
Main results: We included 12 studies (2230 randomised participants). All studies were performed in Europe. Around 60% of the participants were males, reflecting the expected proportion in the population on kidney replacement therapy in Europe. Most studies had insufficient information to judge adequate random sequence generation and, or allocation concealment. All studies were unblinded, and judged as high risk of bias for DGF if the definition was based on need for dialysis, and for acute rejection if the diagnosis did not require a biopsy. Overall, the level of certainty was low, and reasons to downgrade were mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision. Delayed versus early initiation of CNI There may be little or no difference in DGF between the groups (6 studies, 905 recipients: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.12; low certainty evidence) or in acute rejection (8 studies, 1295 recipients: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.40; low certainty evidence). Delaying the initiation of CNI probably makes little or no difference to eGFR (6 studies, 851 recipients: MD -0.81 mL/min, 95% CI -3.33 to 1.72; moderate certainty evidence). Delaying the initiation of CNI may make little or no difference to graft loss censored for death (8 studies, 1295 recipients: RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.65; very low certainty evidence) or to all-cause death (8 studies, 907 recipients: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.14; very low certainty evidence) although the evidence is very uncertain. There is probably little or no difference in all infections between the groups (6 studies, 1226 recipients: RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.25; moderate certainty evidence). Low versus standard initial dose of CNI There may be little or no difference to DGF between the groups (5 studies, 983 recipients: RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.50; low certainty evidence) or in acute rejection (5 studies, 947 recipients: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.30; low certainty evidence). Starting CNI at a lower dose may make little or no difference to eGFR (5 studies, 935 recipients: MD 4.06 mL/min, 95% CI -1.36 to 9.48, low certainty evidence). Starting CNI at a lower dose may make little or no difference to graft loss censored for death, although the evidence is very uncertain (5 studies, 983 recipients: RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.71; very low certainty evidence), or to all-cause death (4 studies, 521 recipients: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.47; low certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in all infections between the groups (4 studies, 828 recipients: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07; moderate certainty evidence).
Authors' conclusions: There may be little or no difference in DGF or acute rejection when delaying the start of CNI or when starting it at a lower dose in kidney transplant recipients at high risk of DGF. The available data are of low certainty.
期刊介绍:
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) stands as the premier database for systematic reviews in healthcare. It comprises Cochrane Reviews, along with protocols for these reviews, editorials, and supplements. Owned and operated by Cochrane, a worldwide independent network of healthcare stakeholders, the CDSR (ISSN 1469-493X) encompasses a broad spectrum of health-related topics, including health services.