OVID Medline Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ov

742 Pages·2017·4.46 MB·English

by  Robert Shepherd

Database: Embase <1974 to 2017 June 1>, OVID Medline Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process &
Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid MEDLINE(R) 1946 to Present,
EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials <April 2017>, EBM Reviews -
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews <2005 to May 24, 2017>
Search Strategy:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 exp kidney transplantation/ (226588)
2 ((renal or kidney*) adj5 (transplantat* or allotransplant* or grafting or homotransplant* or
retransplant*)).tw,kw. (130834)
3 1 or 2 (249970)
4 (exp nephrectomy/ or nephrectom*.tw,kw.) and (exp living donor/ or exp Living Donors/ or
exp kidney donor/ or donor*.tw.) (9033)
5 ((Natural orifice adj5 endoscopic) or "NOTES").tw. (90516)
6 exp natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery/ or exp Natural Orifice Endoscopic
Surgery/ (4310)
7 "SILS".tw. (3018)
8 laparoscopic surgery/ or laparoscop*.tw. (300592)
9 needlescop*.tw. (604)
10 (robotic adj5 assisted).tw. (11158)
11 (transvaginal or trans vaginal single port or clips or Endo GIA*).tw. (48568)
12 (Organ adj3 Retriev*).tw. (1217)
13 or/4-12 (440656)
14 3 and 13 (8213)
15 exp renal artery/ and (exp artery anastomosis/ or exp Anastomosis, Surgical/) (638)
16 ((arteri* or ureter*) adj5 anastomosis).tw,kw. (8673)
17 ((renal* or kidney*) and vein* and extension).tw,kw. (1281)
18 Renal Veins/ and extension.tw. (539)
19 (((left and right) or dual) adj5 kidney*).tw. (10230)
20 (warm adj5 (ischaem* or ischem*)).tw,kw. (13333)
21 (ureter* adj5 stent*).tw,kw. (10544)
22 ureter/ and stent/ (2531)
23 ((bladder or foley) adj5 catheter*).tw,kw. (15681)
24 exp blood vessel graft/ (196680)
25 ((vascular or blood vessel) adj5 (graft* or transposition)).tw,kw. (17717)
26 exp anticoagulant agent/ or exp Anticoagulants/ (791731)
27 (anti coagulant* or anti coagulat* or anticoagulant* or anticoagulat* or antithrombotic* or
thrombin inhibitor*).tw,kw. (238803)
28 or/15-27 (1119967)
29 3 and 28 (12973)
30 14 or 29 (19532)
31 limit 30 to yr="2007 -Current" (10683)
32 limit 31 to english language [Limit not valid in CDSR; records were retained] (10133)
33 ((exp animals/ or exp animal/ or exp nonhuman/ or exp animal experiment/ or animal model/
or animal tissue/ or non human/) not (humans/ or human/)) or ((rats or mice or mouse or cats or
dogs or animal* or cell lines) not (human* or men or women)).ti. (11025686)
34 32 not 33 (9352)
35 ((child/ or Pediatrics/ or Adolescent/ or Infant/ or adolescence/ or newborn/) not (adult/ or
aged/)) or ((baby or babies or child or children or pediatric* or paediatric* or peadiatric* or infant*
or infancy or neonat* or newborn* or new born* or kid or kids or adolescen* or preschool or pre-
school or toddler*) not (aged or adult* or elder* or senior or men or women)).ti. (4317025)
36 34 not 35 (8723)
37 conference abstract.pt. or Congresses as Topic/ (2673433)
38 36 not 37 (6095)
39 case report/ or case reports/ or case report.ti. (4145467)
40 38 not 39 (4785)
41 note/ or editorial/ or letter/ or Comment/ or news/ (3888419)
42 40 not 41 (4447)
43 ((pancrease-kidney or liver-kidney) not ("without" or "not" or "non" or exclud*)).ti. (2335)
44 42 not 43 (4442)
45 remove duplicates from 44 (3108)
46 limit 45 to ed=20160222-20170602 use ppez [Limit not valid in Embase,CCTR,CDSR;
records were retained] (86)
47 limit 45 to dd=20160222-20170602 use oemezd [Limit not valid in Ovid MEDLINE(R),Ovid
MEDLINE(R) Daily Update,Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process,Ovid MEDLINE(R)
Publisher,CCTR,CDSR; records were retained] (259)
48 (2016* or 2017*).dc. or 2017*.ep. (4593426)
49 45 and 48 (489)
50 limit 45 to yr="2016 -Current" use cctr (13)
51 limit 45 to yr="2016 -Current" use coch (18)
52 46 or 47 or 49 or 50 or 51 (562)

