Optimal dose of rituximab in ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation in patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers: A single-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical outcomes of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation have improved with the introduction of desensitization therapy with rituximab. However, rituximab prevents not only antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) but also increases the risk of adverse events, such as infection. For ABOi kidney transplantation in patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers, we previously used a rituximab-free desensitization protocol and then initiated a single dose of 100 mg rituximab in 2016. We retrospectively compared the outcomes of ABOi kidney transplantation in patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers before and after the introduction of rituximab. METHODS: ABOi kidney transplantations (n = 142) in patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers between 2007 and 2021 were included. Patients were divided into two groups (with and without rituximab) for desensitization. The primary outcomes were the incidence of acute AMR and infection. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were desensitized without rituximab (rituximab-free group), and 76 were pretreated with 100 mg rituximab (rituximab group) before transplantation. The incidence of acute AMR was significantly lower in the rituximab group than in the rituximab-free group (.0% [0/76] vs. 7.6% [5/66], respectively; p = .047). Post-transplantation anti-A/B antibody titers were also lower in the rituximab group than in the rituximab-free group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events, including infections, between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In ABOi kidney transplantation patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers, the desensitization protocol with a single dose of 100 mg rituximab was effective in preventing acute AMR without increasing the risk of other adverse events.

ABO-Incompatible Living Donor Liver Transplant From a Blood Type A2 Donor to a Type B Recipient: A Note of Caution.

Standardization of immunomodulation protocols has enabled ABO-incompatible liver transplants with outcomes similar to those of ABO-compatible liver transplants. Patients with the A2 blood group are unique because they have a diminished expression of the A antigen. Despite rare immune complications, this phenomenon of diminished expression has led to treatment of type A2 donors according to the regimen for type O blood group donors in ABO-incompatible liver transplants. Additionally, the requirement for pretransplant recipient immunomodulation is consi dered minimal when considering these donors. The transplant of a type A2 donor kidney to a type B recipient is well recognized; however, for liver donation the A2-to-B transplant is rare. Here, we present a case of 48-year-old male patient with blood group type B who underwent ABO-incompatible liver transplant of a right lobe liver graft from a type A2 donor. Postoperatively, despite adequate immunosuppression and initiation of thera - peutic plasma exchange, the patient developed severe and refractory antibody-mediated rejection that ultimately abated with a splenectomy. This report highlights the low but tangible risk of antibody-mediated rejection in ABO-incompatible liver transp lants from type A2 donors and emphasizes the importance of serial monitoring of anti-A isohemag glutinin titers and posttransplant splenectomy to ensure that liver grafts with antibody-mediated rejection can be rescued.

Evaluation of safety of using incompatible plasma for therapeutic plasma exchange during shortage of AB plasma.

BACKGROUND: Criteria for selection of FFP blood type has not been clearly established and use of group AB plasma is preferred by numerous transplantation protocols. AIMS: This study assesses the safety and efficacy of alternative group A or B plasma in ABO incompatible solid organ transplantation. MATERIALS & METHODS: Alternative use of group A or B plasma (incompatible plasma) was inevitable during the shortage of group AB plasma. Experience from select number of patients during the period of extreme group AB plasma shortage is described. RESULTS: The result of alternative use of group A or B plasma was within expectation, showing effective reduction of isoagglutinin titers for pre-operative desensitization and efficacy for treatment of post-operative patients. No immediate hemolytic transfusion reaction was reported. DISCUSSION: While validation in a larger cohort of patients is necessary, our limited experience have shown satisfactory clinical outcomes without adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Use of incompatible group A or B plasma is a viable option when group AB plasma is limited.

Increasing Living Donor Liver Transplantation Using Liver Paired Exchange.

BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) continues to be the primary modality of liver transplantation in Asia, but it accounts for about 5% of all liver transplantations in the US. ABO incompatibility is the primary reason motivated donors are declined. Although kidney paired exchanges are common, liver paired exchange (LPE) is still evolving in the US. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective review (between January 1, 2019, and July 31, 2021) of our initial experience with LPE. RESULTS: A total of 10 LPEs (20 LDLTs) were performed during the study period. Seven LPEs were initiated by a nondirected O donor. The other 3 pair sets involved 1 ABO compatible and 1 ABO incompatible pair. Transplantations in a pair set were completed within a mean of 4.8 (range 1-14) days of each other. All 20 donors are doing well with no major complications at 12.7 (range 1-20) months. Seventeen of 20 recipients are alive and have good allograft function. One recipient died in the early postoperative period. Two late deaths of patients with functioning allografts were due to COVID-19 (at 8 months) and peritoneal carcinomatosis and gram-negative sepsis (at 9 months). CONCLUSIONS: LPE is feasible in a high-volume LDLT center and is a useful option to increase LDLT by overcoming ABO incompatibility. Nondirected donors can be utilized to initiate an LPE.

