Engraftment Syndrome and Acute Graft-versus-Host Disease: A Meta-Analysis.

Engraftment syndrome (ES) has been associated with the surge of neutrophils and cytokines, which is similar to the presumed underlying pathophysiology behind acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD). However, there has been no meta-analysis to evaluate the association; therefore, the team attempted to verify an association between ES and aGVHD through meta-analysis. The team searched for titles of articles in MEDLINE (PubMed), the Cochrane Library, and the EMBASE database up until December 2018 that evaluated the association between ES and aGVHD and conducted a random effect meta-analysis of 8 studies involving a total of 1,945 participants to report the pooled odds ratio (OR) for association of ES and aGVHD. The team found a significantly increased odds of developing aGVHD in patients with ES with the pooled OR of 2.76 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.64-4.63) and an I2= 64.5%. In conclusion, patients with ES have significantly higher odds of developing aGVHD compared to patients without ES.

Validation of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation primary graft dysfunction instrument in heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) developed a classification instrument for left ventricular (LV) and isolated right ventricular (RV) primary graft dysfunction post‒heart transplant. The instrument classifies LV-PGD as mild, moderate, or severe. In this study, we evaluated the predictive validity of this instrument. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of 412 consecutive patients transplanted between 2004 and 2015 at the Toronto General Hospital and Ottawa Heart Institute (Canada). We classified LV-PGD as mild, moderate, or severe, using the ISHLT instrument. To assess predictive validity, we evaluated the association between LV-PGD severity and 1-year post-transplant mortality using a Cox regression model adjusted for recipient age. RESULTS: The cohort was predominantly male (71%), mean age 50 ± 13 years, mean donor age 38 ± 14 years, with 25% female donors. Mean ischemic time was 3.7 ± 1.1 hours. LV-PGD was mild in 3.6% of patients, moderate in 9.5%, and severe in 3.9%. All levels of LV-PGD were associated with increased 1-year mortality, with a gradient in the association between mild, moderate, and severe. We only observed a statistically significant association for moderate and severe forms of LV-PGD (mild: hazard ratio [HR] 2.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.6 to 10.2; moderate: HR 7.0, 95% CI 3.4 to 14.6; severe: HR 15.9, 95% CI 7.2 to 35.0). CONCLUSIONS: The ISHLT LV-PGD classification convincingly identifies a substantial increase in the risk of death at 1 year, and an increased gradient of risk, in those with moderate or severe LV-PGD.

[Harmonization of data coding in post-transplant follow-up - "GVHD, complications and additional treatments": Guidelines from the Francophone Society of Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (SFGM-TC)]. / Harmonisation du codage des données difficiles du post-greffe « GVHD, complications et traitements additionnels ¼ : recommandations de la Société francophone de greffe de moelle et de thérapie cellulaire (SFGM-TC).

The quality of the information provided in post-transplant follow-up is necessary to obtain a coherent and exploitable database. Since the beginning of 2017, three forms (Med-B-allograft) have been available: the first month (Day 0), Day 100 (second report) and an annual follow-up report. Recommendations for follow-up were addressed in the 2014 harmonization workshop, "Harmonization of Data Coding…". However, it is sometimes difficult to determine which data to specify in ProMISe for post-transplantation. The objective of this workshop was to clarify certain situations and/or items.

Validation of a post-transplant chronic lung allograft dysfunction classification system.

BACKGROUND: Long-term survival after lung transplantation (LTx) is hampered by chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). Our study evaluated the prevalence and prognostic importance of obstructive and restrictive CLAD phenotypes, with or without an identifiable underlying cause, to validate the recently proposed classification system for CLAD. METHODS: Data for patients who underwent LTx between 2004 and 2015 with a minimal survival of 180 days post-LTx were retrospectively collected. Double LTx patients with CLAD (defined as a persistent forced expiratory volume in 1 second decline of ≥ 20% compared with baseline) were subsequently classified according to obstructive (forced expiratory volume in 1 second /forced vital capacity [FVC] < 70%, total lung capacity > 90%, and FVC > 80%) or restrictive (total lung capacity ≤ 90% or FVC ≤ 80%) pulmonary function and to the presence of an unknown (bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome [BOS]/restrictive allograft syndrome [RAS]) or known (non-BOS/non-RAS) underlying cause. RESULTS: After a median of 3.2 years, CLAD developed in 39% of double LTx patients (n = 219), of which 20% (n = 43) had an identifiable cause. Survival was worse in patients with restrictive CLAD (26%) compared with obstructive CLAD (64%; p < 0.0001). Non-BOS patients suffered from inferior survival compared with BOS patients (p = 0.0016), whereas there was no significant difference in survival between RAS and non-RAS (p = 0.17). Patients who evolved from an obstructive (BOS) to a restrictive (RAS) phenotype (10%) experienced better survival than RAS patients and a worse outcome compared with BOS patients (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Given the differences in outcome, accurate diagnosis of CLAD phenotypes is important, because this helps to inform patients about their prognosis, to reveal underlying pathogenesis, to identify homogenous patient populations for clinical trials, and to guide future therapeutic approaches.

