Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-02T05:58:46.361Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 16 - Pathology of Renal Transplantation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2017

By
Tibor Nadasdy ,
Anjali Satoskar  and
Gyongyi Nadasdy
Edited by
Xin Jin (Joseph) Zhou ,
Zoltan G. Laszik ,
Tibor Nadasdy  and
Vivette D. D'Agati
Xin Jin (Joseph) Zhou
Affiliation:
Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas
Zoltan G. Laszik
Affiliation:
University of California, San Francisco
Tibor Nadasdy
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Vivette D. D'Agati
Affiliation:
Columbia University, New York
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Silva's Diagnostic Renal Pathology , pp. 583 - 628
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov, 2014.Google Scholar
Nickeleit, V, Mengel, M, Colvin, RB. Renal transplant pathology. In: Jennette, , Olson, , Silva, , and D’Agati, (Eds.): Heptinstall’s Pathology of the Kidney, Seventh Edition. Wolters Kluwer, 2015; pp. 1321–1459.Google Scholar
McCue, PA, Santoianni, RA. Expedited handling of transplant biopsies. Am J Surg Pathol 1988; 12: 155–157.Google Scholar
Lai, FMM, Lai, KN, Chew, EC, Lee, JC. Microwave fixation in diagnostic renal pathology. Pathology 1987; 19: 17–21.Google Scholar
Nadasdy, GM, Bott, C, Cowden, D, et al. Comparative study for the detection of peritubular capillary C4d deposition in human renal allografts using different methodologies. Hum Pathol 2005; 36: 1178–1185.Google Scholar
Solez, K, Axelsen, RA, Benediktsson, H, et al. International standardization of criteria for the histologic diagnosis of renal allograft rejection; the Banff working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Kidney Int 1993; 44: 411–422.Google Scholar
Sorof, JM, Vartanian, RK, Olson, JL, et al. Histopathological concordance of paired renal allograft biopsy cores. Effect on the diagnosis and management of acute rejection. Transplantation 1995; 60: 1215–1219.Google Scholar
Porter, KA. Renal transplantation. In: Heptinstall, RH (Ed.): Pathology of the Kidney, 4th edition. Little, Brown, Boston, 1992; pp. 1799–1933.Google Scholar
Racusen, LC, Solez, K, Colvin, RB, et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 1999; 55: 713–723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Racusen, LC, Colvin, RB, Solez, K, et al. Antibody-mediated rejection criteria – an addition to the Banff 97 classification of renal allograft rejection. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 704–714.Google Scholar
Solez, K, Colvin, RB, Racusen, LC, et al. Banff 2005 meeting report: differential diagnosis of chronic allograft injury and elimination of chronic allograft nephropathy (‘CAN’). Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 518–526.Google Scholar
Solez, K, Colvin, RB, Racusen, LC, et al. Banff 2007 Classification of renal allograft pathology: updates and future directions. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 753–760.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sis, B, Mengel, M, Haas, M, et al. Banff ’09 meeting report: antibody mediated graft deterioration and implementation of Banff working groups. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 464–471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mengel, M, Sis, B, Haas, M, et al. Banff 2011 Meeting report: new concepts in antibody-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant 2012; 12: 563–570.Google Scholar
Haas, M, Sis, B, Racusen, LC, et al. Banff 2013 meeting report: inclusion of C4d-negative antibody-mediated rejection and antibody-associated arterial lesions. Am J Transplant 2014; 14: 272–283.Google Scholar
Bishop, GA, Hass, BM, Duggin, GG, et al. Immunopathology of renal allograft rejection analyzed with monoclonal antibodies to mononuclear cell markers. Kidney Int 1986; 29: 708–717.Google Scholar
Charney, DA, Nadasdy, T, Lo, AW, Racusen, LC. Plasma cell rich acute renal allograft rejection. Transplantation 1999; 68: 791–797.Google Scholar