***************************

Page 2
1.
Prophylactic Ureteric Stents in Renal Transplant Recipients: a Multicenter Randomized
Controlled Trial of Early Versus Late Removal
Patel P, Rebollo-Mesa I, Ryan E, Sinha MD, Marks SD, Banga N, Macdougall IC, Webb MC,
Koffman G, Olsburgh J
EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials
American journal of transplantation. Vol.(no pagination), 2017.
[Journal: Article In Press]
AN: CN-01337493 NEW
Prophylactic ureteric stenting in renal transplantation reduces major urological complications;
however, morbidity is related to the indwelling duration of a stent. We aimed to determine the
optimal duration for stents in this clinical setting. Patients (aged 2-75 years) from six UK hospitals
who were undergoing renal transplantation were recruited and randomly assigned to either early
stent removal at 5 days (without cystoscopy) or late removal at 6 weeks after transplantation (with
cystoscopy). The primary outcome was a composite of stent-related complications defined as
pain, visible hematuria, migration, fragmentation, and urinary tract infections (UTIs) within 3 mo of
transplantation. Between May 2010 and Nov 2013, we randomly assigned 227 participants, with
205 included in the final analysis of the primary outcome. Stent-related complications were
significantly higher in the late versus early stent removal groups (36 of 126 [28.6%] vs. 6 of 79
[7.6%]; p < 0.001). The majority of stent complications consisted of UTIs, with an incidence of 31
of 126 (24.6%) in the late group compared with 6 of 79 (7.6%) in the early group (p = 0.004). We
found early stent removal on day 5 significantly reduced stent-related complications and improved
quality of life in the first 3 mo after transplantation (ISRCTN09184595). Copyright (C) 2017 The
American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.
Institution
J. Olsburgh, Department of Nephrology Transplantation and Urology Guy's and St Thomas' NHS
Foundation Trust London UK
Publisher
Blackwell Publishing Ltd (E-mail: [email protected])

Page 3
2.
Living donor kidney transplantation in the hemodialysis-naive and the hemodialysis-exposed: a
short term prospective comparative study
Gadelkareem RA, Hameed DA, Moeen AM, El-Araby AM, Mahmoud MA, El-Taher AM, El-
Haggagy AA, Ramzy MF
EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials
African journal of urology. 23(1):56-61, 2017.
[Journal: Article]
AN: CN-01338528 NEW
Introduction Preemptive (P) living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) provides better survival
rates, quality of life and economic saving. However, the extent of these advantages over those
with a short period of pre-LDKT dialysis is not known. Objectives Evaluation of the patients'
characteristics and short-term outcomes of PLDKT and LDKT after a pre-transplant period of
hemodialysis (HD) not >6 months. Patient and methods This study was conducted between June
2010 and June 2012 and included two groups. Group-I included recipients without HD before
operation. Group-II included those who had a period of HD <6 months. Recipients and donors
were evaluated according to the classic work up. Follow-up for 12 months was scheduled.
Results Group-I included 30 recipients and group-II included 15 recipients. Demographic and
clinical characteristics were similar except for mean recipient age (44 versus 34.3 years; p =
0.024), recipient donor age difference (p = 0.03), job categories (p = 0.047) and ABO distribution
(p = 0.01). Cumulative graft (0.88 versus 0.93) and recipient (0.92 versus 0.100) survival rates
were non-significantly different. Graft function and mean serum creatinine level were within
normal up to 12 months. Acute graft rejection (AGR) was significantly higher in group-II (16.7%
versus 46.7%; p = 0.03). However, lymphoceles were significantly more common in group-I (40%
versus 6.7%; p = 0.02). There was no delayed graft function (DGF), major urinary or vascular
complications. Conclusion PLDKT has a lower rate of AGR. Despite it has a higher rate of
lymphoceles, it saves the patient the morbidities of vascular access and inconveniences of HD.
Hence, PLDKT is recommended as the first choice for each KT-candidate. Copyright (C) 2016
Pan African Urological Surgeons' Association
Institution
D.A. Hameed, Urology University Hospital, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt. E-mail:
[email protected]
Publisher
Pan African Urological Surgeons Association(PAUSA) (E-mail: [email protected])

