Impact of combined heart and lung transplantation on bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, cardiac allograft vasculopathy, and long-term survival

Comparison of cardiac allograft vasculopathy incidence between simultaneous multiorgan and isolated heart transplant recipients in the United States

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have shown reduced development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) in multiorgan transplant recipients. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of CAV between isolated heart transplants and simultaneous multiorgan heart transplants in the contemporary era.

METHODS

We utilized the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to perform a retrospective analysis of first-time adult heart transplant recipients between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2019 in the United States. The primary end-point was the development of angiographic CAV within 5 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 20,591 patients included in the analysis, 1,279 (6%) underwent multiorgan heart transplantation (70% heart-kidney, 16% heart-liver, 13% heart-lung, and 1% triple-organ), and 19,312 (94%) were isolated heart transplant recipients. The average age was 53 years, and 74% were male. There were no significant between-group differences in cold ischemic time. The incidence of acute rejection during the first year after transplant was significantly lower in the multiorgan group (18% vs 33%, p < 0.01). The 5-year incidence of CAV was 33% in the isolated heart group and 27% in the multiorgan group (p < 0.0001); differences in CAV incidence were seen as early as 1 year after transplant and persisted over time. In multivariable analysis, multiorgan heart transplant recipients had a significantly lower likelihood of CAV at 5 years (hazard ratio = 0.76, 95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.88, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous multiorgan heart transplantation is associated with a significantly lower long-term risk of angiographic CAV compared with isolated heart transplantation in the contemporary era.

Simultaneous combined transplantation: Intricacies in immunosuppression management

Simultaneous combined transplantation (SCT), i.e. the transplantation of two solid organs within the same procedure, can be required when the patients develop more than one end-stage organ failure. The development of SCT over the last 20 years could only be possible thanks to progress in the surgical techniques and in the perioperative management of patients in an ageing population. Performing such major transplant surgeries from the same donor, in a short amount of time, and in critical pathophysiological conditions, is often considered to be counterbalanced by the immune benefits expected from these interventions. However, SCT includes a wide array of different transplant combinations, with each time a different immunological constellation. Recent research offers new insights into the immune mechanisms involved in these different settings. Progress in the understanding of these immunological intricacies help to address the optimal induction and maintenance immunosuppressive treatment strategies. In this review, we summarize the different immunological benefits according to the type of SCT performed. We also incorporate the main outcomes according to the immunological risk at transplantation, and the deleterious impact of preformed or de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSA) in the different types of SCT. Finally, we propose comprehensive and evidence-based induction and maintenance immunosuppression strategies guided by the type of SCT.

Comparison of long-term outcomes in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant versus simultaneous deceased donor pancreas and living donor kidney transplant

Simultaneous deceased donor pancreas and living donor kidney transplant (SPLK) has certain advantages over conventional simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant (SPK) and may be beneficial for overcoming the paucity of organs needed for diabetic patients requiring transplant. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent either SPK (n = 149) or SPLK (n = 46) in terms of pre- and post-transplantation variables, development of de novo DSA, occurrence of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), and graft survival rates. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the SPK and SPLK groups except for the shorter cold ischemic time of kidney grafts, shorter duration of diabetes, older age of pancreas graft-donors, and younger age of kidney graft-donors in the SPLK group. Our results showed that the death-censored pancreas graft survival rate was lower in the SPLK group. In addition, the incidence of BPAR of the pancreas graft was higher in the SPLK group. There was no significant difference in the presence of de novo DSA and the rates of kidney graft failure, kidney BPAR, and mortality. Our results show that SPLK can be considered an alternative option for SPK although higher incidences of BPAR and graft failure of pancreas after SPLK need to be overcome.

Should there be an age limit for advanced therapies?

Combined heart lung transplant has become a rare procedure. However, there is a significant number of patients potentially benefitting from replacement of both heart and lungs. This represents a quite diverse patient population. Decisions in patient selection have to be adjusted to individual needs and distinct constellation of the patient. Age may be a risk factor, but should be carefully integrated into the evaluation of perioperative and long term risks.

Heart transplantation: focus on donor recovery strategies, left ventricular assist devices, and novel therapies

Heart transplantation is advocated in selected patients with advanced heart failure in the absence of contraindications. Principal challenges in heart transplantation centre around an insufficient and underutilized donor organ pool, the need to individualize titration of immunosuppressive therapy, and to minimize late complications such as cardiac allograft vasculopathy, malignancy, and renal dysfunction. Advances have served to increase the organ donor pool by advocating the use of donors with underlying hepatitis C virus infection and by expanding the donor source to use hearts donated after circulatory death. New techniques to preserve the donor heart over prolonged ischaemic times, and enabling longer transport times in a safe manner, have been introduced. Mechanical circulatory support as a bridge to transplantation has allowed patients with advanced heart failure to avoid progressive deterioration in hepato-renal function while awaiting an optimal donor organ match. The management of the heart transplantation recipient remains a challenge despite advances in immunosuppression, which provide early gains in rejection avoidance but are associated with infections and late-outcome challenges. In this article, we review contemporary advances and challenges in this field to focus on donor recovery strategies, left ventricular assist devices, and immunosuppressive monitoring therapies with the potential to enhance outcomes. We also describe opportunities for future discovery to include a renewed focus on long-term survival, which continues to be an area that is under-studied and poorly characterized, non-human sources of organs for transplantation including xenotransplantation as well as chimeric transplantation, and technology competitive to human heart transplantation, such as tissue engineering.

The pharmaceutical management of cardiac allograft vasculopathy after heart transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) is a major limitation to long-term survival after heart transplantation. Its peculiar pathophysiology involves multifactorial pathways including immune-mediated and metabolic risk factors, which are associated with the development of specific pathological lesions. The often diffuse and chronic nature of the disease reduces the effectiveness of revascularization procedures, and pharmacological prevention of the disease is the sole therapeutic approach with some proven efficacy.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, after briefly outlining the risk factors for CAV, the authors revise the potential pharmacological approaches that may reduce the burden of CAV. While several therapies have shown convincing efficacy in terms of CAV prevention diagnosed by coronary imaging, very few have been reported to improve prognosis with any meaningful level of evidence.

EXPERT OPINION

The authors believe that a customizable approach is necessary for clinical practice given the currently available evidence. Furthermore, it is important, in the future, to address the glaring therapeutic gap of an effective treatment against donor-specific antibodies, whose effect on endothelial injury is currently one of the major mechanisms of CAV development and for which no pharmacological treatment is currently available.