全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Occurrence of Fatal and Nonfatal Adverse Outcomes after Heart Transplantation in Patients with Pretransplant Noncytotoxic HLA Antibodies

DOI: 10.1155/2013/519680

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

HLA antibodies (HLA ab) in transplant candidates have been associated with poor outcome. However, clinical relevance of noncytotoxic antibodies after heart transplant (HT) is controversial. By using a Luminex-based HLA screening, we retested pretransplant sera from HT recipients testing negative for cytotoxic HLA ab and for prospective crossmatch. Out of the 173 consecutive patients assayed ( ; 16% females; 47% ischemic etiology), 32 (18%) showed pretransplant HLA ab, and 12 (7%) tested positive against both class I and class II HLA. Recipients with any HLA ab had poorer survival than those without ( versus %; ), accounting for a doubled independent mortality risk ( ). In addition, HLA-ab detection was associated with increased prevalence of early graft failure (35 versus 15%; ) and late cellular rejection (29 versus 11%; ). Of the subgroup of 37 patients suspected for antibody mediated rejection (AMR), the 9 with pretransplant HLA ab were more likely to display pathological AMR grade 2 ( ). By an inexpensive, luminex-based, HLA-screening assay, we were able to detect non-cytotoxic HLA ab predicting fatal and nonfatal adverse outcomes after heart transplant. Allocation strategies and desensitization protocols need to be developed and prospectively tested in these patients. 1. Introduction Short- and long-term mortality after heart transplantation (HT) has steadily decreased over time, reflecting the improvements in perioperative management and immunosuppressive therapy [1]. Nevertheless, even in the context of modern immunosuppressive strategies, the presence of preformed anti-human leukocyte antigens (HLA) antibodies (ab) in transplant candidates is still an important risk factor for allograft rejection and graft loss [2, 3]. In the last decade, the classical detection method based on complement dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) assays over a panel of leukocytes (panel reactive antibodies—PRA) has been replaced by more sensitive assays based on solid phase recognition of circulating ab [4]. These techniques allow detecting circulating anti-HLA ab in a higher number of patients than CDC assays, thus raising concerns regarding organ allocation and patient management during waiting list [5]. However, in what way the information from solid phase assays is translated into clinical practice to balance the risk of inappropriately delaying transplant on the one hand, or allocating organs likely to be affected by acute or chronic antibody mediated rejection on the other, is still a matter of investigation [4, 6]. Moreover, cost-effectiveness of the most sensitive

References

[1]  J. Stehlik, L. B. Edwards, A. Y. Kucheryavaya et al., “The registry of the international society for heart and lung transplantation: twenty-eighth adult heart transplant report-2011,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 1078–1094, 2011.
[2]  E. K. Ho, G. Vlad, A. I. Colovai et al., “Alloantibodies in heart transplantation,” Human Immunology, vol. 70, no. 10, pp. 825–829, 2009.
[3]  L. U. Nwakanma, J. A. Williams, E. S. Weiss, S. D. Russell, W. A. Baumgartner, and J. V. Conte, “Influence of pretransplant panel-reactive antibody on outcomes in 8,160 heart transplant recipients in recent era,” Annals of Thoracic Surgery, vol. 84, no. 5, pp. 1556–1563, 2007.
[4]  O. E. Pajaro and J. F. George, “On solid-phase antibody assays,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 1207–1209, 2010.
[5]  H. Ross, K. Tinckam, V. Rao, and L. J. West, “In praise of ventricular assist devices-mechanical bridge to virtual crossmatch for the sensitized patient,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 728–730, 2010.
[6]  H. M. Gebel, O. Moussa, D. D. Eckels, and R. A. Bray, “Donor-reactive HLA antibodies in renal allograft recipients: considerations, complications, and conundrums,” Human Immunology, vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 610–617, 2009.
[7]  M. Ziemann, C. Sch?nemann, C. Bern et al., “Prognostic value and cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies for HLA antibodies prior to kidney transplantation,” Clinical Transplantation, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 644–656, 2012.
[8]  G. J. Berry, A. Angelini, M. M. Burke et al., “The ISHLT working formulation for pathologic diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection in heart transplantation: evolution and current status (2005–2011),” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 601–611, 2011.
[9]  M. E. Billingham, N. R. B. Cary, and M. E. Hammond, “A working formulation for the standardisation of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart and lung rejection: heart rejection study group,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 8, pp. 587–593, 1990.
[10]  S. Stewart, G. L. Winters, M. C. Fishbein et al., “Revision of the 1990 working formulation for the standardization of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart rejection,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 1710–1720, 2005.
[11]  L. Potena, F. Grigioni, P. Ortolani et al., “Safety and efficacy of early aggressive versus cholesterol-driven lipid-lowering strategies in heart transplantation: a pilot, randomized, intravascular ultrasound study,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 1305–1311, 2011.
[12]  S. Itescu, T. C. Tung, E. M. Burke et al., “Preformed IgG antibodies against major histocompatibility complex class II antigens are major risk factors for high-grade cellular rejection in recipients of heart transplantation,” Circulation, vol. 98, no. 8, pp. 786–793, 1998.
[13]  R. Pei, G. Wang, C. Tarsitani et al., “Simultaneous HLA class I and class II antibodies screening with flow cytometry,” Human Immunology, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 313–322, 1998.
[14]  S. Chih, K. Tinckam, and H. J. Ross, “205 a survey of current practice for antibody mediated rejection in heart transplantation to guide treatment Standardization,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 31, pp. S74–S75, 2012.
[15]  R. Patel and P. I. Terasaki, “Significance of the positive crossmatch test in kidney transplantation,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 280, no. 14, pp. 735–739, 1969.
[16]  J. Kobashigawa, M. G. Crespo-Leiro, S. M. Ensminger et al., “Report from a consensus conference on antibody-mediated rejection in heart transplantation,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 252–269, 2011.
[17]  A. R. Tambur, R. A. Bray, S. K. Takemoto et al., “Flow cytometric detection of HLA-specific antibodies as a predictor of heart allograft rejection,” Transplantation, vol. 70, no. 7, pp. 1055–1059, 2000.
[18]  D. L. Joyce, R. E. Southard, G. Torre-Amione, G. P. Noon, G. A. Land, and M. Loebe, “Impact of left venticular assist device (LVAD)-mediated humoral sensitization on post-transplant outcomes,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 2054–2059, 2005.
[19]  A. M. Burns and A. S. Chong, “Alloantibodies prevent the induction of transplantation tolerance by enhancing alloreactive T cell priming,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 186, no. 1, pp. 214–221, 2011.
[20]  J. A. White, C. Guiraudon, P. W. Pflugfelder, and W. J. Kostuk, “Routine surveillance myocardial biopsies are unnecessary beyond one year after heart transplantation,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 1052–1056, 1995.
[21]  J. A. Kobashigawa, J. K. Patel, M. M. Kittleson et al., “The long-term outcome of treated sensitized patients who undergo heart transplantation,” Clinical Transplantation, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. E61–E67, 2011.
[22]  J. Stehlik, N. Islam, D. Hurst et al., “Utility of virtual crossmatch in sensitized patients awaiting heart transplantation,” Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 1129–1134, 2009.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133