Nadasdy, T, Krenacs, T, Kalmar, N, et al. Importance of plasma cells in the infiltrate of renal allografts. An immunohistochemical study. Pathol Res Pract 1991; 187: 178–183.Google Scholar
Sarwal, M, Chua, MS, Kambham, N, et al. Molecular heterogeneity in acute renal allograft rejection identified by DNA microarray profiling. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 125–128.Google Scholar
Satoskar, AA, Lehman, AM, Nadasdy, GM, et al. Peritubular capillary C4d in late acute allograft rejection- Is it relevant? Clin Transplant 2008; 22: 61–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oghumu, S, Bracewell, A, Nori, U, et al. Acute pyelonephritis in renal allografts: a new role in microRNAs? Transplantation 2014; 97: 559–568.Google Scholar
Josephson, MA, Chiu, MY, Woodle, ES, Thistlewaite, JR, Haas, M. Drug-induced acute interstitial nephritis in renal allografts: histopathologic features and clinical course in six patients. Am J Kidney Dis 1999; 34: 540–548.Google Scholar
Nickeleit, V, Vamvakas, EC, Pascual, M, Poletti, BJ, Colvin, RB. The prognostic significance of specific arterial lesions in acute renal allograft rejection. J Am Soc Nephrol 1998; 9: 130–138.Google Scholar
Tauzon, TV, Schneeberger, EE, Bhan, AK, et al. Mononculear cells in acute allograft glomerulopathy. Am J Pathol 1987; 129: 119–132.Google Scholar
Alpers, CE, Gordon, D, Gown, AM. Immunophenotype of vascular rejection in renal transplants. Mod Pathol 1990; 3: 198–203.Google Scholar
Reeve, J, Sellares, J, Mengel, M, et al. Molecular diagnosis of T cell-mediated rejection in human kidney transplant biopsies. Am J Transplant 2013; 13: 645–655.Google Scholar
Halloran, PF, Reeve, JP, Pereira, AB, Hidalgo, LG, Famulski, KS. Antibody-mediated rejection, and the injury-repair response: new insights from the Genome Canada studies of kidney transplant biopsies. Kidney Int 2014; 85: 258–264.Google Scholar
Haas, M, Kraus, ES, Samaniego-Picota, M, et al. Acute renal allograft rejection with intimal arteritis: histologic predictors of response to therapy and graft survival. Kidney Int 2002; 61: 1516–1526.Google Scholar
Lefaucheur, C, Loupy, A, Vernerey, D, et al. Antibody-mediated vascular rejection of kidney allografts: a population-based study. Lancet 2013; 381: 313–319.Google Scholar
Feucht, HE, Schneeberger, H, Hillebrand, G, et al. Capillary deposition of C4d complement fragment and early renal graft loss. Kidney Int 1993; 43: 1333–1338.Google Scholar
Collins, AB, Schneeberger, EE, Pascual, MA, et al. Complement activation in acute humoral renal allograft rejection: diagnostic significance of C4d deposits in peritubular capillaries. J Am Soc Nephrol 1999; 10: 2208–2214.Google Scholar
Crespo, M, Pascual, M, Tolkoff-Rubin, N, et al. Acute humoral rejection in renal allograft recipients: I. Incidence, serology and clinical characteristics. Transplantation 2001; 71: 652–658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mauiyyedi, S, Crespo, M, Collins, AB, et al. Acute humoral rejection in kidney transplantation: II. Morphology, immunopathology, and pathologic classification. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002; 13: 779–787.Google Scholar
Nickeleit, V, Zeiler, M, Gudat, F, Theil, G, Mihatsch, MJ. Detection of the complement degradation product C4d in renal allografts: diagnostic and therapeutic implications. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002; 13: 242–251.Google Scholar
Bohmig, GA, Exner, M, Habicht, A, et al. Capillary C4d deposition in kidney allografts: a specific marker of alloantibody-dependent graft injury. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002; 13: 1091–1099.Google Scholar
Herzenberg, AM, Gill, JS, Djurdjev, O, Magil, AB. C4d deposition in acute rejection: an independent long-term prognostic factor. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002; 13: 234–241.Google Scholar
Seemayer, CA, Gaspert, A, Nickeleit, V, Mihatsch, MJ. C4d staining of renal allograft biopsies: a comparative analysis of different staining techniques. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007; 22: 568–576.Google Scholar
