
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
<title>repeat mismatch </title>
<link>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1371446</link>
<description></description>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 6 Jun 2026 11:54:58 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2017 16:34:36 GMT</pubDate>
<copyright>Copyright &#xA9; 2017 American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics</copyright>
<atom:link href="https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/topic_rss.asp?id=1371446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link>
<item>
<title>repeat mismatch </title>
<link>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1371446</link>
<guid>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1371446</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Hi, all<br />
I would like to know the practice in your lab regarding the listing of previously mismatched antigens as avoids at unos. <br />
For candidates awaiting 2nd or 3rd renal tx: <br />
A) You don't list any previously mismatched antigens as avoids<br />
B) You list all previously mismatched antigens<br />
C) You list previously mismatched antigens that the patient is sensitized to (with SAB MFI above certain cutoff value e.g. 1000 or 2000)<br />
D) others, please describe<br />
<br />
If you choose C, what if the antibody was high but decreased to below the cutoff in current serum, or the preliminary crossmatch is negative? Thank you for sharing the information!<br />
<br />
Chang Liu, MD PhD<br />
HLA Laboratory, Wash U/Barnes-Jewish Hospital<br />]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:43:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1371980</link>
<guid>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1371980</guid>
<description><![CDATA[D.  This decision is very patient specific depending upon the immunologic risk tolerance for that individual.  For some we list previously mismatched as unacceptable while others only if MFI reaches a certain threshold.]]></description>
<pubDate>Sat, 15 Jul 2017 21:27:47 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1372861</link>
<guid>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1372861</guid>
<description><![CDATA[C. The majority of the time we call a previous mismatch unacceptable if the patient has antibody against that specificity with MFI >1000 (as long as reactivity is clearly positive). ]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:55:53 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1372992</link>
<guid>https://www.ashi-hla.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1372992</guid>
<description><![CDATA[At two of our transplant centers, our long-standing protocols includes:<br />1) list previously mismatched antigens that the patient is sensitized to with SAB MFI >1000. It's unlikely that we would removed these as UAs due to concerns for memory.<br />2) For 2nd regrafts, we avoid the DRB1 mismatches from the first transplant. We feel there is decent data to support avoiding DRs, and centers are very risk-adverse. However, if the patient waits >3 years and doesn't have antibodies to these DR types, we often remove these "protocol UAs". <br />3) For 3rd/4th regrafts, we avoid A/B/DRB1 of all previous kidneys. The rationale may be more punitive for avoiding the A/B mismatches, and we may remove these after some period of waiting.<br /><br />We are in Oregon where the wait times are relatively short and the the centers are risk-adverse!  ]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2017 17:34:36 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
