Existing and Evolving Bioethical Dilemmas, Challenges, and Controversies in Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation: An International Perspective From the Brocher Bioethics Working Group

Ethical and Psychosocial Factors in the Decision-Making and Informed Consent Process for Upper Extremity Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation: A Mixed-Methods Study

Although upper extremity (UE) vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) aims to improve quality of life, relatively few have been performed worldwide to support evidence-based treatment and informed decision-making.

Methods

We qualitatively examined factors contributing to anticipated and actual decision-making about UE VCA and perceptions of the elements of informed consent among people with UE amputations, and UE VCA candidates, participants, and recipients through in-depth interviews. Thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative data.

Results

Fifty individuals participated; most were male (78%) and had a mean age of 45 y and a unilateral amputation (84%). One-third (35%) were "a lot" or "completely" willing to pursue UE VCA. UE VCA decision-making themes included the utility of UE VCA, psychosocial impact of UE VCA and amputation on individuals' lives, altruism, and anticipated burden of UE VCA on lifestyle. Most respondents who underwent UE VCA evaluation (n = 8/10) perceived having no reasonable treatment alternatives. Generally, respondents (n = 50) recognized the potential for familial, societal, cultural, medical, and self-driven pressures to pursue UE VCA among individuals with amputations. Some (n = 9/50, 18%) reported personally feeling "a little," "somewhat," "a lot," or "completely" pressured to pursue UE VCA. Respondents recommended that individuals be informed about the option of UE VCA near the amputation date.

Conclusions

Our study identified psychosocial and other factors affecting decision-making about UE VCA, which should be addressed to enhance informed consent. Study participants' perceptions and preferences about UE VCA suggest re-examination of assumptions guiding the UE VCA clinical evaluation process.

Patient preferences of patient selection criteria for upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation: A qualitative study

Background

Upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation is a life-enhancing reconstructive treatment option that aims to improve recipients' quality of life and maximize function. This study assessed upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation patient selection criteria perceptions among individuals with upper extremity limb loss. The perceptions of individuals with upper extremity limb loss on patient selection criteria may enable vascularized composite allotransplantation centers to improve criteria to avoid mismatched expectations about the posttransplant vascularized composite allotransplantation experience and outcomes. Realistic patient expectations may increase patient adherence, improve outcomes, and reduce vascularized composite allotransplantation graft loss.

Methods

We conducted in-depth interviews with civilian and military service members with upper extremity limb loss and upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation candidates, participants, and recipients from three US institutions. Interviews assessed perceptions of patient selection criteria for suitability as a candidate for upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation. Thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative data.

Results

A total of 50 individuals participated (66% participation rate). Most participants were male (78%), White (72%), with a unilateral limb loss (84%), and a mean age of 45 years. Six themes emerged regarding upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation patient selection criteria, including support for candidates who: (1) are of younger age, (2) are in good physical health, (3) have mental stability, (4) are willing to "put in the work," (5) have specific amputation characteristics, and (6) have sufficient social support. Patients had preferences about selecting candidates with unilateral versus bilateral limb loss.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that numerous factors, including medical, social, and psychological characteristics, inform patients' perceptions of patient selection criteria for upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation. Patient perceptions of patient selection criteria should inform the development of validated screening measures that optimize patient outcomes.

Psychosocial and bioethical challenges and developments for the future of vascularized composite allotransplantation: A scoping review and viewpoint of recent developments and clinical experiences in the field of vascularized composite allotransplantation

Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation (VCA) has evolved in recent years, encompassing hand, face, uterus, penile, and lower extremity transplantation. Accordingly, without centralized oversight by United States Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) or European Programs, centers have developed their own practices and procedures that likely vary, and accordingly, present different levels of rigor to the evaluation process, internationally. The importance of psychosocial factors in the selection process and treatment course has been widely recognized, and therefore, several approaches have been developed to standardize and guide care of VCA candidates and recipients. We propose to develop an international multidisciplinary platform for the exchange of expertise that includes clinical, patient, and research perspectives. Patient perspectives would derive from peer education and the assessment of patient-reported outcomes. To establish a foundation for such a platform, future research should review and combine current VCA protocols, to develop the ethical framework for a standardized psychosocial evaluation and follow-up of VCA candidates and recipients. This review presents a comprehensive overview of recent results in the field of VCA, developments in structural aspects of VCA, and provides viewpoints driven from clinical experience.