Mengel, M, Chan, S, Climenhaga, J, et al. Banff initiative for quality assurance in transplantation (BIFQUIT): reproducibility of C4d immunohistochemistry in kidney allografts. Am J Transplant 2013; 13: 1235–1245.Google Scholar
Takemoto, SK, Zeevi, A, Feng, S, et al. National conference to assess antibody mediated rejection in solid organ transplantation. Am J Transplant 2004; 4: 1033–1041.Google Scholar
Dickenmann, M, Steiger, J, Descoeudres, B, Mihatsch, M, Nickeleit, V. The fate of C4d positive kidney allografts lacking histologic signs of acute rejection. Clin Nephrol 2006; 65: 173–179.Google Scholar
Haas, M, Montgomery, RA, Segev, DL, et al. Subclinical acute antibody-mediated rejection in positive crossmatch renal allografts. Am J Transplant 2007; 3: 576–585.Google Scholar
Haas, M. Pathology of C4d-negative antibody-mediated rejection in renal allografts. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2013; 18: 319–326.Google Scholar
Sis, B, Jhangri, GS, Bunnag, S, et al. Endothelial gene expression in kidney transplants with alloantibody indicates antibody-mediated damage despite lack of C4d staining. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 2312–2323.Google Scholar
Mauiyyedi, S, Pelle, PD, Saidman, S, et al. Chronic humoral rejection: identification of antibody mediated chronic renal allograft rejection by C4d deposits in peritubular capillaries. J Am Soc Nephrol 2001; 12: 574–582.Google Scholar
Regele, H, Bohmig, GA, Habicht, A, et al. Capillary deposition of complement split product C4d in renal allografts is associated with basement membrane injury in peritubular and glomerular capillaries: a contribution of humoral immunity to chronic allograft rejection. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002; 13: 2371–2380.Google Scholar
Haas, M, Rahman, MH, Racusen, LC, et al. C4d and C3d staining in biopsies of ABO and HLA incompatible renal allografts: correlation with histologic findings. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1753–1754.Google Scholar
Magil, AB, Tinckam, K. Monocytes and peritubular capillary C4d deposition in acute renal allograft rejection. Kidney Int 2003; 63: 1888–1893.Google Scholar
Fahim, T, Bohmig, GA, Exner, M, Huttary, N, Kerschner, H. The cellular lesion of humoral rejection: predominant recruitment of monocytes to peritubular and glomerular capillaries. Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 385–393.Google Scholar
Gibson, IW, Gwinner, W, Bröcker, V, et al. Peritubular capillaritis in renal allografts: prevalence, scoring system, reproducibility and clinicopathological correlates. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 819–825.Google Scholar
Satoskar, AA, Pelletier, R, Adams, P, et al. De novo thrombotic microangiopathy in renal allograft biopsies-role of antibody-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 1804–1811.Google Scholar
Nadasdy, T. Thrombotic microangiopathy in renal allografts: the diagnostic challenge. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2014; 19: 283–292.Google Scholar
Kayler, LK, Kiss, L, Sharma, V, et al. Acute renal allograft rejection: diagnostic significance of focal peritubular capillary C4d. Transplantation 2008; 85: 813–820.Google Scholar
Kedainis, RL, Koch, MJ, Brennan, DC, Liapis, H. Rocal C4d+ in renal allografts is associated with the presence of donor-specific antibodies and decreased allograft survival. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 812–819.Google Scholar
Jen, KY, Nguyen, TB, Vincenti, FG, Laszik, ZG. C4d/CD34 double-immunofluorescence staining of renal allograft biopsies for assessing peritubular capillary C4d positivity. Mod Pathol 2012; 25: 434–438.Google Scholar
Kuypers, DR, Lerut, E, Evenepoel, P, et al. C3d deposition in peritubular capillaries indicates a variant of acute renal allograft rejection characterized by a worse clinical outcome. Transplantation 2003; 76: 102–108.55. Nadasdy, T. Thrombotic microangiopathy in renal allografts: the diagnostic challenge. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2014; 19: 283–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Satoskar, AA, Pelletier, R, Nadasdy, GM, et al. Histopathology and outcome of acute humoral rejection in renal allografts. Front Biosci (Schol Ed) 2011; 3: 919–928.Google Scholar