Page 4
3.
Predictive model of 1-year postoperative renal function after living donor nephrectomy
Benoit T, Game X, Roumiguie M, Sallusto F, Doumerc N, Beauval JB, Rischmann P, Kamar N,
Soulie M, Malavaud B
EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials
International urology and nephrology. 1-9p. 2017.
[Journal: Article In Press]
AN: CN-01341738 NEW
Objective: Kidney transplantation from a living donor nephrectomy (LDN) is the best treatment for
end-stage renal disease, but decrease in donor renal function is often revealed. The aim of this
study was to evaluate the association between preoperative factors and postoperative estimated
glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and test a predictive model to estimate postoperative eGFR, 1
year after LDN.Patients and methods: We reviewed 226 records of consecutive patients who
underwent laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy between 2006 and 2014 in a single tertiary
center. Of these, complete data on 202 patients were analyzed. A training (2/3 of the whole
population) and a validation set (1/3) were randomized. A multivariate regression model was used
to identify predictors and a formula to estimate of 1-year postoperative eGFR in the training set,
using the CKD-EPI formula. Then, the formula was subjected to internal validation using the
validation set using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: Two hundred and
two LLDN were evaluated with a mean preoperative eGFR of 94.1 +/- 15.5 ml/min/1.73
m² and postoperative eGFR of 64.6 +/- 14.5 ml/min/1.73 m² (p <
0.0001). In multivariable analysis, age and preoperative eGFR were independent predictors of
postoperative eGFR in the training set. A formula to estimate postoperative eGFR was generated
with Pearson r = 0.70 in the training cohort and 0.65 in the validation cohort (both p < 0.0001).
Area under the ROC curve of the formula was 0.89 in the training cohort and 0.83 in the
validation cohort (both p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Preoperative eGFR and age are predictors of
postoperative eGFR after LDN. The internally validated predictive model of postoperative eGFR
developed could be an accurate tool to improve the selection of LDN candidates. Copyright (C)
2017 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Institution
T. Benoit, Department of Urology, Andrology and Transplantation, Centre Hospitalier universitaire
Toulouse-Rangueil, 1 avenue du Pr Jean Poulhes, Toulouse Cedex 9 31059, France. E-mail:
[email protected]
Publisher
Page 5
Springer Netherlands

4.
Randomized trial of rATg/Daclizumab vs. rATg/Alemtuzumab as dual induction therapy in renal
transplantation: results at 8 years of follow-up
Ciancio G, Gaynor JJ, Guerra G, Sageshima J, Roth D, Chen L, Kupin W, Mattiazzi A, Tueros L,
Flores S, Hanson L, Ruiz P, Vianna R, Burke GW
EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials
Transplant immunology. Vol.40, pp.42-50, 2017.
[Journal: Article]
AN: CN-01330158 NEW
Our goal in using dual induction therapy is to bring the kidney transplant recipient closer (through
more effectively timed lymphodepletion) to an optimally immunosuppressed state. Here, we
report long-term results of a prospective randomized trial comparing (Group I,N = 100) rATG/Dac
(3 rATG, 2 Dac doses) vs. (Group II,N = 100) rATG/Alemtuzumab(C1H) (1 dose each), using
reduced tacrolimus dosing, EC-MPS, and early corticosteroid withdrawal. Lower EC-MPS dosing
was targeted in Group II to avoid severe leukopenia. Median follow-up was 96 mo post-
transplant. There were no differences in 1st BPAR (including borderline) rates: 10/100 vs. 9/100
in Groups I and II during the first 12mo(P = 0.54), and 20/100 vs. 20/100 throughout the study(P =
0.90). Equally favorable renal function was maintained in both treatment arms(N.S.). While not
significant, more patients in Group II experienced graft loss, 25/100 vs. 18/100 in Group I(P =
0.23). Actuarial patient/graft survival at 96 mo was 92%/83% vs. 85%/73% in Groups I and
II(N.S.). DWFG-due-to-infection(N.S.), EC-MPS withholding-due-to-leukopenia during the first
2mo(P = 0.03), and incidence of viral infections(P = 0.09) were higher in Group II, whereas EC-
MPS withholding-due-to-GI symptoms was higher in Group I(P = 0.009). No other adverse event
differences were observed. While long-term anti-rejection and renal function efficacy were
demonstrated in both treatment arms, slight over-immunosuppression of Group II patients
occurred. Copyright (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V.
Institution
G. Ciancio, Department of Surgery, Miami Transplant Institute, University of Miami Miller School
of Medicine, P.O. Box 012440 (R-440), Miami, FL 33101, United States. E-mail:
[email protected]
Publisher
Page 6
Elsevier B.V.

