Frontiers in transplantation最新文献

Since the first liver transplant was performed over six decades ago, the landscape of liver transplantation in the US has seen dramatic evolution. Numerous advancements in perioperative and operative techniques have resulted in major improvements in graft and patient survival rates. Despite the increase in transplants performed over the years, the waitlist mortality rate continues to remain high. The obesity epidemic and the resultant metabolic sequelae continue to result in more marginal donors and challenging recipients. In this review, we aim to highlight the changing characteristics of liver transplant recipients and liver allograft donors. We focus on issues relevant in successfully transplanting a high model for end stage liver disease recipient. We provide insights into the current use of terms and definitions utilized to discuss marginal allografts, discuss the need to look into more consistent ways to describe these organs and propose two new concepts we coin as "Liver Allograft Variables" (LAV) and "Liver Allograft Composite Score" (LACS) for this. We discuss the development of spectrum of risk indexes as a dynamic tool to characterize an allograft in real time. We believe that this concept has the potential to optimize the way we allocate, utilize and transplant livers across the US.

For some patients who have lost the lower part of an arm, hand transplant offers the possibility of receiving a new limb with varying degrees of sensation and function. This procedure, Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation (VCA), is demanding for patients and their care community and comes with significant risks. As a high-stakes decision, patients interested in VCA are subject to extensive clinical evaluation and eligibility decision making. Patients and their care community must also decide if hand transplant (versus other approaches including rehabilitative therapies with or without prosthesis) is right for them. This decision making is often confusing and practically and emotionally fraught. It is complicated in four ways: by the numerous beneficial and harmful potential effects of hand transplant or other options, the number of people affected by VCA and the diverse or conflicting positions that they may hold, the practical demands and limitations of the patient's life situation, and the existential significance of limb loss and transplant for the patient's being. Patients need support in working through these treatment determining issues. Evaluation does not provide this support. Shared decision making (SDM) is a method of care that helps patients think, talk, and feel their way through to the right course of action for them. However, traditional models of SDM that focus on weighing possible beneficial and harmful effects of treatments are ill-equipped to tackle the heterogeneous issues of VCA. A recent model, Purposeful SDM extends the range of troubling issues that SDM can help support beyond opposing effects, to include conflicting positions, life situations, and existential being. In this paper we explore the pertinence of these issues in VCA, methods of SDM that each require of clinicians, the benefits of supporting patients with the breadth of issues in their unique problematic situations, implications for outcomes and practice, and extend the theory of the Purposeful SDM model itself based on the issues present in hand transplant decision making.

Introduction: Remdesivir (REM) and molnupiravir (MOL) are commonly used to treat lung transplant recipients (LTRs) with COVID-19; however, the clinical efficacy of these medications is yet to be compared. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the clinical outcomes between LTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 treated with REM and those treated with MOL.

Methods and results: Between March 2020 and August 2022, 195 LTRs developed COVID-19 at our center. After excluding 82 who presented with severe disease requiring hospitalization, the remaining 113 were included in the analysis: 54 did not receive antiviral treatment, 30 were treated with REM, and 29 were treated with MOL. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis showed similar rates of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.169, [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.105-12.997, p = 0.899], ICU admission (aOR 0.822, 95% CI 0.042-16.220, p = 0.898), mechanical ventilation (aOR 0.903, 95% CI 0.015-55.124, p = 0.961), and COVID-19-related mortality (aOR 0.822, 95% CI 0.042-16.220, p = 0.898) between LTRs treated with REM and those treated with MOL for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, irrespective of SARS-CoV-2 strain.

Conclusion: MOL may be a suitable alternative to REM to treat LTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, and the choice of antiviral therapy can be driven by practical considerations such as route of administration and drug availability.