Mengel, M, Reeve, J, Bunnag, S, et al. Scoring total inflammation is superior to the current Banff inflammation score in predicting outcome and the degree of molecular disturbance in renal allografts. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 1859–1867.Google Scholar
Mannon, RB, Matas, AJ, Grande, J, et al. Inflammation in areas of tubular atrophy in kidney allograft biopsies: a potent predictor of allograft failure. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 2066–2073.Google Scholar
Mazzucco, G, Motta, M, Segoloni, G, Monga, G. Intertubular capillary changes in the cortex and medulla of transplanted kidneys and their relationship with transplant glomerulopathy: an ultrastructural study of 12 transplantectomies. Ultrastruct Pathol 1994; 18: 533–537.Google Scholar
Ivanyi, B, Fahmy, H, Brown, H, et al. Peritubular capillaries in chronic renal allograft rejection: a quantitative ultrastructural study. Hum Pathol 2000; 31: 1129–1138.Google Scholar
Colvin, RB. Antibody-mediated renal allograft rejection: diagnosis and pathogenesis. J Am Soc Nephrol 2007; 18: 1046–1056.Google Scholar
Sijpkens, YW, Joosten, SA, Wong, MC, et al. Immunologic risk factors and glomerular C4d deposits in chronic transplant glomerulopathy. Kidney Int 2004; 65: 2409–2418.Google Scholar
Husain, S, Sis, B. Advances in the understanding of transplant glomerulopathy. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013; 62: 352–363.Google Scholar
Haas, M, Mirocha, J. Early ultrastructural changes in renal allografts: correlation with antibody-mediated rejection and transplant glomerulopathy. Am J Transplant. 2011; 11: 2123–2131.Google Scholar
Habib, R, Zurowska, A, Hinglais, N, et al. A specific glomerular lesion of the graft: allograft glomerulopathy. Kidney Int Suppl 1993; 42: S104–111.Google Scholar
Schwimmer, J, Nadasdy, TA, Spitalnik, PK, Kaplan, KL, Zand, MS. De novo thrombotic microangiopathy in renal transplant recipients: a comparison of hemolytic uremic syndrome with localized renal thrombotic microangiopathy. Am J Kidney Dis 2003; 41: 471–479.Google Scholar
Baid-Agrawal, S, Farris, AB 3rd, Pascual, M, et al. Overlapping pathways to transplant glomerulopathy: chronic humoral rejection, hepatitis C infection, and thrombotic microangiopathy. Kidney Int 2011; 80: 879–885.Google Scholar
Zand, L, Lorez, EC, Cosio, FG, et al. Clinical findings, pathology, and outcomes of C3GN after kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2014; 25: 1110–1117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sis, B, Dadras, F, Khoshjou, F, et al. Reproducibility studies on arteriolar hyaline thickening scoring in calcineurin inhibitor-treated renal allograft recipients. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1444–1450.Google Scholar
Isoniemi, HM, Krogerus, L, von Willebrand, E, et al. Histopathological findings in well-functioning, long-term renal allografts. Kidney Int 1992; 41: 155–160.Google Scholar
Colvin, RB. CADI, Canti, Cavi. Transplantation 2007; 83: 677–678.Google Scholar
Randhawa, PS, Shapiro, R, Jordan, ML, Starzl, TE, Demetris, AJl. The histopathological changes associated with allograft rejection and drug toxicity in renal transplant recipients maintained on FK 506. Clinical significance and comparison with cyclosporine. Am J Surg Pathol 1993; 17: 60–68.Google Scholar
Mihatsch, MJ, Thiel, G, Basler, V, et al. Morphologic patterns in cyclosporine-treated renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1985; 17 (Suppl 1): 101–116.Google Scholar
Sibley, RK, Rynasiewicz, J, Ferguson, RM, et al. Morphology of cyclosporine nephrotoxicity and acute rejection in patients immunosuppressed with cyclosporine and prednisone. Surgery 1983; 94: 225–234.Google Scholar
Bergstrand, A, Bohman, SO, Farnsworth, A, et al. Renal histopathology in kidney transplant recipients immunosuppressed with Cyclosporine A: results of an international workshop. Clin Nephrol 1985; 24: 107–119.Google Scholar
