Article

The Banff classification revisited

Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Kidney International (Impact Factor: 8.52). 12/2012; 83(2). DOI: 10.1038/ki.2012.395
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT From small beginnings in 1991, the Banff working classification of renal allograft pathology has grown to be a major force for setting standards in renal transplant pathology, and is widely used in international clinical trials of new antirejection agents. The meeting, classification, and consensus process have unique history, and look poised to continue for another several decades as the embodiment of the process for setting global standards in pathology. The Banff meetings have expanded from renal allograft pathology to most other areas of solid organ transplantation, and increasingly incorporate international working groups, so that productive collaborative activity is ongoing, creating an important dynamic process enhancing clinical success in transplantation. On the other hand, despite the successes of the working classifications and ongoing collaborative efforts, there are limitations in this and other pathological classifications, related to potential for sampling error, issues of reproducibility when implemented globally, and lack of formal incorporation of morphometry and molecular and genomics approaches. Some of these problems cannot be overcome within the realm of traditional histopathology, and will only be solved when the classification is able to confidently embrace genomics and molecular medicine parameters for all common diagnoses. The smooth integration of these newer technologies with traditional histopathology is one of the great challenges for the future.Kidney International advance online publication, 12 December 2012; doi:10.1038/ki.2012.395.

0 Followers
 · 
91 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nephropathologische Klassifikationen von renalen Erkrankungen sind sowohl für die pathologische als auch klinische Befunderhebung wichtig. Es existieren Klassifikationen, die eine Einordnung der Krankheitsbilder in definierte Subentitäten ermöglichen, deren pathologische und/oder klinische Erscheinungsbilder sich jeweils unterscheiden. Daher sind solche Klassifikationen prognostisch relevant, und es können Therapiestrategien abgeleitet werden. Die ISN/RPS-Klassifikation der Lupusnephritis ist ein Beispiel dafür. Eine Schweregradeinteilung der jeweiligen Veränderungen ist obligat. Diese Klassifikationsstrategien sind von solchen zu unterscheiden, die mehrheitlich prognostische morphologische Marker in umschriebenen Entitäten definieren, wie z. B. die Klassifikation der diabetischen Nephropathie. Während die Nutzung der erstgenannten Klassifizierungen allein zur Diagnosestellung unerlässlich ist, bleiben Letztere derzeit oft wissenschaftlichen Fragestellungen vorbehalten. Die Anwendung im klinischen Alltag ist in Ermangelung prospektiver Validationsstudien meist fakultativ. Insofern ist ein lebendiger Dialog zwischen Nephropathologen und Nephrologen unerlässlich.
    Der Nephrologe 11/2013; 8(6). DOI:10.1007/s11560-012-0723-y
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study was to investigate the expression levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) in acute rejection reaction (ARR) following orthotopic liver transplantation in a rat model. Serum VEGF and bFGF levels were detected using ELISA, and their expression levels in liver and spleen tissues were determined using immunohistochemistry. The mRNA expression levels of VEGF and bFGF were detected by conducting a quantitative polymerase chain reaction during the ARR following orthotopic liver transplantation. The expression levels of VEGF and bFGF in the serum 3 days following liver transplantation were significantly higher compared with those in the other groups (1 and 7 days following transplantation; P<0.01). In addition, the numbers of cells in the liver tissue that were shown to be positive for the expression VEGF and bFGF using immunohistochemistry were significantly higher 3 days following transplantation than at the other time points (P<0.0001). Furthermore, the numbers of cells positive for VEGF and bFGF expression in the spleen detected 3 days following the transplantation surgery were also significantly higher compared with those at the other time points (P<0.01). VEGF and bFGF mRNA expression levels were also increased from 1 day following the surgery and reached a peak at day 3, prior to declining gradually and remaining at a relatively high level. VEGF and bFGF mRNA expression levels changed dynamically, by peaking and then declining, in ARR following orthotopic liver transplantation. These changes may have an important impact on angiogenesis and the inflammatory reaction, and the identification of these changes increases the current understanding of ARR following orthotopic liver transplantation.
    Experimental and therapeutic medicine 08/2014; 8(2):483-487. DOI:10.3892/etm.2014.1779 · 0.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acute antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) occurs in a small minority of sensitized liver transplant recipients. Although histopathologic characteristics have been described, specific features that could be used: a) for a generalizable scoring system; and b) to trigger a more in-depth analysis are needed to screen for this rare but important finding. Toward this goal, we created a training and validation cohort from 3 high volume liver transplant programs of putative acute AMR and control cases that were evaluated blindly by 4 independent transplant pathologists. Evaluations were performed on H&E sections alone without knowledge of either serum DSA results or C4d stains. Routine histopathological features strongly correlated with severe acute AMR included portal eosinophilia, portal vein endothelial cell hypertrophy, eosinophilic central venulitis, central venulitis severity, and cholestasis. Acute AMR inversely correlated with lymphocytic venulitis and lymphocytic portal inflammation. These and other characteristics were incorporated into models created from the training cohort alone. The final Acute-AMR (aAMR) score (portal vein endothelial cell hypertrophy + portal eosinophilia + eosinophilic venulitis / lymphocytic portal inflammation + lymphocytic venulitis) exhibited a strong correlation with severe acute AMR in the training (OR=2.86, p<0.001) and validation cohort (OR=2.49, p<0.001). SPSS tree classification was used to select 2 cutoffs, one that optimized specificity at a score >1.75 (sensitivity = 34%, specificity = 87%) and a second that optimized sensitivity at a score >1.0 (sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 71%). In conclusion, routine histopathological features of aAMR score can be used to screen for acute AMR on routine H&E in indication liver transplant biopsies, however, a definitive diagnosis requires substantiation by donor-specific HLA alloantibody testing, diffuse C4d staining, and exclusion of other insults. Liver Transpl , 2014. © 2014 AASLD.
    Liver Transplantation 07/2014; 20(10). DOI:10.1002/lt.23948 · 3.79 Impact Factor