Strategies to prevent cellular rejection in pediatric heart transplant recipients

Pediatric heart transplantation: Looking forward after five decades of learning

Heart transplantation has become the standard of care for pediatric patients with end-stage heart disease throughout the world. Since the first transplant was performed in 1967, the number of transplants has grown dramatically with 13 449 pediatric heart transplants being reported to The International Society of Heart and Lung Transplant (ISHLT) between January 1992 and June 30, 2018. Outcomes have consistently improved over the last few decades, specifically short-term outcomes. Most recent survival data demonstrate that recipients who survive to 1-year post-transplant have excellent long-term survival with more than 60% of those who were transplanted as infants being alive 25 years later. Nonetheless, the rates of graft loss beyond the first year have remained relatively constant over time; driven primarily by our poor understanding and lack of treatments for chronic allograft vasculopathy (CAV). Acute rejection, CAV, graft failure, and infection continue to be the major causes of death within the first 5 years post-transplant. In addition, renal dysfunction, malignancy, and the need for re-transplantation remain as significant issues that require close follow-up. Looking forward, key challenges include improving donor utilization rates (including donation after cardiac death (DCD) and the use of ex vivo perfusion devices), the development of non-invasive biomarkers for rejection, efforts to mitigate the long-term effects of immunosuppression, and prevention of CAV. It is not possible to cover the entire evolution of pediatric heart transplantation over the last five decades, but in this review, we hope to touch on key observations, lessons learned, and practice changes that have advanced the field, as well as glance ahead to the next decade.

Cardiac allograft vasculopathy: A review

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation has become the standard of care for pediatric patients with end-stage heart disease, and outcomes have consistently improved over the last few decades. CAV, however, remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in heart transplantation and is the leading cause of death beyond 3 years post-transplantation. We sought out to provide an in-depth overview of CAV in the pediatric heart transplant population.

METHODS

Database searches were conducted in both Medline and Embase on the topic of cardiac vasculopathy in pediatric heart transplant recipients. The search used five broad concept terms: heart transplant; pediatric; CAV; diagnosis, prognosis, and risk factors; and guidelines and reviews. References were captured if there was at least one term in each of the concepts. The search was limited to articles in the English language.

RESULTS

A total of 148 articles were identified via the literature search with further articles identified via review of references. Pediatric data regarding the etiology and development of CAV remain limited although knowledge about the immune and non-immune factors playing a role are increasing. CAV continues to be difficult to detect with many invasive and non-invasive methods available, yet their effectiveness in the detection of CAV remains suboptimal. There remains no proven medical intervention to treat or reverse established CAV disease, and CAV is associated with high rates of graft loss once detected. However, several medications are used in hopes of preventing, slowing progression, or modifying the outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This review provides a comprehensive overview of CAV, discusses its clinical presentation, risk factors, diagnostic tools used to identify CAV in the pediatric population, and highlights the current therapeutic options and the need for ongoing research.

Use of sirolimus in pediatric heart transplant patients: A multi-institutional study from the Pediatric Heart Transplant Study Group

BACKGROUND

Proliferation signal inhibitors, such as sirolimus, are increasingly used in solid-organ transplantation. However, limited data exist on sirolimus-treated pediatric patients. We aimed to describe sirolimus use in pediatric heart transplant patients and test the hypothesis that sirolimus use is associated with improved outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review and propensity-matched analysis of the Pediatric Heart Transplant Study database was performed on patients undergoing primary heart transplantation from 2004 to 2013 with at least 1 year of follow-up comparing patients treated vs not treated with sirolimus at 1 year after transplant. The primary outcome of interest was patient survival, with secondary outcomes including cardiac allograft vasculopathy, rejection, malignancy, and renal insufficiency.