Quantitative chest CT for subtyping chronic lung allograft dysfunction and its association with survival.

Chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) is a major cause of mortality in lung transplant recipients. CLAD can be sub-divided into at least 2 subtypes with distinct mortality risk characteristics: restrictive allograft syndrome (RAS), which demonstrates increased overall computed tomography (CT) lung density in contrast with bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS), which demonstrates reduced overall CT lung density. This study aimed to evaluate a reader-independent quantitative density metric (QDM) derived from CT histograms to associate with CLAD survival. A retrospective study evaluated CT scans corresponding to CLAD onset using pulmonary function tests in 74 patients (23 RAS, 51 BOS). Two different QDM values (QDM1 and QDM2) were calculated using CT lung density histograms. Calculation of QDM1 includes the extreme edges of the histogram. Calculation of QDM2 includes the central region of the histogram. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression analysis were used for CLAD prognosis. Higher QDM values were significantly associated with decreased survival. The hazard ratio for death was 3.2 times higher at the 75th percentile compared to the 25th percentile using QDM1 in a univariate model. QDM may associate with CLAD patient prognosis.

Primary Graft Dysfunction (PGD) Following Lung Transplantation.

Primary graft dysfunction (PGD) is a form of acute lung injury that results from ischemia reperfusion injury (IRI) and is the major cause of early posttransplant morbidity and mortality. Patients who survive PGD have decreased quality of life, an increased risk of chronic lung allograft dysfunction, specifically bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, and a significantly increased risk of death. In 2017, the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation released updated consensus statements on the PGD definition, most up-to-date PGD risk factors, mechanisms of PGD development, and the state-of-the-art for PGD therapeutics. Risk factor identification has led to the development of PGD predictive algorithms, although their clinical utility remains limited. Ongoing areas of controversy and discussion include further refinements to the PGD grading scheme to account for technologic advances such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and the increased utilization of high flow nasal cannula, the use of PGD as an outcome measure in clinical trials of ex vivo lung perfusion, enhancement of predictive algorithms incorporating biochemical risk factors, and the need for development of therapies targeted at improving PGD outcomes.

Clinical relevance of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation consensus classification of primary graft dysfunction after heart transplantation: Epidemiology, risk factors, and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Primary graft dysfunction (P-GD) is the leading cause of early mortality after heart transplantation (HT). In this 2-center study we analyze outcomes and risk factors of P-GD according to the recent consensus conference classification endorsed by International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. METHODS: We included all adult HTs performed between 1999 and 2013. P-GD was graded as mild, moderate, and severe, according to International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation recommendations, and analyzed separately from secondary GD. The primary end point was the combined occurrence of in-hospital death or emergency retransplantation. RESULTS: Early GD was found in 118 of 518 patients (23%), and 72 (13.9%) met the criteria for P-GD. Of these, 4 (5%) were mild, 33 (46%) moderate, and 35 (49%) severe and mostly characterized by biventricular involvement (78%). The end point occurred in 53 patients (10.2%). Overall, GD was a strong predictor of death-graft loss (odds ratio, 15.9; 95% confidence interval, 7.9-33.5; p < 0.01), with non-significant worse outcomes in P-GD (37%) vs secondary GD (27%) patients (p = 0.2). The study end point was more frequent in severe P-GD patients (65%) than in moderate (12%) or mild (0%; p < 0.01). Several known risk factors influenced the risk for P-GD, and the combination of specific donor and recipient risk factors accounted for approximately 22-times increased odds for P-GD. Donor age, recipient diabetes, ischemic time, and post-operative dialysis predicted non-recovery from P-GD. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus-defined P-GD identifies patients at major risk for early death and graft loss after HT, although the "mild" grade appeared under-represented and clinically irrelevant. The amplified negative effect of donor and recipient factors on P-GD risk underscores the need for appropriate donor-recipient match.

Primary Cardiac Allograft Dysfunction-Validation of a Clinical Definition.

