-
Pediatric Transplantation May 2017The process of pediatric solid organ transplantation (SOT) places new and increased stressors on patients and family members. Measures of family functioning may predict... (Review)
Review
The process of pediatric solid organ transplantation (SOT) places new and increased stressors on patients and family members. Measures of family functioning may predict psychological and health outcomes for pediatric patients and their families, and provide opportunity for targeted intervention. This systematic review investigated parent and family functioning and factors associated with poorer functioning in the pediatric SOT population. Thirty-seven studies were identified and reviewed. Studies featured a range of organ populations (eg, heart, liver, kidney, lung, intestine) at various stages in the transplant process. Findings highlighted that parents of pediatric SOT populations commonly report increased stress and mental health symptoms, including posttraumatic stress disorder. Pediatric SOT is also associated with increased family stress and burden throughout the transplant process. Measures of parent and family functioning were associated with several important health-related factors, such as medication adherence, readiness for discharge, and number of hospitalizations. Overall, findings suggest that family stress and burden persists post-transplant, and parent and family functioning is associated with health-related factors in SOT, highlighting family-level functioning as an important target for future intervention.
Topics: Caregivers; Child; Family; Family Health; Female; Hospitalization; Humans; Male; Medication Adherence; Organ Transplantation; Parenting; Parents; Patient Discharge; Postoperative Period; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 28181361
DOI: 10.1111/petr.12900 -
Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain... Aug 2022Solid-organ transplantation (SOT) from SARS-CoV-2 positive donors could be a life-saving opportunity worth grasping. We perform a systematic review to evaluate the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Solid-organ transplantation (SOT) from SARS-CoV-2 positive donors could be a life-saving opportunity worth grasping. We perform a systematic review to evaluate the recipient outcomes of SOT from donors with recent or current SARS-CoV-2 infection.
METHODS
Search strategy was performed in PubMed, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and Web of Science databases from the 1 of January 2019 to the 31 of December 2021. SOT adult recipients from a donor with past or current SARS-CoV-2 infection were elegible for inclusion. Outcomes were viral transmission, COVID-19 symptoms, mortality, hospital stay, and complications. PROSPERO Register Number: CRD42022303242 FINDINGS: Sixty-nine recipients received 48 kidneys, 18 livers and 3 hearts from 57 donors. Six additional transplants from positive lungs were identified. IgG+ anti-SARS-CoV-2 titers were detected among 10/16 recipients; only 4% (3/69) recipients were vaccinated. Non-lung transplant recipients received organs from 10/57 (17.5%) donors with persistent COVID-19. In 18/57 donors, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected (median 32 Cycle threshold [Ct]) at procurement. Among non-lung transplant recipients, SARS-CoV-2 viral transmission was not documented. Four patients presented delayed graft dysfunction, two patients acute rejection, and two patients died of septic shock. The median (IQR) hospital stay was 18 (11-28) days in recipients from symptomatic donors. Viral transmission occurred from three lung donors to their recipients, who developed COVID-19 symptoms. One of the recipients subsequently died.
CONCLUSION
Use of non-lung (kidney, liver and heart) organs from SARS-CoV-2 positive donors seem to be a safe practice, with a low risk of transmission irrespective of the presence of symptoms at the time of procurement. Low viral replication (Ct > 30) was safe among non-lung donors, even if persistently symptomatic at procurement.
Topics: Adult; COVID-19; Humans; Organ Transplantation; RNA, Viral; SARS-CoV-2; Tissue Donors
PubMed: 35533977
DOI: 10.1016/j.accpm.2022.101098 -
Transplantation Reviews (Orlando, Fla.) Jan 2019Reviews on alcohol use in transplant recipients focus on liver recipients and their risk of post-transplant rejection, but do not assess alcohol use in kidney, heart, or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Reviews on alcohol use in transplant recipients focus on liver recipients and their risk of post-transplant rejection, but do not assess alcohol use in kidney, heart, or lung transplant recipients. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthesize the evidence on correlates and outcomes of any alcohol use and at-risk drinking after solid organ transplantation (Tx).