Combination of a CD26 Inhibitor, G-CSF, and Short-term Immunosuppressants Modulates Allotransplant Survival and Immunoregulation in a Rodent Hindlimb Allotransplant Model

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have demonstrated that inhibition of CD26 potentiates stromal cell-derived factor-1α (SDF-1α), promotes tissue regeneration, and suppresses the rejection of organ transplants. This study investigated whether the combination of a CD26 inhibitor (CD26i) with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and short-term immunosuppressants modulates vascularized composite tissue allotransplant survival in a rodent orthotopic hindlimb allotransplant model.

METHODS

The hindlimb allotransplantation from Brown-Norway to Lewis rats was divided into 4 groups. Group 1 (controls) did not receive any treatment. Group 2 was treated with short-term antilymphocyte serum (ALS) and cyclosporine-A (CsA). Group 3 was administrated CD26i and G-CSF. Group 4 received a combination of CD26i/G-CSF/ALS/CsA. Each subgroup comprised 10 rats. Peripheral blood and sampling of transplanted tissues were collected for immunological and histological analysis.

RESULTS

The results revealed that allotransplant survival was found to be significantly prolonged in group 4 with CD26i/G-CSF/ALS/CsA treatment compared with those in the other groups. The interleukin-10 and transforming growth factor-βl levels, the percentage of CD4+/CD25+/FoxP3+ T cells, as well as the levels of SDF-1α expressions were significantly increased in group 4 compared with those in the other groups. Group 4 revealed a statistical increase in the percentage of donor cells (RT1n) expression in the recipient peripheral blood, and the mixed lymphocyte reaction showed hyporesponsiveness of the T cells to donor alloantigens.

CONCLUSION

The combination of CD26i/G-CSF and short-term immunosuppressants prolongs allotransplant survival by inducing immunoregulatory effects and enhancing the percentage of SDF-1α expression. This immunomodulatory approach has great potential as a strategy to increase vascularized composite allotransplantation survival.

Attitudes Toward Organ, Tissue, and Vascularized Composite Allograft (VCA) Donation and Transplantation: A Survey of United States Military Veterans

BACKGROUND

There are 20 million living US armed forces veterans; however, the organ donation attitudes of veterans have not been examined.

METHODS

Over a 17-month period, a convenience sample of 1517 veterans in New England completed a survey to assess attitudes about organ, tissue, and vascularized composite allograft (VCA) donation.

RESULTS

Most veterans (96%) supported the donation of organs and tissue for transplantation, and 59% were registered as an organ and tissue donor. Being younger (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.960.970.98; P = 0.01), female (aOR: 1.061.462.03; P = 0.02), non-Hispanic white (aOR: 1.302.073.30; P = 0.01), Hispanic (aOR: 1.282.434.61; P = 0.01), and having more trust that the transplant process is fair and equal (aOR: 1.191.401.65; P = 0.01) were predictive of donor registration. Also, most veterans were willing to donate their face (57%), hands/arms (81%), legs (81%), penis (men: 61%), and uterus (women: 76%) at time of death; donation willingness was higher for upper and lower limbs than for face or genitourinary organs (P < 0.001). Those unwilling to donate VCA organs expressed concerns about identity loss, psychological discomfort of self and others, body integrity, funeral presentation, and religious beliefs. Most (54%) felt that VCA donation should require permission of legal next-of-kin at the time of one's death, even if the decedent was a registered donor.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a high level of support for organ, tissue, and VCA transplantation and donation among veterans, despite limited educational campaigns targeting this population. There is high potential among veterans to further increase donor registry enrollment and raise awareness about VCA benefits for severely injured service members.

Upper extremity and craniofacial vascularized composite allotransplantation: ethics and immunosuppression

Vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) is the name most often used to refer to the transplantation of anatomical units composed of multiple tissue types (skin, bone, muscle, tendon, nerves, vessels, etc.) when such transplants do not have the primary purpose of extending life, as is the case in the more familiar field of solid organ transplantation (SOT). A serious interest in VCA developed in the late twentieth century following advances in immunosuppression which had led to significant improvements in short and medium-term survival among SOT recipients. Several ethical concerns have been raised about VCA, with many being connected in one way or another to the limitations, burdens, and risks associated with immunosuppression. This article will focus on upper extremity and craniofacial VCA, beginning with a brief review of the history of VCA including reported outcomes, followed by a discussion of the range of ethical concerns, before exploring in greater detail how immunological issues inform and shape several of the ethical concerns.