Progress in Transplantation最新文献

Introduction: Delayed graft function in kidney transplant is associated with an increased risk of rejection and graft loss. Use of rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction in delayed graft function has been correlated with less rejection compared to basiliximab, but optimal dosing remains unknown. Program Evaluation Aims: The purpose of this evaluation was to retrospectively assess the short-term effectiveness and tolerability of a clinical protocol that increased the net state of immunosuppression in delayed graft function kidney transplant recipients using cumulative 6 mg/kg rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction. Design: This retrospective cohort included 88 kidney transplant recipients with delayed graft function, transplanted between January 2017 and March 2021, who either received cumulative 4.5 mg/kg pre-protocol or 6 mg/kg post-protocol rabbit antithymocyte globulin. Outcomes evaluated were biopsy-proven acute rejection and incidence of graft loss, infection, and cytopenia at 6 months. Results: A significant reduction of biopsy-proven acute rejection incidence occurred post-protocol implementation (10/33, 30.3% vs 6/55, 10.9%; P = .04). Of those with rejection, significantly less post-protocol patients were classified as acute cellular rejection (9/10, 90.0% vs 2/6, 33.3%; P = .04). No death-censored graft loss was observed in either group. Rates of cytopenia and infection were similar pre- versus post-protocol implementation. Conclusion: Increasing the exposure to rabbit antithymocyte globulin and maintenance immunosuppression in delayed graft function kidney transplant recipients was tolerable and significantly reduced rejection occurrence at 6 months.

Introduction: Transplantation is a field with unique medical and administrative challenges that involve an equally diverse array of stakeholders. Expectantly, the litigation stemming from this field should be similarly nuanced. There is a paucity of comprehensive reviews characterizing this medicolegal landscape. Design: The Caselaw Access Project Database was used to collect official court briefs of 2053 lawsuits related to kidney, liver, heart, lung, and pancreas transplantation. A thematic analysis was undertaken to characterize grounds for litigation, defendant type, and outcomes. Cases were grouped into policy, discrimination, poor or unsuccessful outcome, or other categories. Results: One hundred sixty-four court cases were included for analysis. Cases involving disputes over policy coverage were the most common across all organ types (N = 55, 33.5%). This was followed by poor outcomes (N = 51, 31.1%), allegations of discrimination against prison systems and employers (N = 37, 22.6%) and other (N = 21, 12.8%). Defendants involved in discrimination trials won with the greatest frequency (N = 29, 90.62%). Defendants implicated in policy suits won 65.3% (N = 32), poor outcomes 62.2% (N = 28), and other 70% (N = 14). Of the 51 cases involving poor outcomes, plaintiffs indicated lack of informed consent in 23 (45.1%). Conclusion: Reconsidering the informed consent process may be a viable means of mitigating future legal action. Most discrimination suits favoring defendants suggested previous concerns of structural injustices in transplantation may not be founded. The prevalence of policy-related cases could be an indication of financial burden on patients. Future work and advocacy will need to substantiate these concerns and address change where legal recourse falls short.