Allogeneic Kidney Transplantation After COVID-19: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing organ transplantation are immunosuppressed and already at risk of various diseases. We report about a patient who underwent ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) without a recurrence of infection. CASE REPORT: A 68-year-old woman presented with end-stage renal failure owing to primary autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease; accordingly, hemodialysis was initiated in September 2020. Her medical history included bilateral osteoarthritis, lumbar spinal stenosis, hypertension, and hyperuricemia. In mid-January 2021, she contracted severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection from her husband. Both of them were hospitalized and received conservative treatment. Because their symptoms were mild, they were discharged after 10 days. The patient subsequently underwent ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation from her husband who recovered from COVID-19 in March 2021. Before kidney transplantation, her COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test was negative, confirming the absence of pre-existing COVID-19 immediately before the procedure. Computed tomography revealed no pneumonia. Initial immunosuppression was induced by administering tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, methylprednisolone, basiliximab, rituximab, and 30 g of intravenous immunoglobulin. Double-filtration plasmapheresis and plasma exchange were performed once before ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation. The renal allograft functioned immediately, and the postoperative course was normal without rejection. COVID-19 did not recur. In addition, her serum creatinine levels and renal function had otherwise remained stable. CONCLUSION: Living kidney transplantation was safely performed in a patient with COVID-19 without postoperative complications or rejection. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the possibility of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection during transplantation surgery must be considered.

Modelling suggests ABO histo-incompatibility may substantially reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Several independent datasets suggest blood type A is over-represented and type O under-represented among COVID-19 patients. However, blood group antigens appear not to be conventional susceptibility factors in that they do not affect disease severity, and the relative risk to non-O individuals is attenuated when population prevalence is high. Here, I model a scenario in which ABO transfusion incompatibility reduces the chance of a patient transmitting the virus to an incompatible recipient - thus in Western populations type A and AB individuals are "super-recipients" while type O individuals are "super-spreaders". This results in an offset in the timing of the epidemic among individuals of different blood types, and an increased relative risk to type A/AB patients that is most pronounced during early stages of the epidemic. However, once the majority of any given population is infected, the relative risk to each blood type approaches unity. Published data on COVID-19 prevalence from regions in the early stages of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic suggests that if this model holds true, ABO incompatibility reduces virus transmissibility by at least 60 %. Exploring the implications of this model for vaccination strategies shows that paradoxically, targeted vaccination of either high-susceptibility type A/AB or "super-spreader" type O individuals is less effective than random vaccination at blocking community spread of the virus. Instead, the key is to maintain blood type diversity among the remaining susceptible individuals. Given the good agreement between this model and observational data on disease prevalence, the underlying biochemistry urgently requires experimental investigation.

Restarting LDLT During COVID-19: Early Results After Restructuring.

INTRODUCTION: Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been mostly suspended and deceased-donor living transplantation activity has been considerably reduced because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We modified our protocols and procedures in line with COVID-19 guidelines. Since the restructuring, we have performed 20 LDLTs. Our study reports the outcomes of these cases and demonstrates the feasibility of LDLT during this pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The changes were influenced by experiences and communications from across the globe. A month-long self-imposed moratorium was spent in restructuring the program and implementing new protocols. Twenty LDLTs were performed between April 18 and September 15 using the new protocols. Our experience includes 2 simultaneous liver-kidney transplants, 1 ABO-incompatible LDLT, and 1 pediatric case (age 11 months). RESULTS: Nineteen patients recovered and 1 patient died. We maintained our postoperative immunosuppression protocol without many changes. Major complications were observed in 30% of recipients but none of the donors. One recipient was infected with COVID-19 during the postoperative period. A donor-recipient couple contracted COVID-19 after discharge from the hospital. All patients recovered from COVID-19 and liver enzymes were unaffected. CONCLUSION: This study represents a microcosm of experience in LDLT during the COVID-19 era. Outcomes of LDLT are not affected by COVID-19 per se, provided that we make necessary changes.

A Case Report to Assess Passive Immunity in a COVID Positive Pregnant Patient.

INTRODUCTION: Data regarding transplacental passage of maternal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antibodies and potential immunity in the newborn is limited. CASE REPORT: We present a 25-year-old multigravida with known red blood cell isoimmunization, who was found to be COVID-19 positive at 27 weeks of gestation while undergoing serial periumbilical blood sampling and intrauterine transfusions. Maternal COVID-19 antibody was detected 2 weeks after positive molecular testing. Antibodies were never detected on cord blood samples from two intrauterine fetal cord blood samples as well as neonatal cord blood at the time of delivery. CONCLUSION: This case demonstrates a lack of passive immunity of COVID-19 antibodies from a positive pregnant woman to her fetus, neither in utero nor at the time of birth. Further studies are needed to understand if passage of antibodies can occur and if that can confer passive immunity in the newborn. KEY POINTS: · Passive immunity should not be assumed in COVID-19 infection in pregnancy.. · Isoimmunization may impair passive immunity of certain antibodies.. · Vaccination to or maternal infection of COVID-19 may not be protective for the fetus..