Bilateral hand transplantation: bone healing under immunosuppression with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisolone

A World Update of Progress in Lower Extremity Transplantation: What's Hot and What's Not

ABSTRACT

The field of vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) is the new frontier of solid organ transplantation (SOT). VCA spans life-enhancing/life-changing procedures such as upper extremity, craniofacial (including eye), laryngeal, tracheal, abdominal wall, penis, and lower extremity transplants. VCAs such as uterus transplants are life giving unlike any other SOT. Of all VCAs that have shown successful intermediate- to long-term graft survival with functional and immunologic outcomes, lower extremity VCAs have remained largely underexplored. Lower extremity transplantation (LET) can offer patients with improved function compared to the use of conventional prostheses, reducing concerns of phantom limb pain and stump complications, and offer an option for eligible amputees that either fail prosthetic rehabilitation or do not adapt to prosthetics. Nevertheless, these benefits must be carefully weighed against the risks of VCA, which are not trivial, including the adverse effects of lifelong immunosuppression, extremely challenging perioperative care, and delayed nerve regeneration. There have been 5 lower extremity transplants to date, ranging from unilateral or bilateral to quadrimembral, progressively increasing in risk that resulted in fatalities in 3 of the 5 cases, emphasizing the inherent risks. The advantages of LET over prosthetics must be carefully weighed, demanding rigorous candidate selection for optimal outcomes.

Immunosuppressive strategies in face and hand transplantation: a comprehensive systematic review of current therapy regimens and outcomes

Background

Recipients of Vascularized Composite Allotransplants require effective immunosuppressive therapy to prevent graft rejection. This systematic review summarizes the current body of literature on immunosuppressive regimens used in face and hand transplants while summarizing their outcome in terms of rejection, renal failure, and infections.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify relevant studies from 1998 until July 1st, 2023. We included all studies that discussed immunosuppressive strategies in face and hand transplant recipients according to PRISMA.

Results

The standard triple maintenance therapy was mostly adjusted due to nephrotoxicity or high incidence of rejection. The most common alternative treatments utilized were sirolimus (25/91; 27.5%) or everolimus (9/91; 9.9%) following hand- and photophoresis (7/45; 15.6%), sirolimus (5/45; 11.1%) or belatacept (1/45; 2.2%) following face transplantation. Episodes of rejection were reported in 60 (65.9%) of hand- and 33 (73%) of face transplant patients respectively. Graft loss of 12 (13.2%) hand and 4 (8.9%) face transplants was reported. Clinical CMV infection was observed in 6 (6.6%) hand and 7 (15.5%) face transplant recipients.

Conclusions

Based on the herein presented data, facial grafts exhibited a heightened incidence of rejection episodes and CMV infections. Facial mucosa adds complexity to the immunological graft composition highlighting the need of individualized immunosuppressive regimens and further research.

Maxillary and Mandibular Healing After Facial Allotransplantation

INTRODUCTION

Facial transplantation has emerged as a viable option in treating devastating facial injuries.Despite the high healing rate of Le Fort III and bilateral sagittal split osteotomies (BSSO) in nontransplant patients, few studies have reported assessment of maxillary and mandibular healing in face transplant patients compared with nontransplant patients. The aim of this study was to examine differences in bone healing in our patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted of facial allotransplantation patients at the Cleveland Clinic from December 2008 to inception. Demographics such as age, date of birth, and sex were recorded. Additional variables included procedures, revisions, reoperations, medications, and bone stability and healing. Computed tomography (CT) images assessed the alignment of skeletal components, bony union quality, and stability of fixation.

RESULTS

Three patients were included: 2 had Le Fort III segment transplantation, and 1 had transplantation of both a Le Fort III segment and mandibular BSSO. The Le Fort III segment in all patients exhibited mobility and fibrous union at the Le Fort III osteotomy on CT. In contrast, the BSSO healed uneventfully after transplantation and revision surgery, with bony union confirmed by both CT and histology of the fixation area between the donor and recipient mandible bilaterally. No patients with midfacial fibrous union required revision of the nonunion as they were clinically asymptomatic.

CONCLUSION

Le Fort osteotomy demonstrates inferior healing in facial transplantation compared with the nontransplant population. In contrast, the successful healing in the mandible is likely owing to the high density of rich cancellous bone.

Two Decades of Hand Transplantation: A Systematic Review of Outcomes

ABSTRACT

Hand transplantation for upper extremity amputation provides a unique treatment that restores form and function, which may not be achieved by traditional reconstruction and prosthetics. However, despite enhancing quality of life, hand transplantation remains controversial, because of immunological complications, transplant rejection, and medication effects. This systematic literature review sought to collect information on current experiences and outcomes of hand transplants to determine the efficacy and utility of hand transplants. The databases PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were analyzed with combinations of "hand" or "upper extremity" or "arm" and "transplant" or "allograft," with information collected on recipient characteristics, details of transplant, immunological outcomes, functional outcomes, and complications. Functional outcomes, as measured by Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, were compared between patient groups using Wilcoxon signed-rank test or 1-way analysis of variance test and post hoc Tukey test. Within the 108 articles that fulfilled inclusion and exclusion criteria, there were 96 patients with 148 hand transplants. There were 57 patients who experienced acute rejection and 5 patients with chronic rejection. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores significantly decreased after hand transplantation and were significantly lower for distal transplants compared with proximal transplants. There were 3 patients with concurrent face transplantation and 2 patients with simultaneous leg transplants. Sixteen patients experienced amputation of the hand transplant, and there were 5 deaths. This study found that hand transplantation provides significant restoration of function and form, especially for proximal transplants. Reduction in complications, such as rejection and amputation, can be achieved by decreasing medication cost and patient education.

