Utilization of increased risk for transmission of infectious disease donor organs in solid organ transplantation: Retrospective analysis of disease transmission and safety

Donor-Derived Infection's Prevention and Control in Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to summarize the experience of donor selection and recipient therapy in the face of potential donor-derived infections and improve the quality of donor organ utilization, which would help reduce the risk of infection after recipient operation and decrease the risk of loss or even death of recipient kidney transplantation.

METHODS

In this study, 132 kidneys from 70 donors and their recipients who underwent surgery between July 2017 and January 2021 were studied to perform a retrospective analysis of their etiologic examination results and treatment process.

RESULTS

In the 70 donors, only 25 had negative etiologic examination results, accounting for 35.71%. Among the 132 recipients, 31.82% had positive culture results, 3 (2.27%) experienced donor-derived infections, and one died.

CONCLUSIONS

Although infection in the donor before the donation is quite common, the incidence of donor-derived infections is relatively low. The targeted and preventive application of adequate sensitive antibiotics in the whole course of therapy was the cornerstone for treating recipients at potential risk of potential donor-derived infection. The changes in infection indicators in the recipient should be closely monitored, which would guide medication adjustments timely. These measures could, to a great degree, ensure the prognosis of the recipient, in turn reducing the adverse events caused by donor-derived infections.

Donor heart selection: Evidence-based guidelines for providers

The proposed donor heart selection guidelines provide evidence-based and expert-consensus recommendations for the selection of donor hearts following brain death. These recommendations were compiled by an international panel of experts based on an extensive literature review.

Prevalence of Blood-Borne Viruses and Predictors of Risk in Potential Organ Donors in Australia

Internationally, the designation of a patient as an increased viral risk organ donor has been associated with lower utilisation rates. The actual prevalence of blood borne viruses in Australian potential organ donors, and the predictive performance of questionnaires administered to stratify this risk, remains unknown. We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who commenced workup for donation on the national database between 2014-2020. The prevalence of HIV, Active HBV and Active HCV in 3650 potential organ donors was 0.16%, 0.9%, and 2.2%, respectively. The behavioural risk profile was assessed in a subset of 3633 patients. Next-of-kin reported increased risk behaviours were associated with an increased prevalence of HCV but not of HIV or HBV (OR 13.8, p < 0.01, OR 0.3. p = 0.42, OR 1.5, p = 0.14). Furthermore, the majority of HIV and HBV infections occurred in potential donors without a disclosed history of increased risk behaviours. In this series, donors had a higher prevalence of HCV, and similar rates of HBV and HIV to the broader community. Behavioural transmission risks were poorly predictive of HIV and HBV. Rather than pre-transplantation behavioural risk screening, routine post-transplant recipient screening may provide a more powerful tool in mitigating the consequences of unexpected viral transmission.

Heterogeneity in transplant center responses to the minimum acceptance criteria across UNOS regions

Transplantation of organs from increased risk donors for infection transmission (IRDs) is increasing. These organs confer survival benefit to recipients. This study examined transplant center acceptance policies for IRD kidneys across United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) regions, based on transplant centers' annual responses to the Minimum Acceptance Criteria (MAC) for acceptance of IRD kidneys, and the association with national and regional IRD kidney utilization. De-identified MAC responses from all transplant centers in the United States from 2007 to 2019 were obtained. Implementation of MAC responses into practice was evaluated based on annual rates of recovery and transplantation of IRD kidneys, by MAC and UNOS region. Nationally, the number of transplant centers willing to accept IRD kidneys across all criteria increased from 22% in 2007 to 64% in 2019. Acceptance rates increased markedly from donors with intravenous drug use and other potential HIV exposures. However, significant heterogeneity exists in transplant center willingness to accept IRD kidneys, both regionally and between criteria. Trends towards increasing acceptance are strongly associated with higher rates of recovery and transplantation of IRD kidneys. Further research on provider- and center-based refusal to consider IRD kidneys for waitlisted patients is needed to improve utilization of this organ pool.

Pre-transplant donor HBV DNA+ and male recipient are independent risk factors for treatment failure in HBsAg+ donors to HBsAg- kidney transplant recipients

Background

In order to reduce the burden on organ shortage around the world, using potential infectious donor might be an option. However, scarce evidences have been published on kidney transplantation (KTx) from hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) + donors to HBsAg- recipients [D (HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg-)] without hepatitis B virus (HBV) immunity. Here, we reported the results of D(HBsAg+/HBV DNA- or +)/R(HBsAg-) living KTx recipients with or without HBV immunity.