RESULTS

Between 2004 and 2013, 2,531 patients underwent transplantation. At least 1 year of follow-up was available for 2,080 patients, of whom 144 (7%) were on sirolimus at 1 year post-transplant. Sirolimus-treated and non-treated patients had similar survival in the overall cohorts and in the propensity-matched analysis. The secondary outcomes measures were also similar, including a composite end point of all outcome measures. There was a trend toward increased time to cardiac allograft vasculopathy (p = 0.09) and decreased time to infection (p = 0.05) among sirolimus-treated patients in the overall cohort (p = 0.19) but not in the propensity-matched cohort (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Sirolimus was used in less than 10% of patients at 1 year post-transplant. Overall outcomes of sirolimus treated and non-treated patients were similar with respect to survival and major transplant adverse events. Further study of sirolimus in pediatric heart transplant patients is needed.

Heart Transplantation-The Pediatric Cardiac Critical Care Perspective

OBJECTIVES

Although there have been tremendous advancements in the care of severe pediatric cardiovascular disease, heart transplantation remains the standard therapy for end-stage heart disease in children. As such, these patients comprise an important and often complex subset of patients in the ICU. The purpose of this article is to review the causes and management of allograft dysfunction and the medications used in the transplant population.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane Database of systemic reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric heart transplant recipients represent a complex group of patients that frequently require critical care. Their immunosuppressive medications, while being vital to maintenance of allograft function, are associated with significant short- and long-term complications. Graft dysfunction can occur from a variety of etiologies at different times following transplantation and remains a major limitation to long-term posttransplant survival.

Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Society 2014 Consensus Statement: Pharmacotherapies in Cardiac Critical Care Immune Therapy

OBJECTIVE

In this Consensus Statement, we review the etiology and pathophysiology of inflammatory processes seen in critically ill children with cardiac disease. Immunomodulatory therapies aimed at improving outcomes in patients with myocarditis, heart failure, and transplantation are extensively reviewed.

DATA SOURCES

The author team experience and along with an extensive review of the medical literature were used as data sources.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The authors synthesized the data in the literature to present current immumodulatory therapies. For each drug, the physiologic rationale, mechanism of action, and pharmacokinetics are synthesized, and the evidence in the literature to support the therapy is discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunomodulation has a crucial role in the treatment of certain pediatric cardiac diseases. Immunomodulatory treatments that have been used to treat myocarditis include corticosteroids, IV immunoglobulin, cyclosporine, and azathioprine. Contemporary outcomes of pediatric transplant recipients have improved over the past few decades, partly related to improvements in immunomodulatory therapy to prevent rejection of the donor heart. Immunosuppression therapy is commonly divided into induction, maintenance, and acute rejection therapy. Common induction medications include antithymocyte globulin, muromonab-CD3, and basiliximab. Maintenance therapy includes chronic medications that are used daily to prevent rejection episodes. Examples of maintenance medications are corticosteroids, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, sirolimus, everolimus, azathioprine, and mycophenolate mofetil. Rejection of the donor heart is diagnosed either by clinically or by biopsy and is treated with intensification of immunosuppression.

Everolimus in heart transplantation: an update

The evidence base relating to the use of everolimus in heart transplantation has expanded considerably in recent years, providing clinically relevant information regarding its use in clinical practice. Unless there are special considerations to take into account, all de novo heart transplant patients can be regarded as potential candidates for immunosuppression with everolimus and reduced-exposure calcineurin inhibitor therapy. Caution about the use of everolimus immediately after transplantation should be exercised in certain patients with the risk of severe proteinuria, with poor wound healing, or with uncontrolled severe hyperlipidemia. Initiation of everolimus in the early phase aftertransplant is not advisable in patients with severe pretransplant end-organ dysfunction or in patients on a left ventricular assist device beforetransplant who are at high risk of infection or of wound healing complications. The most frequent reason for introducing everolimus in maintenance heart transplant patients is to support minimization or withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitor therapy, for example, due to impaired renal function or malignancy. Due to its potential to inhibit the progression of cardiac allograft vasculopathy and to reduce cytomegalovirus infection, everolimus should be initiated as soon as possible after heart transplantation. Immediate and adequate reduction of CNI exposure is mandatory from the start of everolimus therapy.