5.
A comparison of the effects of oral vs. intravenous hydration on subclinical acute kidney injury in
living kidney donors: a protocol of a randomised controlled trial
Mackinnon S, Aitken E, Ghita R, Clancy M
EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials
BMC nephrology. 18(1) (no pagination):2017.
[Journal: Article]
AN: CN-01332769 NEW
Background: Optimal treatment for established renal failure is living donor kidney transplantation.
However this pathway exposes healthy individuals to significant reduction in nephron mass via
major surgical procedure. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is now the most common method for
live donor transplantation, reducing both donor post-operative pain and recovery time. However
this procedure exposes kidneys to additional haemodynamic stresses. It has been suggested that
donor hydration - particularly the use of preoperative intravenous fluids - may counteract these
stresses, reducing subclinical acute kidney injury and ultimately improving long-term renal
function. This may be important in both preservation of donor renal function and recipient graft
longevity. Methods/Design: A prospective single-centre single-blinded randomized controlled trial
will be carried out to determine the effects of donor preoperative intravenous fluids. The primary
outcome is donor subclinical acute kidney injury (defined as plasma NGAL, >153 ng/ml) on day 1
postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include intraoperative haemodynamics, recipient
subclinical acute kidney injury, perioperative complications and donor sleep quality. Donors will
be randomised into two groups: the intervention group will receive active pre-hydration consisting
of three litres of intravenous Hartmann's solution between midnight and 8 am before morning
kidney donation, while the control group will not receive this. Both groups will receive unlimited
oral fluids until midnight, as is routine. Plasma NGAL will be measured at pre-specified
perioperative time points, intraoperative haemodynamic data will be collected using non-invasive
cardiac output monitoring and clinical notes will be used to obtain demographic and clinical data.
The researcher will be blinded to the donor fluid hydration status. Blinded statistical analysis will
be performed on an intention-to-treat basis. A prospective power calculation estimates a required
sample size of 86 patients. Discussion: This study will provide important data, as there is
currently little evidence about the use of donor preoperative fluids in laparoscopic nephrectomy. It
Page 7
is hoped that the results obtained will guide future clinical practice. Trial registration: This study
has been approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 3 (reference no.
14/WS/1160, 27 January 2015) and is registered with the International Standard Randomised
Controlled Trial Number Register (reference no. ISRCTN10199225, 20 April 2015). Copyright (C)
2017 The Author(s).
Institution
S. Mackinnon, Department of Renal Transplantation, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, 1345
Govan Road, Glasgow G51 4TF, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]
Publisher
BioMed Central Ltd. (E-mail: [email protected])