Methods

We retrospectively identified 83 D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg-) living KTx recipients, and 83 hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) + living donors to HBcAb- recipients [D(HBcAb+)/R(HBcAb-)] were used as control group by reviewing medical archives and propensity score matching. Treatment failure (defined as any HBV serology conversion, liver injury, graft loss, or recipient death) is the primary endpoint.

Results

Twenty-four donors (28.9%) were HBV DNA+, and 20 recipients had no HBV immunity in the D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg-) group pre-transplantation. HBV prophylaxis was applied in all D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg-) recipients, while none was applied in the D(HBcAb+)/R(HBcAb-) group. We observed a significant higher treatment failure in D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg-) than D(HBcAb+)/R(HBcAb-) group (21.7% vs. 10.8%, P < 0.001). Interestingly, no significant difference was found between groups on HBV seroconversion, liver and graft function, rejection, infection, graft loss, or death. However, 2/20 recipients without HBV immunity in the D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg-) group developed HBV DNA+ or HBsAg+, while none observed in the D(HBcAb+)/R(HBcAb-) group. HBV DNA+ donor and male recipient were significant risk factors for treatment failure.

Conclusion

D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg-) should be considered for living kidney transplantation, but with extra caution on donors with HBV DNA+ and male candidates.

Screening of donors and recipients for infections prior to solid organ transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is a brief overview of current guidelines on screening donors and candidates for bacterial, fungal, parasitic and viral infections prior to solid organ transplantation. The pretransplant period is an important time to evaluate infection exposure risk based on social history as well as to offer vaccinations.

RECENT FINDINGS

One of the major changes in the past few years has been increased utilization of increased Public Health Service risk, HIV positive, and hepatitis C-positive donors. There has also been increased attention to donor and recipient risks for geographically associated infections, such as endemic fungal infections and flaviviruses.

SUMMARY

Screening for donors and candidates prior to organ transplantation can identify and address infection risks. Diagnosing infections in a timely manner can help guide treatment and additional testing. Use of necessary prophylactic treatment in organ recipients can prevent reactivation of latent infections and improve posttransplant outcomes.

Kidney Transplantation From Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg)–Positive Living Donors to HBsAg-Negative Recipients: Clinical Outcomes at a High-Volume Center in China

Background

Data on kidney transplantation (KTx) from hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)–positive (HBsAg+) donors to HBsAg-negative (HBsAg−) recipients [D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg-)] are limited. We aimed to report the outcomes of D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) KTx in recipients with or without hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb).

Methods

Eighty-three D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) living KTx cases were retrospectively identified. The 384 cases of KTx from hepatitis B core antibody–positive (HBcAb+) living donors to HBcAb-negative (HBcAb−) recipients [D(HBcAb+)/R(HBcAb−)] were used as the control group. The primary endpoint was posttransplant HBsAg status change from negative to postive (-− →+).

Results

Before KTx, 24 donors (28.9%) in the D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) group were hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA positive, and 20 recipients were HBsAb−. All 83 D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) recipients received HBV prophylaxis, while no D(HBcAb+)/R(HBcAb−) recipients received prophylaxis. After a median follow-up of 36 months (range, 6–106) and 36 months (range, 4–107) for the D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) and D(HBcAb+)/R(HBcAb−) groups, respectively, 2 of 83 (2.41%) D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) recipients and 1 of 384 (0.26%) D(HBcAb+)/R(HBcAb−) became HBsAg+, accompanied by HBV DNA-positive (P = .083). The 3 recipients with HBsAg−→+ were exclusively HBsAb−/HBcAb− before KTx. Recipient deaths were more frequent in the D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) group (6.02% vs 1.04%, P = .011), while liver and graft function, rejection, infection, and graft loss were not significantly different. In univariate analyses, pretransplant HBsAb−/HBcAb− combination in the D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) recipients carried a significantly higher risk of HBsAg−→+, HBV DNA−→+, and death.

Conclusions

Living D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) KTx in HBsAb+ recipients provides excellent graft and patient survivals without HBV transmission. HBV transmission risks should be more balanced with respect to benefits of D(HBsAg+)/R(HBsAg−) KTx in HBsAb-/HBcAb− candidates.

Pediatric heart transplant from an incompletely treated influenza A-positive donor

There is a shortage of pediatric donor hearts for waitlisted children, and yet nearly 50% of organs offered are not transplanted. Donor quality is often cited as a reason for declining organs offered from donors infected with influenza, presumably due to concern about disease transmission at transplant leading to severe disease. We previously described an excellent outcome after heart transplant from a donor infected with influenza B that had been treated with a complete course of oseltamivir. In this report, we describe a similar outcome after transplantation of an organ from an influenza A-positive donor with symptomatic disease incompletely treated with oseltamivir. Due to the availability of effective antiviral treatment, we suggest that influenza A is also a manageable donor infection that need not preclude heart placement.