All hands on deck: Hand replantation versus transplantation

Objectives:

Our hands play a remarkable role in our activities of daily living and the make-up of our identities. In the United States, an estimated 41,000 individuals live with upper limb loss. Our expanding experience in limb transplantation—including operative techniques, rehabilitation, and expected outcomes—has often been based on our past experience with replantation. Here, we undertake a systematic review of replantation with transplantation in an attempt to better understand the determinants of outcome for each and to provide a summary of the data to this point.

Methods:

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted PubMed searches from 1964 to 2013 for articles in English. In total, 53 primary and secondary source articles were found to involve surgical repair (either replantation or transplantation) for complete amputations at the wrist and forearm levels. All were read and analyzed.

Results:

Hand replantations and transplantations were compared with respect to pre-operative considerations, surgical techniques, post-operative considerations and outcomes, including motor, sensation, cosmesis, patient satisfaction/quality of life, adverse events/side effects, financial costs, and overall function. While comparison of data is limited by heterogeneity, these data support our belief that good outcomes depend on patient expectations and commitment.

Conclusion:

When possible, hand replantation remains the primary option after acute amputation. However, when replantation fails or is not possible, hand transplantation appears to provide at least equal outcomes. Patient commitment, realistic expectations, and physician competence must coincide to achieve the best possible outcomes for both hand replantation and transplantation.

World experience after more than a decade of clinical hand transplantation: update on the Polish program

It has been demonstrated over the past decade that the generally achieved functional outcomes of patients after hand transplantation (HTx) are better than those of equivalent replantations. However, HTx should be performed in specialized centers with Institutional Review Board-approved transplantation programs. In Poland such requirements are fulfilled by The Subdepartment of Replantation of Limbs of St. Jadwiga Hospital in Trzebnica. A main emphasis of this subdepartment is to make the very involved process of donor recruitment, recipient screening, surgery, and postoperative treatment fully transparent. This article summarizes the experience of this center with HTx over the past 5 years.

World experience after more than a decade of clinical hand transplantation: update on the Innsbruck program

Patients who have lost a hand or upper extremity face many challenges in everyday life. For some patients, reconstructive hand transplantation represents a reasonable option for anatomic reconstruction, restoring prehensile function with sensation and allowing them to regain daily living independence. The first clinical case of bilateral hand transplantation at University Hospital Innsbruck was realized on March 17th, 2000. A decade later, a total of 7 hands and forearms were transplanted in 4 patients. This article review the clinical courses of 3 bilateral hand transplant recipients and highlights psychological aspects on reconstructive hand transplantation with special regard to unilateral/bilateral transplantation.

[Organ transplantation, composite tissue allotransplantation, and plastic surgery]

Transplantations play an increasing role for plastic reconstructive surgeons. The increasing number of solid organ transplantations and the improved long-term survival rates lead to increased numbers of these patients also undergoing plastic and reconstructive procedures. Free flap transfer in solid organ transplant patients is feasible with no higher risk to both transplant function and postoperative complications than for nontransplant patients, even during immune suppression. Composite tissue allotransplantation (CTA) is an evolving field in plastic reconstructive surgery with hands, arms, partial faces, abdominal walls, and knee joints being transferred in clinical settings. However only an interdisciplinary approach using all available resources in highly selected patients after exhausting all other plastic reconstructive procedures is able to achieve reasonable results. The potential complications of long-term immune suppression and patient compliance have to be balanced with the expected and achieved functional result of CTA, whose procedures must be discussed as a potential tissue or organ transplantation, given the legal and logistic implications. The interdisciplinary cooperation of transplant surgeons, microsurgeons, psychologists, and ergo- and physiotherapists is mandatory to achieve successful CTA results.

Outcome of allogeneic vascularized knee transplants

Transplantation of vascularized knee joints is a novel approach in Composite Tissue Allotransplantation (CTA). In 1996 our group started a clinical knee transplantation project and six transplantations have been performed since. Key problems identified early were the monitoring of acute rejection and choice of an immunosuppressive regime. One graft was lost due to postoperative infection and one due to of noncompliance where the patient discontinued the immunosuppressant regime. In three cases late rejection lead to necrosis and graft dysfunction after 15, 16 and 24 months, respectively. Exit-strategies were arthrodesis in one patient and Above Knee Amputation in two cases. With retrospective analysis after initial five cases the treatment protocol was improved. The immunosuppressive drug regime was altered, femoral diaphysis and knee joint grafting was combined and a vascularized block of donor skin and subcutaneous tissue was harvested with the graft (sentinel skin graft). The sentinel skin graft enabled us to monitor acute rejection by clinical and histological examination and avoid late rejection by rapid treatment with high dose steroids. In summary, over a four-year period, one of six allogeneic vascularized knee transplants has survived, one was lost from a surgical site infection, one by noncompliance and three by late rejection. Analysis of our data leads us to suggest that knee transplantation should be limited to a combined injury consisting of extensive loss of cartilage and bone, deficient extensor mechanism and soft tissue and skin defects without any signs of infection. Transplantation should only be taken into consideration as last option before Above Knee Amputation in an otherwise healthy patient under 35 years of age.