METHODS
We searched 4 databases for quantitative studies in adult heart, liver, kidney and lung Tx recipients, investigating associations between post-Tx alcohol use and correlates and/or clinical, economic or quality of life outcomes. Paper selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by 2 reviewers independently. A pooled odds ratio (OR) was computed for each correlate/outcome reported ≥5 times.
RESULTS
Of the 5331 studies identified, 76 were included in this systematic review (93.3% on liver Tx; mean sample size 148.9 (SD = 160.2); 71.9% male; mean age 48.9 years (SD = 6.5); mean time post-Tx 57.7 months (SD = 23.1)). On average, 23.6% of patients studied used alcohol post-transplant. Ninety-three correlates of any post-Tx alcohol use were identified, and 9 of the 19 pooled ORs were significantly associated with a higher odds for any post-Tx alcohol use: male gender, being employed post-transplant, smoking pre-transplant, smoking post-transplant, a history of illicit drug use, having first-degree relatives who have alcohol-related problems, sobriety <6 months prior to transplant, a history of psychiatric illness, and having received treatment for alcohol-related problems pre-transplant. On average 15.1% of patients had at-risk drinking. A pooled OR was calculated for 6 of the 47 correlates of post-Tx at risk drinking investigated, of which pre-transplant smoking was the only correlate being significantly associated with this behavior. None of the outcomes investigated were significantly associated with any use or at-risk drinking.
CONCLUSION
Correlates of alcohol use remain under-investigated in solid organ transplant recipients other than liver transplantation. Further research is needed to determine whether any alcohol use or at-risk drinking is associated with poorer post-transplant outcomes. Our meta-analysis highlights avenues for future research of higher methodological quality and improved clinical care.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO protocol CRD42015003333.
Topics: Alcohol Drinking; Humans; Organ Transplantation; Quality of Life; Transplant Recipients
PubMed: 30472153
DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2018.09.003 -
Renal Failure Dec 2023Pre-emptive kidney transplantation (PEKT), i.e., transplantation performed before initiation of maintenance dialysis, is considered an ideal renal replacement therapy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pre-emptive kidney transplantation (PEKT), i.e., transplantation performed before initiation of maintenance dialysis, is considered an ideal renal replacement therapy because there is no exposure to long-term dialysis therapy. Therefore, we summarized advantages/disadvantages of PEKT to assist in deciding whether kidney transplantation should be performed pre-emptively.
METHODS
This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021269163. Observational studies comparing clinical outcomes between PEKT and non-PEKT were included; those involving only pediatric recipients or simultaneous multi-organ transplantations were excluded. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases were searched on 1 August 2021. Studies were pooled using the generic inverse-variance method with random effects model, and risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I.
RESULTS
Seventy-six studies were included in the systematic review (sample size, 23-121,853; enrollment year, 1968-2019). PEKT patients had lower all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 0.78 [95% CI 0.66-0.92]), and lower death-censored graft failure (0.81 [0.67-0.98]). Unadjusted RRs for the following outcomes were comparable between the two patient groups: cardiovascular disease, 0.90 (0.58-1.40); biopsy-proven acute rejection, 0.75 (0.55-1.03); cytomegalovirus infection, 1.04 (0.85-1.29); and urinary tract infection, 0.89 (0.61-1.29). Mean differences in post-transplant QOL score were comparable in both groups. The certainty of evidence for mortality and graft failure was moderate and that for other outcomes was very low following the GRADE classification.
CONCLUSIONS
The present meta-analysis shows the potential benefits of PEKT, especially regarding patient and graft survival, and therefore PEKT is recommended for adults with end-stage kidney disease.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Child; Kidney Transplantation; Quality of Life; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Renal Dialysis; Cytomegalovirus Infections
PubMed: 36705051
DOI: 10.1080/0886022X.2023.2169618 -
Transplant Immunology Dec 2021ABO-incompatible liver transplantation (ABOi-LT) is increasingly used to overcome donor shortage. Evidence about disadvantage and advantage in comparison with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
ABO-incompatible liver transplantation (ABOi-LT) is increasingly used to overcome donor shortage. Evidence about disadvantage and advantage in comparison with ABO-compatible liver transplantation (ABOc-LT) needs to be performed in the early and late periods. Herein, We compared the short-term and long-term outcomes between ABOi-LT and ABOc-LT cohorts.