Utilizing increased risk for disease transmission (IRD) kidneys for pediatric renal transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Strategies to expand numbers of deceased donor kidneys suitable for pediatric recipients are urgently needed to prevent long-term dialysis-associated morbidity and mortality. Donors designated as increased risk of disease transmission (IRD) are infrequently used in pediatric recipients. We examined outcomes of these kidneys in pediatric patients and the potential to increase the donor pool.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database records presence of IRD in all deceased donors since 2004. All pediatric kidney transplant recipients from 2004 to 2017 were identified and stratified by IRD status, and outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

Four hundred seventy-three pediatric kidney transplant recipients received an IRD allograft. IRD donors had lower kidney donor profile index (KDPI); were more likely to be younger, male, and Caucasian; and were more likely to have used drugs. IRD kidneys were more likely to have been biopsied and placed on pulsatile perfusion. Other than an older recipient age, demographic data were not different between groups. Allograft and patient survivals were similar, as were rejection and delayed graft function rates. Compared with adult recipients and adult IRD recipients, pediatric recipients were more likely to have a younger donor, receive a kidney with a lower creatinine, and were less likely to have delayed graft function (p < 0.05). There were no recorded disease transmissions in IRD group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and allograft survivals are similar in IRD and non-IRD kidneys. High-quality IRD organs used in adults represent a large number of donors with excellent outcomes. IRD allografts have a potential to increase transplant volume and should be considered for pediatric patients.

Pre-emptive pangenotypic direct acting antiviral therapy in donor HCV-positive to recipient HCV-negative heart transplantation: an open-label study

BACKGROUND

Low donor heart availability underscores the need to identify all potentially transplantable organs. We sought to determine whether pre-emptive administration of pangenotypic direct-acting antiviral therapy can safely prevent the development of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in uninfected recipients of HCV-infected donor hearts.

METHODS

Patients were recruited for this an open-label, single-centre, proof-of-concept study from Nov 1, 2017, to Nov 30, 2018. Following enrolment, the recipient's status on the heart transplantation waiting list was updated to reflect a willingness to accept either an HCV-positive or HCV-negative heart donor. Patients who underwent transplantation with a viraemic donor heart, as determined by nucleic acid testing (NAT), received pre-emptive oral glecaprevir-pibrentasvir before transport to the operating room followed by an 8-week course of glecaprevir-pibrentasvir after transplantation. Patients receiving HCV antibody-positive donor hearts without detectable circulating HCV RNA were followed using a reactive approach and started glecaprevir-pibrentasvir only if they developed viraemia. The primary outcome was achievement of sustained virological response 12 weeks after completion of glecaprevir-pibrentasvir therapy (SVR12). Patients were followed from study enrolment to 1 year after transplantation. This is an interim analysis, initiated after all enrolled patients reached the primary outcome. Results reflect data from Nov 1, 2017, to May 30, 2019. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03208244.

FINDINGS

55 patients were assessed for eligibility and 52 consented to enrolment. 25 patients underwent heart transplantation with HCV-positive donor hearts (20 NAT-positive, five NAT-negative), three of whom underwent simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation. All 20 recipients of NAT-positive hearts tolerated glecaprevir-pibrentasvir and showed rapid viral suppression (median time to clearance 3·5 days, IQR 0·0-8·3), with the subsequent achievement of SVR12 by all 20. The five recipients of NAT-negative grafts did not become viraemic. Median pre-transplant waiting time for patients following enrolment in the HCV protocol was 20 days (IQR 8-57). Patient and allograft survival were 100% at a median follow-up of 10·7 months (range 6·5-18·0).

INTERPRETATION

Pre-emptive administration of glecaprevir-pibrentasvir therapy results in expedited organ transplantation, rapid HCV suppression, prevention of chronic HCV infection, and excellent early allograft function in patients receiving HCV-infected donor hearts. Long-term outcomes are not yet known.

FUNDING

American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, National Institutes of Health, and the Massachusetts General Hospital.