Matas, AJ. Chronic progressive calcineurin nephrotoxicity: an overstated concept. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 687–692.Google Scholar
Randhawa, PS, Tsamandas, AC, Magnone, M, et al. Microvascular changes in renal allografts associated with FK506 (Tacrolimus) therapy. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 306–312.Google Scholar
Remuzzi, G, Bertani, T. Renal vascular and thrombotic effects of cyclosporine. Am J Kidney Dis 1989; 13: 261–272.Google Scholar
Smith, KD, Wrenshall, LE, Nicosia, RF, et al. Delayed graft function and cast nephropathy associated with tacrolimus plus Rapamycin use. J Am Soc Nephrol 2003; 14: 1037–1045.Google Scholar
Pelletier, R, Nadasdy, T, Nadasdy, G, et al. Acute renal failure following kidney transplantation associated with myoglobinuria in patients treated with Rapamycin. Transplantation 2006; 82: 645–650.Google Scholar
Straathof-Galema, L, Wetzels, JF, Dijkman, HB, Steenbergen, EJ, Hilbrands, LB. Sirolimus-associated heavy proteinuria in a renal transplant recipient: evidence for a tubular mechanism. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 429–433.Google Scholar
van den Akker, JM, Wetzels, JF, Hoitsma, AJ. Proteinuria following conversion from azathioprine to sirolimus in renal transplant recipients. Kidney Int 2006; 70: 1355–1357.Google Scholar
Letavernier, E, Bruneval, P, Mandet, C, et al. High sirolimus levels may induce focal segmental glomerulosclerosis de novo. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007; 2: 326–333.Google Scholar
Sartelet, H, Toupance, O, Lorenzato, M, et al. Sirolimus-induced thrombotic microangiopathy is associated with decreased expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in kidneys. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 2441–2447.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nickeleit, V, Hirsch, HH, Binet, IF, Gudat, F, Prince, O. Polyomavirus infection of renal allograft recipients: from latent infection to manifest disease. J Am Soc Nephrol 1999; 10: 1080–1089.Google Scholar
Randhawa, P, Brennen, DC. BK virus infection in transplant recipients: an overview and update. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 2000–2005.Google Scholar
Drachenberg, CB, Papadimitriou, JC. Polyomavirus-associated nephropathy: update in diagnosis. Transpl Infect Dis 2006; 8: 68–75.Google Scholar
Bracamonte, E, Leca, N, Smith, KD, et al. Tubular basement membrane immune deposits in association with BK polyoma virus nephropathy. Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 1552–1560.Google Scholar
Nickeleit, V, Klimkait, T, Binet, IF, et al. Testing for polyomavirus type BK DNA in plasma to identify renal-allograft recipients with viral nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1309–1315.Google Scholar
Singh, HK, Reisner, H, Derebail, VK, Kozlowski, T, Nickeleit, V. Polyomavirus nephropathy: quantitative urinary polyomavirus-haufen testing accurately predicts the degree of intrarenal viral disease. Transplantation 2015; 99: 609–61.Google Scholar
Meehan, SM, Kraus, MD, Kadambi, PV, Chang, A. Nephron segment localization of polyoma virus large T antigen in renal allografts. Hum Pathol 2006; 37: 1400–1406.Google Scholar
Kashyap, R, Shapiro, R, Jordan, M, Randhawa, PS. The clinical significance of cytomegalovirus inclusions in the allograft kidney. Transplantation 1979; 67: 98–103.Google Scholar
Sagedal, S, Hartmann, A, Rollag, H. The impact of early cytomegalovirus infection and disease in renal transplant recipients. Clin Microbiol Infect 2005; 11: 518–530.Google Scholar
Mathur, SC, Squiers, EC, Tatum, AH, et al. Adenovirus infection of the renal allograft with sparing of pancreas graft function in the recipient of a combined kidney–pancreas transplant. Transplantation 1998; 65: 138–141.Google Scholar
Lim, AK, Parsons, S, Ierino, F. Adenovirus tubulointerstitial nephritis presenting as a renal allograft space occupying lesion. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 2062–2066.Google Scholar
