Quality of life after pediatric intestinal transplantation: the perception of pediatric recipients and their parents

Small bowel transplantation

Until very recently, outcomes from small bowel transplantation (SBTx) lagged behind those in liver, heart, and kidney transplantation because of the magnitude of the immunologic burden; the strong expression of histocompatibility antigens; and the contamination in grafts by bacterial organisms. With novel techniques of immune-induction therapies, such as recipient "preconditioning" with lymphocyte reduction, followed by the more subtle use of immunosuppression-based single-agent tacrolimus, graft and host 1-year survival is now over 90% in the most active US centers, a finding that parallels the outcomes in liver and kidney transplantation. In contrast to the alternative therapy for permanent intestinal failure, home total parenteral nutrition (TPN), SBTx improves quality of life and restores digestive and absorptive function, making patients nutritionally autonomous. With survival beyond 1 to 3 years, the procedure is cost-effective. Current results support expansion of the indications for SBTx from use as salvage therapy for patients with TPN failure to preemptive therapy for patients at risk of developing TPN failure.

Intestinal transplantation in The Netherlands: first experience and future perspectives

Intestinal transplantation for intestinal failure is no longer an experimental procedure, but an accepted treatment for patients who fail total parenteral nutrition (TPN) therapy. Early referral for evaluation for small bowel transplantation has to be considered in patients with permanent intestinal failure who have occlusion of more than two major veins, frequent line-related septic episodes, impairment of liver function or an unacceptable quality of life. With the increased experience in post-transplant patient care and newer forms of induction (thymoglobulin, IL-2 receptor antagonists) and maintenance (tacrolimus) therapies the 1-year graft survival has increased to 65% for isolated and to 59% for liver/small bowel transplantation, and is further improving. Rejection, bacterial, fungal and viral (CMV, EBV) infection, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) and graft versus host disease (GvHD) are the most common complications after intestinal transplantation. Although most of the long-term survivors are TPN-independent and have a good quality of life, the risk of the procedure and long-term adverse effects of immunosuppressive medication limits small bowel, or liver/small bowel transplantation only to patients with severe complications of TPN therapy.

Current issues in the management of intestinal failure

Successful long term parenteral nutrition has transformed the prognosis for children with irreversible intestinal failure in the last three decades, but has also highlighted the long term complications: intestinal failure associated liver disease; recurrent catheter sepsis; and impaired venous access. Recent advances in small bowel transplantation and non-transplant surgical techniques now offer hope of sustained survival in the future without parenteral nutrition.

Cost and quality of life after intestinal transplantation

Intestinal transplantation has become a standard treatment for intestinal failure in patients with life-threatening complications of TPN. Although the long-term survival of patients with continued parenteral nutrition is higher than after intestinal transplantation, the 1 and 2 year survival is comparable. Here we examine other aspects of the treatment options available for patients with intestinal failure including the cost of the therapy and the quality of life. The cost of parenteral nutrition compared to intestinal transplantation reveals that transplantation is cost-effective in patients that maintain graft function within 1 to 3 years after surgery. The quality of life after transplantation is probably equal to or better than quality of life on TPN and children report quality of life similar to normal school children. Although currently reserved for those with life-threatening complications, intestinal transplantation may soon be an option for any patient permanently dependent on parenteral nutrition.

Proxies and other external raters: methodological considerations

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this paper is to introduce researchers to the measurement and subsequent analysis considerations involved when using externally rated data. We will define and describe two categories of externally rated data, recommend methodological approaches for analyzing and interpreting data in these two categories, and explore factors affecting agreement between self-rated and externally rated reports. We conclude with a discussion of needs for future research.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Data sources for this paper are previous published studies and reviews comparing self-rated with externally rated data.

STUDY DESIGN/DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

This is a psychometric conceptual paper.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We define two types of externally rated data: proxy data and other-rated data. Proxy data refer to those collected from someone who speaks for a patient who cannot, will not, or is unavailable to speak for him or herself, whereas we use the term other-rater data to refer to situations in which the researcher collects ratings from a person other than the patient to gain multiple perspectives on the assessed construct. These two types of data differ in the way the measurement model is defined, the definition of the gold standard against which the measurements are validated, the analysis strategies appropriately used, and how the analyses are interpreted. There are many factors affecting the discrepancies between self- and external ratings, including characteristics of the patient, the proxy, and of the rated construct. Several psychological theories can be helpful in predicting such discrepancies.

CONCLUSIONS

Externally rated data have an important place in health services research, but use of such data requires careful consideration of the nature of the data and how it will be analyzed and interpreted.

2003 report of the intestine transplant registry: a new era has dawned

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The intestine has been more difficult to transplant than other solid organs. We analyzed registry data to determine the scope and success of intestine transplantation in the current era.

METHODS

All known intestinal-transplant programs participated. Patient- and graft-survival estimates were obtained using the Kaplan-Meier product limit method and were analyzed with the Wilcoxon statistic.

RESULTS

Sixty-one programs provided data on 989 grafts in 923 patients. Four patients were lost to follow-up. The short-gut syndrome was the most common primary indication for transplantation. Sixty-one percent of the recipients were < or =18 years. Proportionally more combined intestinal and liver transplants were performed in this group. More than 80% of all current survivors had stopped parenteral nutrition and resumed normal daily activities. A multivariate analysis of cases within the last 5 years revealed that transplantation of patients waiting at home, recipient age, antibody induction immune suppression, and center experience with at least 10 cases were associated with improved patient survival. One-year graft survival rates of 81% were achieved in patients who were induced with antithymocyte globulin and maintained on tacrolimus.

CONCLUSIONS

Transplantation is an effective therapy for the treatment of patients with end-stage intestine failure who cannot tolerate parenteral nutrition. With newer immune suppressive protocols, 1-year graft and patient survival rates approach the results of liver transplantation. Further improvement in survival are expected with early referral since suitable donor organs are scarce and survival rates are better when patients are well enough to wait at home for their transplant.