Kidney transplant outcomes associated with the use of increased risk donors in children

Increased risk donors (IRDs) may inadvertently transmit blood-borne viruses to organ recipients through transplant. Rates of IRD kidney transplants in children and the associated outcomes are unknown. We used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to identify pediatric deceased donor kidney transplants that were performed in the United States between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2015. We used the Cox regression analysis to compare patient and graft survival between IRD and non-IRD recipients, and a sequential Cox approach to evaluate survival benefit after IRD transplants compared with remaining on the waitlist and never accepting an IRD kidney. We studied 328 recipients with and 4850 without IRD transplants. The annual IRD transplant rates ranged from 3.4% to 13.2%. IRDs were more likely to be male (P = .04), black (P < .001), and die from head trauma (P = .006). IRD recipients had higher mean cPRA (0.085 vs 0.065, P = .02). After multivariate adjustment, patient survival after IRD transplants was significantly higher compared with remaining on the waitlist (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.26-0.88, P = .018); however, patient (aHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.54-1.59, P = .79) and graft survival (aHR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.70-1.13, P = .32) were similar between IRD and non-IRD recipients. We recommend that IRDs be considered for transplant in children.

Pediatric heart transplantation from an influenza B-positive donor

As heart transplantation demand is increasing without subsequent growth of the donor pool, need for expansion of acceptance criteria is paramount, particularly when considering critically ill, highly sensitized patients. We present a case report of a pediatric heart transplant recipient of an organ refused by 197 prior potential recipients due to the donor being infected with influenza virus. We perform a literature review of recent solid organ transplant cases from influenza-positive donors and conclude that the donor pool may be expandable by allowing donors with treatable infections to be included.

Is This Organ Donor Safe?: Donor-Derived Infections in Solid Organ Transplantation

Infection is an inevitable complication of solid organ transplantation. Unrecognized infection may be transmitted from a donor and result in disseminated disease in the immunosuppressed host. Recent outbreaks of deceased donor-derived infections resulting in high rates of mortality and severe morbidity have emphasized the need to be cautious in using donors with possible meningoencephalitis. Screening of organ donors for potential transmissible infections is paramount to improving transplantation outcomes.

Is This Organ Donor Safe?: Donor-Derived Infections in Solid Organ Transplantation

Infection is an inevitable complication of solid organ transplantation. Unrecognized infection may be transmitted from a donor and result in disseminated disease in the immunosuppressed host. Recent outbreaks of deceased donor-derived infections resulting in high rates of mortality and severe morbidity have emphasized the need to be cautious in using donors with possible meningoencephalitis. Screening of organ donors for potential transmissible infections is paramount to improving transplantation outcomes.

An Update in Antimicrobial Therapies and Infection Prevention in Pediatric Lung Transplant Recipients

Lung transplantation can offer life-prolonging therapy to children with otherwise terminal end-stage lung disease. However, infectious complications, like those experienced by their adult counterparts, are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. These include bacteria, viruses, and fungi that infect the patient pretransplant and those that may be acquired from the donor or by the recipient in the months to years posttransplant. An understanding of the approach to the management of each potential infecting organism is required to ensure optimal outcomes. In particular, emphasis on aggressive preoperative management of infections in pediatric patients with cystic fibrosis is important. These include multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, fungi, and Mycobacterium abscessus, the posttransplant outcome of which depends on optimal pretransplant management, including vaccination and other preventive, antibiotic-sparing strategies. Similarly, increasing the transplant donor pool to meet rising transplant demands is an issue of critical importance. Expanded-criteria donors-those at increased risk of blood-borne viruses in particular-are increasingly being considered and transplants undertaken to meet the rising demand. There is growing evidence in the adult pool that these transplants are safe and associated with comparable outcomes. Pediatric transplanters are therefore likely to be presented with increased-risk donors for their patients. Finally, numerous novel antibiotic-sparing therapeutic approaches are on the horizon to help combat infections that currently compromise transplant outcomes.

Infectious disease risks in xenotransplantation

Hurdles exist to clinical xenotransplantation including potential infectious transmission from nonhuman species to xenograft recipients. In anticipation of clinical trials of xenotransplantation, the associated infectious risks have been investigated. Swine and immunocompromised humans share some potential pathogens. Swine herpesviruses including porcine cytomegalovirus (PCMV) and porcine lymphotropic herpesvirus (PLHV) are largely species-specific and do not, generally, infect human cells. Human cellular receptors exist for porcine endogenous retrovirus (PERV), which infects certain human-derived cell lines in vitro. PERV-inactivated pigs have been produced recently. Human infection due to PERV has not been described. A screening paradigm can be applied to exclude potential human pathogens from "designated pathogen free" breeding colonies. Various microbiological assays have been developed for screening and diagnosis including antibody-based tests and qualitative and quantitative molecular assays for viruses. Additional assays may be required to diagnose pig-specific organisms in human xenograft recipients. Significant progress has been made in the evaluation of the potential infectious risks of clinical xenotransplantation. Infectious risk would be amplified by intensive immunosuppression. The available data suggest that risks of xenotransplant-associated recipient infection are manageable and that clinical trials can be performed safely. Possible infectious risks of xenotransplantation to the community at large are undefined but merit consideration.