Caillard, S, Dharnidharka, V, Agodoa, L, Bohen, E, Abbot, K. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders after renal transplantation in the United States in era of modern immunosuppression. Transplantation 2005; 80: 1233–1243.Google Scholar
Nalesnik, MA. The diverse pathology of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders: the importance of a standardized approach. Transpl Infect Dis 2001; 3: 88–96.Google Scholar
Randhawa, PS, Magnone, M, Jordan, M, et al. Renal allograft involvement by Epstein–Barr virus associated post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 563–571.Google Scholar
Fonseca, LE, Shapiro, R, Randhawa, PS. Occurrence of urinary tract infection in patients with renal allograft biopsies showing neutrophilic tubulitis. Mod Pathol 2003; 16: 281–285.Google Scholar
Scarpero, HM, Copley, JB. Xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis in a renal allograft recipient. Am J Kidney Dis 1997; 30: 846–848.Google Scholar
Pusl, T, Weiss, M, Hartmann, B, et al. Malacoplakia in a renal transplant recipient. Eur J Intern Med 2006; 17: 133–135.Google Scholar
Denton, MD, Singh, AK. Recurrent and de novo glomerulonephritis in the renal allograft. Semin Nephrol 2000; 20: 164–175.Google Scholar
Couser, W. Recurrent glomerulonephritis in the renal allograft: an update of selected areas. Exp Clin Transplant 2005; 3: 283–288.Google Scholar
Choy, BY, Chan, TM, Lai, KN. Recurrent glomerulonephritis after kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 2535–2542.Google Scholar
Sprangers, B, Kuypers, DR. Recurrence of glomerulonephritis after renal transplantation. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2013; 27: 126–134.Google Scholar
Vincenti, F, Ghiggeri, GM. New insights into the pathogenesis and the therapy of recurrent focal glomerulosclerosis. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 1179–1185.Google Scholar
Larsen, CP, Walker, PD. Phospholipase A2 receptor (PLA2 R) staining is useful in the determination of de novo versus recurrent membranous glomerulopathy. Transplantation 2013; 27: 1259–1262.Google Scholar
Rodriguez, EF, Cosio, FG, Nasr, SH, et al. The pathology and clinical features of early recurrent membranous glomerulonephritis. Am J Transplant 2012; 12: 1029–1038.Google Scholar
Nachman, PH, Selegelmark, M, Westman, K, et al. Recurrent ANCA-associated small vessel vasculitis after transplantation: a pooled analysis. Kidney Int 1999; 56: 1544–1550.Google Scholar
Ponticelli, C, Moroni, G. Renal transplantation in lupus nephritis. Lupus 2005; 14: 95–98.Google Scholar
Monga, G, Mazzucco, G, Basolo, B, et al. Membranous glomerulonephritis (MGN) in transplanted kidneys: morphologic investigation on 256 renal allografts. Modern Pathol 1993; 6: 249–258.Google Scholar
Meehan, SM, Pascual, M, Williams, WW, et al. De novo collapsing glomerulopathy in renal allografts. Transplantation 1998; 65: 1192–1197.Google Scholar
Nadasdy, T, Allen, C, Zand, MS. Zonal distribution of glomerular collapse in renal allografts: possible role of vascular change. Hum Pathol 2002; 33: 437–441.Google Scholar
Sundararaman, S, Lager, DJ, Qian, X, et al. Collapsing and non-collapsing focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in kidney transplants. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2006; 21: 2607–2614.Google Scholar
Byrne, MC, Budisavljevic, MN, Fan, Z, Self, SE, Ploth, DW. Renal transplant patients with Alport Syndrome. Am J Kidney Dis 2002; 4: 769–775.Google Scholar
Abouna, GM, Adnani, MS, Kumar, MS, Samhan, SA. Fate of transplanted kidneys with diabetic nephropathy. Lancet 1986; 1: 622–623.Google Scholar
Hall, IE, Reese, PP, Weng, FL, et al. Preimplant histologic acute tubular necrosis and allograft outcomes. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2014; 9: 573–582.Google Scholar
Kasiske, BL, Stewart, DE, Bista, BR, et al. The role of procurement biopsies in acceptance decisions for kidneys retrieved for transplant. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2014; 9: 562–571.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×