Noninvasive Monitoring of Allograft Rejection Using a Novel Epidermal Sampling Technique

Xenotransplantation: Current Challenges and Emerging Solutions

To address the ongoing shortage of organs available for replacement, xenotransplantation of hearts, corneas, skin, and kidneys has been attempted. However, a major obstacle facing xenotransplants is rejection due to a cycle of immune reactions to the graft. Both adaptive and innate immune systems contribute to this cycle, in which natural killer cells, macrophages, and T-cells play a significant role. While advancements in the field of genetic editing can circumvent some of these obstacles, biomarkers to identify and predict xenograft rejection remain to be standardized. Several T-cell markers, such as CD3, CD4, and CD8, are useful in both the diagnosis and prediction of xenograft rejection. Furthermore, an increase in the levels of various circulating DNA markers and microRNAs is also predictive of xenograft rejection. In this review, we summarize recent findings on the advancements in xenotransplantation, with a focus on pig-to-human, the role of immunity in xenograft rejection, and its biomarkers.

Quantification of Facial Allograft Edema During Acute Rejection: A Software-Based 3-Dimensional Analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute rejection (AR) is a common complication in facial transplant (FT) patients associated with allograft edema and erythema. Our study aims to demonstrate the feasibility of using software-based 3-dimensional (3D) facial analysis to quantify edema as it resolves during/after AR treatment in an FT patient.

METHODS

Our patient is a 23-year-old man who underwent a face and bilateral hand allotransplant in August 2020. The Vectra H1 (Canfield, Fairfield, NJ) portable scanner was used to capture 3D facial images at 8 time points between postoperative day (POD) 392 and 539. The images were analyzed with the Vectra Software using a rejection-free image (POD 539) as a control.

RESULTS

Edema increased in the periorbital, lower third, and submandibular regions before AR treatment (POD 392-415). At POD 448, total facial edema was reduced to near baseline values in response to plasmapheresis and thymoglobulin (+156.94 to +28.2 mL). The fastest and most notable response to treatment was seen in the periorbital region, while some edema remained in the submandibular (+19.79 mL) and right lower third (+8.65 mL) regions. On POD 465, after the initial improvement, the edema increased but was resolved with steroid use. Facial edema did not correlate with the histopathological evaluation in our patient.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated the feasibility of analyzing 3D facial images to quantify edema during/after AR treatment in an FT patient. Our analysis detected edema changes consistent with AR followed by an improvement after treatment. This technology shows promise for noninvasive monitoring of FT patients.

Software-based Detection of Acute Rejection Changes in Face Transplant

BACKGROUND

 An objective, non-invasive method for redness detection during acute allograft rejection in face transplantation (FT) is lacking.

METHODS

 A retrospective cohort study was performed with 688 images of 7 patients with face transplant (range, 1 to 108 months post-transplant). Healthy controls were matched to donor age, sex, and had no prior facial procedures. Rejection state was confirmed via tissue biopsy. An image-analysis software developed alongside VicarVision (Amsterdam, Netherlands) was used to produce R, a measure of differences between detectable color and absolute red. R is inversely proportional to redness, where lower R values correspond to increased redness. Linear mixed models were used to study fixed effect of rejection state on R values. Estimated marginal means of fitted models were calculated for pairwise comparisons.

RESULTS

 Of 688 images, 175, 170, 202, and 141 images were attributable to Banff Grade 0,1,2, and 3, respectively. Estimated change in R value of facial allografts decreased with increasing Banff Grade (p = 0.0001). The mean R value of clinical rejection (Banff Grade ⅔) (16.67, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 14.79-18.58) was lower (p = 0.005) than non-rejection (Banff Grade 0/1) (19.38, 95%CI 17.43-21.33). Both clinical and non-rejection mean R values were lower (p = 0.0001) than healthy controls (24.12, 95%CI 20.96-27.28).

CONCLUSION

 This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that software-based analysis can detect and monitor acute rejection changes in FT. Future studies should expand on this tool's potential application in telehealth and as a screening tool for allograft rejection.

The 2020 Facial Transplantation Update: A 15-Year Compendium

Over the past 15 years, landmark achievements have established facial transplantation (FT) as a feasible reconstructive option for otherwise irreparable craniofacial defects. However, as the field matures and long-term outcomes begin to emerge, FT teams around the world are now facing new challenges. Data for this review were identified by searches of the PubMed/MEDLINE database from inception through August 2020. All English-language articles pertaining to FT were included. Significant advances in candidate selection, technology, operative technique, posttransplant care, and immunosuppressive management have contributed to the tremendous expansion of the field, culminating in the execution in the past 3 years of 2 facial re-transplantations, and most recently the world’s first successful combined face and double hand transplant in August 2020. Despite these achievements, the allograft donor pool remains limited, with long wait times, requiring surgical experimentation with cross-sex FT. Immunosuppressive management has improved, but significant adverse events continue to be reported. Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has placed an unprecedented strain on the healthcare system, with various implications for the practice of reconstructive transplantation. In this article, we provide the most comprehensive and up-to-date FT review, highlighting fundamental lessons learned and recent advancements, while looking toward the challenges ahead. Over the past 15 years, extensive multidisciplinary efforts have been instrumental to the establishment of FT as a feasible reconstructive option. As novel challenges are beginning to emerge, continued collaborative and multispecialty research efforts are needed to further this field.

Noninvasive evaluation of intragraft immune responses in upper extremity transplantation

In vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA), invasive tissue biopsies remain the gold standard in diagnosing rejection carrying significant morbidity. We aimed to show feasibility of tape-stripping for noninvasive immune monitoring in VCA. Tape-stripping was performed on allografts and native skin of upper extremity transplant recipients. Healthy nontransplanted individuals served as controls. The technique was also used in swine on naïve skin in nontransplanted animals, native skin of treated, transplanted swine, nonrejecting VCAs, and rejecting VCAs. Extracted protein was analyzed for differences in cytokine expression using Luminex technology. Significantly decreased levels of INFγ and IL-1Ra were seen between human allograft samples and native skin. In swine, rejecting grafts had increased IL-1Ra compared to naïve and native skin, decreased levels of GM-CSF compared to native skin, and decreased IL-10 compared to nonrejecting grafts. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering revealed rejecting grafts separated from the nonrejecting (P = 0.021). Variable importance in projection scores identified GM-CSF, IL-1Ra, and IL-2 as the most important profiles for group discrimination. Differences in cytokine expression are detectable in human VCA patient native skin and VCA graft skin using a noninvasive tape-stripping method. Swine studies suggest that differences in cytokines between rejecting and nonrejecting grafts are discernable.