METHODS
We performed a meta-analysis based on the observation studies which included outcomes at ≥1 year after ABOi-LT and ABOc-LT procedures, based on the MEDLINE (via Pubmed), the Cochrance Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and EMBASE (via Ovid) systems. Two researchers independently screened each study according to the pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria to assess the quality of each study and extracted data from published studies. The primary outcome indicators were all-cause mortality and graft survival at 1, 3 and 5 years after transplantation. In the meta-analysis, we based on the value of heterogeneity using a fixed-effect and a random-effect. A fixed-effect model was used if the value of I2 was less than or equal 50%; and a random-effect model was used if the value of I2 was greater than 50%.
FINDINGS
Out of 335 identified records, 29 records with 10,783 patients with liver transplants; 2137 of them were ABOi-LTs and the remaining 8646 were ABOc-LTs. There was no significant difference at 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year in all-cause mortality, death-censored graft survival and complication incidence rate between ABO-incompatible living donor liver transplantation (ABOi-LDLT) group and ABO-compatible living donor liver transplantation (ABOc-LDLT) group. Compared with ABO-compatible deceased donor liver transplantation (ABOc-DDLT), ABO-incompatible deceased donor liver transplantation (ABOi-DDLT) had a higher 1-year all-cause mortality, and the value of totally pooled odds ratio (OR) was 1.89 (1.28,2.80). However, there was no significant difference at 3-year and 5-year all-cause mortality between ABOi-DDLT and ABOc-DDLT groups. ABOi-DDLT group had a lower 1-year and 5-year death-censored graft survival than ABOc-DDLT, as the value of totally pooled OR was 1.91 (1.41,2.60) and 1.52 (1.12,2.05), respectively. No significant difference was detected at 3-year death-censored graft survival between ABOi-DDLT and ABOc-DDLT groups. ABOi-DDLT group had a higher complication incidence rate than ABOc-DDLT, and the value of totally pooled OR was 2.26 (1.53,3.33). We found no obvious bias except for the complication of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT; P = 0.038).
IN CONCLUSION
The short-term and long-term outcomes were worse after ABOi-DDLT than ABOc-DDLT in the all-cause mortality, death-censored graft survival, and complication incidence rate. However, the same outcomes were essentially comparable between ABOi-LDLT vs. ABOc-LDLT cohorts. Considering the current shortage of liver donors, we believe that ABOi-LT from living donor and deceased donors can save lives under emergency situations.
Topics: ABO Blood-Group System; Blood Group Incompatibility; Graft Rejection; Graft Survival; Humans; Liver Transplantation; Living Donors; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34601097
DOI: 10.1016/j.trim.2021.101476 -
World Journal of Surgery Dec 2019Significant numbers of patients in the USA and UK die while waiting for solid organ transplant. Only 1-2% of deaths are eligible as donors with a fraction of the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Significant numbers of patients in the USA and UK die while waiting for solid organ transplant. Only 1-2% of deaths are eligible as donors with a fraction of the deceased donating organs. The form of consent to donation may affect the organs available. Forms of consent include: opt-in, mandated choice, opt-out, and organ conscription. Opt-in and opt-out are commonly practiced. A systematic review was conducted to determine the effect of opt-in versus opt-out consent on the deceased donation rate (DDR) and deceased transplantation rate (DTR).
METHODS
Literature searches of PubMed and EMBASE between 2006 and 2016 were performed. Research studies were selected based on certain inclusion criteria which include USA, UK, and Spain; compare opt-in versus opt-out; primary data analysis; and reported DDR or DTR. Modeled effect on US transplant activity was conducted using public data from Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and Centers for Disease Control WONDER from 2006 to 2015.
RESULTS
A total of 2400 studies were screened and six studies were included. Four studies reported opt-out consent increases DDR by 21-76% over 5-14 years. These studies compared 13-25 opt-out countries versus 9-23 opt-in countries. Three studies reported opt-out consent increases DTR by 38-83% over 11-13 years. These studies compared 22-25 opt-out versus 22-28 opt-in countries. Modeled opt-out activity on the USA resulted in 4753-17,201 additional transplants annually.