BACKGROUND: Heart transplantation is an established treatment for advanced heart failure. Primary allograft dysfunction (PGD) is reported in up to 40% of transplants and is associated with a poor outcome. METHODS: As part of Heart Evaluation and Retrieval for Transplantation study, an investigation of the assessment of donor hearts for transplantation, we proposed a clinical definition for cardiac PGD comprising severely impaired systolic function affecting one or both ventricles accompanied by hypotension, low cardiac output, and high filling pressures occurring in the first 72 hours (in the absence of hyper acute rejection and technical surgical factors, such as cardiac tamponade). Here, we examine the prospective application of this definition to 290 heart transplants. We compared the clinical outcome of PGD and non-PGD cases. RESULTS: Ninety-four of 290 transplants developed PGD (32.4%). Inotrope use (score) was higher in the PGD group at 24, 48, and 72 hours after transplantation (P < 0.01). In the PGD group, there was a greater requirement for, intra-aortic balloon pump (50% vs 15%, P < 0.01), mechanical support (27% vs 0%, P < 0.01), and renal replacement therapy (61% vs 26%, P < 0.01). Intensive care stay was longer for recipients with PGD (median 14 vs 5 days, P < 0.01) and early mortality was higher (37% vs 4% at 30 days, 42% vs 8% at 1 year, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our definition of PGD could be applied in a national multicenter study, and the cases it defined had more frequent complications and higher mortality.

Pediatric lung transplantation: 10 years of experience.

Lung transplantation is a well-established treatment for advanced lung diseases. In children, the diseases that most commonly lead to the need for a transplantation are cystic fibrosis, pulmonary hypertension, and bronchiolitis. However, the number of pediatric lung transplantations being performed is low compared with the number of transplants performed in the adult age group. The objective of this study was to demonstrate our experience with pediatric lung transplants over a 10-year period in a program initially designed for adults.

Pediatric lung transplantation: 10 years of experience

Lung transplantation is a well-established treatment for advanced lung diseases. In children, the diseases that most commonly lead to the need for a transplantation are cystic fibrosis, pulmonary hypertension, and bronchiolitis. However, the number of pediatric lung transplantations being performed is low compared with the number of transplants performed in the adult age group. The objective of this study was to demonstrate our experience with pediatric lung transplants over a 10-year period in a program initially designed for adults.

A proposal to grade the severity of early allograft dysfunction after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: To propose a grading system for early hepatic graft dysfunction. METHODS: A retrospective study from a single transplant center. Recipients of liver transplants from deceased donors, transplanted under the MELD system were included. Early graft dysfunction was defined by Olthoff criteria. Multiple cut-off points of post-transplant laboratory tests were used to create a grading system for early graft dysfunction. The primary outcome was 6-months grafts survival. RESULTS: The peak of aminotransferases during the first postoperative week correlated with graft loss. The recipients were divided into mild (aminotransferase peak >2,000IU/mL, but <3,000IU/mL); moderate (aminotransferase peak >3,000IU/mL); and severe (aminotransferase peak >3,000IU/mL + International Normalized Ratio ≥1.6 and/or bilirubin ≥ 10mg/dL in the 7th postoperative day) early allograft dysfunction. Moderate and severe early dysfunctions were independent risk factors for graft loss. Patients with mild early dysfunction presented with graft and patient survival comparable to those without graft dysfunction. However, those with moderate early graft dysfunction showed worse graft survival than those who had no graft dysfunction. Patients with severe early dysfunction had graft and patient survival rates worse than those of any other groups. CONCLUSION: Early graft dysfunction can be graded by a simple and reliable criteria based on the peak of aminotransferases during the first postoperative week. The severity of the early graft dysfunction is an independent risk factor for allograft loss. Patients with moderate early dysfunction showed worsening of graft survival. Recipients with severe dysfunction had a significantly worse prognosis for graft and patient survival.

Evaluation of the updated definition of early allograft dysfunction in donation after brain death and donation after cardiac death liver allografts.

BACKGROUND: An updated definition of early allograft dysfunction (EAD) was recently validated in a multicenter study of 300 deceased donor liver transplant recipients. This analysis did not differentiate between donation after brain death (DBD) and donation after cardiac death (DCD) allograft recipients. METHODS: We reviewed our prospectively entered database for all DBD (n=377) and DCD (n=38) liver transplantations between January 1, 2006 and October 30, 2011. The incidence of EAD as well as its ability to predict graft failure and survival was compared between DBD and DCD groups. RESULTS: EAD was a valid predictor of both graft and patient survival at six months in DBD allograft recipients, but in DCD allograft recipients there was no significant difference in the rate of graft failure in those with EAD (11.5%) compared with those without EAD (16.7%) (P=0.664) or in the rate of death in recipients with EAD (3.8%) compared with those without EAD (8.3%) (P=0.565). The graft failure rate in the first 6 months in those with international normalized ratio ≥1.6 on day 7 who received a DCD allograft was 37.5% compared with 6.7% for those with international normalized ratio <1.6 on day 7 (P=0.022). CONCLUSIONS: The recently validated definition of EAD is a valid predictor of patient and graft survival in recipients of DBD allografts. On initial assessment, it does not appear to be a useful predictor of patient and graft survival in recipients of DCD allografts, however a study with a larger sample size of DCD allografts is needed to confirm these findings. The high ALT/AST levels in most recipients of DCD livers as well as the predisposition to biliary complications and early cholestasis make these parameters as poor predictors of graft failure. An alternative definition of EAD that gives greater weight to the INR on day 7 may be more relevant in this population.