Background: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) grafts are vital for increasing available donor organs. Gradual rewarming during machine perfusion has proven effective in mitigating reperfusion injury and enhancing graft quality. Limited data exist on artificial oxygen carriers as an effective solution to meet the increasing metabolic demand with temperature changes. The aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy and safety of utilizing a hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier (HBOC) during the gradual rewarming of DCD rat livers.

Methods: Liver grafts were procured after 30 min of warm ischemia. The effect of 90 min of oxygenated rewarming perfusion from ice cold temperatures (4 °C) to 37 °C with HBOC after cold storage was evaluated and the results were compared with cold storage alone. Reperfusion at 37 °C was performed to assess the post-preservation recovery.

Results: Gradual rewarming with HBOC significantly enhanced recovery, demonstrated by markedly lower lactate levels and reduced vascular resistance compared to cold-stored liver grafts. Increased bile production in the HBOC group was noted, indicating improved liver function and bile synthesis capacity. Histological examination showed reduced cellular damage and better tissue preservation in the HBOC-treated livers compared to those subjected to cold storage alone.

Conclusion: This study suggests the safety of using HBOC during rewarming perfusion of rat livers as no harmful effect was detected. Furthermore, the viability assessment indicated improvement in graft function.

Background: Kidney transplantation is the therapy of choice for end-stage kidney disease, and a fast-growing transplant procedure worldwide. Diverse clinical practices for recipients and donors' selection and management between transplant centers hinder the creation and dissemination of an anesthesia-surgical checklist.

Methods: Components of the anesthesia-surgical checklist were selected after a review of the English literature using PubMed search for donor, recipient and graft protocols and outcomes of existing practices in the field of kidney transplantation. Key elements of the most relevant articles were combined with our own center's experience and formulated into the proposed checklist. The checklist is intended to be used perioperatively, once patient receives an offer.

Results: The perioperative checklist centers primarily on the following donor and recipient's factors: (i) Review of the pretransplant candidate workup; (ii) Assessment of donor/graft status; (iii) Hypothermic machine perfusion parameters; (iv) Operating room management; (v) Sign out. The proposed kidney transplant checklist was designed to ensure consistency and completeness of diverse tasks and facilitates team communication and coordination.

Conclusion: We present a novel standardized combined anesthesia-surgical checklist framework for kidney transplant aimed at increasing perioperative safety and streamline the perioperative care of recipients. Future validation studies will determine its clinical feasibility and post-implementation efficacy.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/frtra.2024.1346667.].

Background: In Iceland, a small number of kidney transplants from living donors (LDs) are performed at Landspitali University Hospital (LUH) in Reykjavik, while deceased donor transplants have until recently invariably been carried out abroad. In this study, we evaluated the outcome of kidney transplantation in Icelandic patients.

Methods: This was a retrospective study that included all Icelandic residents who underwent kidney transplantation between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2019. Data were obtained from the Icelandic End-Stage Kidney Disease Registry, medical records at LUH, and the Scandiatransplant database. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation was used to calculate estimated glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine for recipients and donors aged >18 years, and the modified Schwartz equation for those aged ≤18 years. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was employed for group comparisons.

Results: A total of 229 kidney transplants in 221 patients were performed during the 20-year period, of which 135 (58.9%) were from LDs. Transplants carried out at LUH were 118 (51.5%), of which 116 were from LDs. During a median follow-up of 7.4 years (range 0.1-20), 27 (12.2%) patients died, 20 (74%) of whom had a functioning graft. One-year patient survival was 99.1% [95% confidence interval (CI), 97.9-100], 5-year survival was 95.7% (95% CI, 92.7-98.7), and 10-year survival was 87.7% (95% CI, 82.4-93.4). Death-censored graft survival was 98.3% (95% CI, 96.6-100), 96.8% (95% CI, 94.4-99.2), and 89.2% (95% CI, 84.1-94.7) at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively.

Conclusions: Patient and graft survival are comparable with those of large transplant centers, demonstrating the feasibility of running a quality kidney transplant program in a small nation in collaboration with a larger center abroad.