CONCLUSION
Opt-out consent increases DDR and DTR and may be useful in decreasing deaths on the waiting list in the USA and other countries.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42019098759.
Topics: Humans; Informed Consent; Organ Transplantation; Tissue and Organ Procurement; Waiting Lists
PubMed: 31428836
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-019-05118-4 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Feb 2022Mycophenolic acid (MPA) is an immunosuppressive drug commonly used for prophylaxis of graft rejection in solid organ transplant recipients. The main concern with the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
Mycophenolic acid (MPA) is an immunosuppressive drug commonly used for prophylaxis of graft rejection in solid organ transplant recipients. The main concern with the prolonged use of immunosuppressive drugs is the risk of developing cancer. However, it remains unclear whether the immunosuppressive regimens containing MPA confer an increased degree of cancer risk. The present study aimed to determine the association between MPA exposure and the incidence of cancer in solid organ transplant recipients.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed on the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Relevant articles that had findings on the incidence (or event) of cancer in cohorts with and without MPA exposure were retrieved for data extraction. A meta-analysis was conducted by means of the random-effects model, and the relative risk (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used as a summary effect measure.
RESULTS
A total of 39 studies were eligible for inclusion, with 32 studies that enabled meta-analysis. MPA exposure was significantly associated with a lower risk of cancer when compared to azathioprine exposure (RR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.53-0.81, P < .001) or no exposure to any additional treatments (RR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.73-0.99, P = .04). There was no significant difference in cancer risk for the comparison between MPA exposure and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor exposure (RR = 1.54, 95% CI = 0.96-2.46, P = .07).
CONCLUSIONS
MPA exposure was not associated with an increased risk of cancer and may even be associated with a lower risk of cancer when compared to azathioprine or no treatment.
Topics: Azathioprine; Graft Rejection; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Mycophenolic Acid; Neoplasms; Organ Transplantation; Risk
PubMed: 34240462
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14979 -
Transplantation Jun 2012Alemtuzumab (MabCampath or Campath; Genzyme, Cambridge, MA) is a CD52-specific monoclonal antibody that causes profound and sustained lymphocyte depletion. Its use as an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Alemtuzumab (MabCampath or Campath; Genzyme, Cambridge, MA) is a CD52-specific monoclonal antibody that causes profound and sustained lymphocyte depletion. Its use as an induction therapy in organ transplantation is increasing. Since our last systematic review in 2006, where we identified the need for good-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), several RCTs have been published that examine its efficacy and safety in kidney transplantation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the current evidence for alemtuzumab induction therapy in kidney transplantation.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Transplant Library from the Centre for Evidence in Transplantation, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Inclusion criteria specified all RCTs in which kidney transplant recipients receiving induction with alemtuzumab were compared with those receiving another induction agent or no induction. Studies were assessed for methodological quality. The primary outcome was the incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) (Banff grade ≥1), and secondary outcomes included graft loss, renal function, delayed graft function (DGF), patient death, and the incidence of infection, autoimmunity, malignancy, and new-onset diabetes mellitus after transplantation.
RESULTS
Ten RCTs, with a total of 1223 patients, were included. Studies were grouped according to induction regimens. Alemtuzumab induction has a lower risk of BPAR compared with induction with the interleukin-2 receptor antibodies (IL-2RAs): basiliximab (Simulect; Novartis, Basel, Switzerland) and daclizumab (Zenapax; Roche, Basel, Switzerland) combined (relative risk, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.79; P<0.01). No significant difference was observed in the risk of BPAR when alemtuzumab induction was compared with rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) (Thymoglobulin [Genzyme] or ATG-Fresenius S [Fresenius, Munich, Germany]) (relative risk, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.21; P=0.28). There was no difference in graft loss, DGF, patient death, and new-onset diabetes mellitus after transplantation when alemtuzumab was compared with IL-2RAs or rATG induction. The effect of alemtuzumab induction on renal function and the incidence of infection, malignancy, and autoimmunity were limited by the data available. There were two trials comparing alemtuzumab with no induction, but neither trial reported a significant reduction in BPAR at 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS
Alemtuzumab induction reduces the risk of BPAR compared with IL-2RAs but not rATG. Because the incidence of other efficacy outcomes (graft loss, DGF, and patient death) was similar, if it is felt that an induction agent is necessary, then our analysis suggests that it is more acceptable to base the choice of induction agent on safety outcomes and/or costs.