6.
Dual Kidney Transplant Techniques: A Systematic Review.
Cocco A; Shahrestani S; Cocco N; Hameed A; Yuen L; Ryan B; Hawthorne W; Lam V; Pleass H.
OVID Medline Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid
MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid MEDLINE(R) 1946 to Present
Clinical Transplantation. , 2017 May 23.
[Journal Article]
UI: 28544075
BACKGROUND: Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) was developed in order to improve outcomes
from transplantation of extended criteria donors (ECD). This paper examined which surgical
techniques have been reported for DKT, and whether any technique had superior patient and
graft survival.
METHOD: Electronic databases were searched for published studies mapping to MESH terms:
''kidney or renal" AND "transplan*" AND "dual or double". Single case reports; studies of patients
less than 18 years old; studies which did not describe the surgical technique; and studies that did
not report patient or graft survival were excluded.
RESULTS: Fifteen reports of 434 DKT recipients were identified. Three techniques were
described: bilateral placement; unilateral placement with separate anastomoses; and unilateral
placement with patch anastomoses. Patient survival across all three techniques was over 95% at
one year, and graft survival was also similar at over 90%. Rates of delayed graft function were
between 20 and 30% across all techniques.
Page 8
CONCLUSION: The three techniques have equivalent delayed graft function as well as patient
and graft survival rates. This is an encouraging result as it means that the surgeon can choose to
use the technique which is most appropriate for their own skills and for the patient. This article is
protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Copyright This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Status
Publisher
Authors Full Name
Cocco, Annelise; Shahrestani, Sara; Cocco, Nicholas; Hameed, Ahmer; Yuen, Lawrence; Ryan,
Brendan; Hawthorne, Wayne; Lam, Vincent; Pleass, Henry.
Institution
Cocco, Annelise. Westmead Hospital. Shahrestani, Sara. The University of Sydney.
Cocco, Nicholas. Royal Prince Alfred Hospital.
Hameed, Ahmer. Westmead Hospital and the University of Sydney.
Yuen, Lawrence. Westmead Hospital.
Ryan, Brendan. Westmead Hospital.
Hawthorne, Wayne. The University of Sydney.
Lam, Vincent. Westmead Hospital and the University of Sydney.
Pleass, Henry. Westmead Hospital and the University of Sydney.
Date Created
20170525
Year of Publication
2017

7.
Drug Library Screening for the Identification of Ionophores That Correct the Mistrafficking
Disorder Associated with Oxalosis Kidney Disease.
Hou S; Madoux F; Scampavia L; Janovick JA; Conn PM; Spicer TP.
OVID Medline Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid
MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid MEDLINE(R) 1946 to Present
SLAS discovery. 2472555217689992, 2017 Jan 01.
[Journal Article]
UI: 28346094
Page 9
Primary hyperoxaluria is the underlying cause of oxalosis and is a life-threatening autosomal
recessive disease, for which treatment may require dialysis or dual liver-kidney transplantation.
The most common primary hyperoxaluria type 1 (PH1) is caused by genetic mutations of a liver-
specific enzyme alanine:glyoxylate aminotransferase (AGT), which results in the misrouting of
AGT from the peroxisomes to the mitochondria. Pharmacoperones are small molecules with the
ability to modify misfolded proteins and route them correctly within the cells, which may present
an effective strategy to treat AGT misrouting in PH1 disorders. We miniaturized a cell-based high-
content assay into 1536-well plate format and screened ~4200 pharmacologically relevant
compounds including Food and Drug Administration, European Union, and Japanese-approved
drugs. This assay employs CHO cells stably expressing AGT-170, a mutant that predominantly
resides in the mitochondria, where we monitor for its relocation to the peroxisomes through
automated image acquisition and analysis. The miniaturized 1536-well assay yielded a Z'
averaging 0.70 +/- 0.07. Three drugs were identified as potential pharmacoperones from this pilot
screen, demonstrating the applicability of this assay for large-scale high-throughput screening.
Status
Publisher
Authors Full Name
Hou, Shurong; Madoux, Franck; Scampavia, Louis; Janovick, Jo Ann; Conn, P Michael; Spicer,
Timothy P.
Institution
Hou, Shurong. 1 Department of Molecular Therapeutics, Scripps Research Institute Molecular
Screening Center, Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, FL, USA. Madoux, Franck. 1 Department
of Molecular Therapeutics, Scripps Research Institute Molecular Screening Center, Scripps
Research Institute, Jupiter, FL, USA.
Madoux, Franck. 3 Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.
Scampavia, Louis. 1 Department of Molecular Therapeutics, Scripps Research Institute Molecular
Screening Center, Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, FL, USA.
Janovick, Jo Ann. 2 Departments of Internal Medicine and Cell Biology/Biochemistry, Center for
Membrane Protein Research, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Conn, P Michael. 2 Departments of Internal Medicine and Cell Biology/Biochemistry, Center for
Membrane Protein Research, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Spicer, Timothy P. 1 Department of Molecular Therapeutics, Scripps Research Institute Molecular
Screening Center, Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, FL, USA.
Date Created
20170327
Year of Publication
2017
Page 10