Patient Advocacy in Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation

First-in-Human Whole-Eye Transplantation: Ensuring an Ethical Approach to Surgical Innovation

As innovations in the field of vascular composite allotransplantation (VCA) progress, whole-eye transplantation (WET) is poised to transition from non-human mammalian models to living human recipients. Present treatment options for vision loss are generally considered suboptimal, and attendant concerns ranging from aesthetics and prosthesis maintenance to social stigma may be mitigated by WET. Potential benefits to WET recipients may also include partial vision restoration, psychosocial benefits related to identity and social integration, improvements in physical comfort and function, and reduced surgical risk associated with a biologic eye compared to a prosthesis. Perioperative and postoperative risks of WET are expected to be comparable to those of facial transplantation (FT), and may be similarly mitigated by immunosuppressive protocols, adequate psychosocial support, and a thorough selection process for both the recipient and donor. To minimize the risks associated with immunosuppressive medications, the first attempts in human recipients will likely be performed in conjunction with a FT. If first-in-human attempts at combined FT-WET prove successful and the biologic eye survives, this opens the door for further advancement in the field of vision restoration by means of a viable surgical option. This analysis integrates recent innovations in WET research with the existing discourse on the ethics of surgical innovation and offers preliminary guidance to VCA programs considering undertaking WET in human recipients.

Patient definitions of transplant success in upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation: A mixed-methods study

Objective

Upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation is an innovative treatment option for people with upper extremity amputations. Limited patient-relevant long-term outcomes data about transplant success may impede patients' informed treatment decision-making. We assessed perceptions of what constitutes upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation success among individuals with upper extremity amputations.

Methods

This multisite study entailed interviews and focus groups with individuals with upper extremity amputations and upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation candidates, participants, and recipients. We examined perceptions of transplant success and preferences for five upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation outcomes. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis; and quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

In all, 50 individuals participated in interviews (61.7% participation rate), and 37 participated in nine focus groups (75.5% participation rate). Most were White (72%, 73%), had a mean age of 45 and 48 years, and had a unilateral amputation (84%, 59%), respectively. Participants conceptualized upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation success as transplant outcomes: (1) restoring function and sensation to enable new activities; (2) accepting the transplanted limb into one's identity and appearance; (3) not having transplant rejection; (4) attaining greater quality of life compared to prosthetics; and (5) ensuring benefits outweigh risks. Participants rated their most important upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation outcomes as follows: not having transplant rejection, not developing health complications, grasping objects, feeling touch and temperature, and accepting the upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation into your identity.

Conclusion

Individuals with upper extremity amputations maintain several conceptions of vascularized composite allotransplantation success, spanning functional, psychosocial, clinical, and quality of life outcomes. Providers should address patients' conceptions of success to improve informed consent discussions and outcomes reporting for upper extremity vascularized composite allotransplantation.

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.