Topics: Alemtuzumab; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents; Graft Rejection; Humans; Kidney Transplantation; Lymphocyte Depletion; Risk Factors; Transplantation Conditioning
PubMed: 22660659
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e318257ad41 -
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and... Feb 2020Calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) can significantly improve the results of solid organ transplantation regarding graft and patient survival. However, the high cost, chronic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE
Calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) can significantly improve the results of solid organ transplantation regarding graft and patient survival. However, the high cost, chronic nephrotoxicity and other side effects are major challenges for the long-term use of these drugs. Ketoconazole can significantly increase the plasma concentration of CNIs by inhibiting the activity of the cytochrome P450 enzyme. The combination of ketoconazole-CNIs can reduce the cost of medication for patients by reducing the dosage of CNIs, but its safety is still controversial. Therefore, this study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of this combination.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials on ketoconazole and CNI (cyclosporin or tacrolimus) co-administration in solid organ transplantation. Two authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. The meta-analysis was performed in RevMan 5.3 provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019118796.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Five relevant trials with 326 patients were included. Compared with the controls, ketoconazole combined with CNIs can significantly reduce the dose of CNIs in patients receiving solid organ transplantation (WMD = -203.04 mg/day; 95% CI: -310.51 to -95.57, P = .0002). There was no significant difference in serum creatinine between the experimental group and the control group (WMD = -0.19 mg/mL; 95% CI: -0.52 to 0.14, P = .26). In addition, there was no significant difference in the number of rejections between the two groups (OR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.22, P = .15).
WHAT'S NEW AND CONCLUSION
The co-administration of ketoconazole and CNIs can significantly reduce the dose of CNIs. This combination may be safely used as a CNI-sparing agent from the time of solid organ transplantation with low-dose ketoconazole, based on the findings of this review.
Topics: Calcineurin Inhibitors; Cyclosporine; Cytochrome P-450 Enzyme Inhibitors; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Ketoconazole; Organ Transplantation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tacrolimus
PubMed: 31571253
DOI: 10.1111/jcpt.13043 -
Transplantation Jul 2018The best approach for determining whether a transplant program is delivering high-quality care is unknown. This review aims to identify and characterize quality metrics...
BACKGROUND
The best approach for determining whether a transplant program is delivering high-quality care is unknown. This review aims to identify and characterize quality metrics in solid organ transplantation.
METHODS
Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception until February 1, 2017. Relevant full text reports and conference abstracts that examined quality metrics in organ transplantation were included. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and quality metrics from 52 full text reports and 24 abstracts. PROSPERO registration: CRD42016035353.
RESULTS
Three hundred seventeen quality metrics were identified and condensed into 114 unique indicators with sufficient detail to be measured in practice; however, many lacked details on development and selection, were poorly defined, or had inconsistent definitions. The process for selecting quality indicators was described in only 5 publications and patient involvement was noted in only 1. Twenty-four reports used the indicators in clinical care, including 12 quality improvement studies. Only 14 quality metrics were assessed against patient and graft survivals.
CONCLUSIONS
More than 300 quality metrics have been reported in transplantation but many lacked details on development and selection, were poorly defined, or had inconsistent definitions. Measures have focused on safety and effectiveness with very few addressing other quality domains, such as equity and patient-centeredness. Future research will need to focus on transparent and objective metric development with proper testing, evaluation, and implementation in practice. Patients will need to be involved to ensure that transplantation quality metrics measure what is important to them.
Topics: Graft Survival; Humans; Organ Transplantation; Patient Participation; Quality Improvement; Quality of Health Care
PubMed: 29557915
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000002149