Transaminitis after pancreatic islet transplantation.

BACKGROUND: An asymptomatic, self-limited transaminitis uniformly follows pancreatic islet transplantation (PIT) performed through portal vein (PV) infusion. The underlying cause and significance of this transaminitis is unclear. STUDY DESIGN: Records of all patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus who had undergone PIT at our institution were reviewed. All PITs were performed in conjunction with a remote pancreatic islet isolation center and done through percutaneous transhepatic PV infusion. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, serum glucose concentrations, insulin requirements, and color-flow Doppler ultrasonography examinations of the right upper quadrant were assessed before and after PIT. RESULTS: Eleven patients have undergone a total of 26 PITs. An elevated ALT level occurred in all 11 patients (100%) after the first PIT, with the median post-PIT peak ALT level reaching 187 IU/L. Transaminitis was less frequent and less marked after the second PIT. A negative correlation between viability of the pancreatic islets transplanted (r = -0.44, p = 0.03) and a positive correlation between the ratio of maximum to initial PV pressure (r = 0.41, p = 0.04) were seen with the subsequent ALT peak. Color-flow Doppler ultrasonography examinations showed no occurrences of PV thrombosis or intrahepatic hematoma. Finally, the degree of transaminitis did not correlate with post-PIT insulin requirements, indicating that post-PIT transaminitis cannot be used to measure allograft rejection or function. CONCLUSIONS: Transaminitis after PIT is common and self-limited. Post-PIT transaminitis does not signal acute rejection or serious procedure-related complications such as PV thrombosis or intrahepatic hematoma.

Pharmacologic immunosuppression.

Clinical organ transplantation only became a viable treatment option after the advent of effective pharmacologic immunosuppression. Azathioprine and steroids were among the first drugs available for pharmacologic immunosuppression allowed for the first long-term successes in kidney and liver transplantation, though survivors experienced significant adverse effects of the immunosuppression. Azathioprine is an antimetabolite which inhibits the de novo and salvage pathways of purine synthesis. This results in lymphocyte suppression but also toxicity to bone marrow, gastrointestinal tract, and liver. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), another antimetabolite drug, inhibits only the de novo purine synthesis pathway. Corticosteroids cause immunosuppression mainly by sequestration of CD4+ T-lymphocytes in the reticuloendothelial system and by inhibiting the transcription of cytokines. Corticosteroids have adverse effects on virtually every system in the body, producing many dose-limiting problems such as osteoporosis, obesity and glucose intolerance. The introduction of cyclosporine in 1983 allowed for further improvements in graft survival, and the incidence of acute rejection decreased. Cyclosporine and the more recently-introduced tacrolimus compose the class of immunosuppressive agents called calcineurin inhibitors. By binding calcineurin and preventing its translocation into the nucleus these drugs prevent transcription and subsequent secretion of IL-2. These drugs produce varying degrees of nephrotoxicity, neurotoxicity and glucose intolerance. Rapamycin also inhibits IL-2 expression, though by interaction with the mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) protein. The use of antibody to produce immunosuppression began with polyclonal sera developed in animals such as horses or goats. The mechanism by which polyclonal sera causes immunosuppression is not well understood, though cell-mediated cytotoxicity of lymphocytes in the circulation may be one major effect. In contrast, the monoclonal antibody OKT3 is specific for the T-cell receptor (TCR)/CD3 complex, thus preventing activation of T-lymphocutes. Most recently, human and chimeric murine monoclonal antibodies daclizumab and basiliximab have provided effective induction therapy with virtually no adverse effects. While the improved efficacy and decreased adverse effects immunosuppressive agents account for much of the progress in the field of transplantation, current immunosuppression medications not perfect. Ideally, medications would inducing graft tolerance while avoiding generalized immunosuppression and non-immunologic adverse effects. Future research will likely focus on molecular- and gene-level mechanisms to achieve this goal.

Development of a human pancreatic islet-transplant program through a collaborative relationship with a remote islet-isolation center.

BACKGROUND: With the development of the Edmonton Protocol, pancreatic islet transplantation (PIT) now offers insulin-dependent diabetic patients metabolic stability. The PIT Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, pancreatic islet isolation (PII) techniques, and clinical PIT protocols are challenging and make PIT program development daunting. PURPOSE: Review of the establishment of a PIT program through a collaborative relationship with a remote PIT/PII center. METHODS: Four key elements are required: (1) development of a collaborative relationship with an established PIT/PII center, (2) achievement of institutional review board and FDA approval at both centers, (3) generation of standard operating procedures, and (4) development of a multidisciplinary PIT team. RESULTS: Securing a collaborative relationship with an experienced PIT/PII center permitted our program to develop in less than 18 months. Twenty-two PITs were completed in the first clinical year. CONCLUSIONS: Collaboration with an experienced PIT/PII center allows developing programs to focus on patient safety and care, prudent use of pancreata, and consolidates PII expertise and experience.

Pancreatic islet transplantation: the radiographic approach.

BACKGROUND: Successful pancreatic islet transplantation (PIT) has resulted in several transplant centers wanting to start PIT programs. PIT remains experimental and must be performed safely for its continued use. We describe the radiographic techniques used at our center and their results. METHODS: Between January 17, 2002, and December 16, 2002, 17 percutaneous transhepatic PITs were performed by two interventional radiologists. Ultrasound localization of and guidance to the portal vein (PV) were used. Portosplenography confirmed the position of the PV islet infusion catheter, and PV pressure was documented before, during, and at the completion of PIT. To prevent PV thrombosis, heparin (17.5 U/kg) through the PV infusion catheter and subcutaneous enoxaparin (Lovenox, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Parsippany, NJ) were administered after PIT. At the completion of PIT, thrombin-saturated Gelfoam (Johnson and Johnson, Summerville, NJ) was embolized into the hepatic parenchymal tract. RESULTS: Percutaneous PV access was achieved in all cases (median number of seeker needle passes=2, range: 1-6), and PIT was performed. In no case was any extrahepatic organ punctured, and sustained PV hypertension was not seen. No patient required transfusion, and it was documented by Doppler ultrasonography that PV thrombosis did not result from PIT. In addition, intraparenchymal and intraabdominal bleeding did not complicate any PIT; 71% and 59% of the patients experienced moderate posttransplant abdominal pain and nausea, respectively. All patients demonstrated a self-limited, asymptomatic posttransplant transaminitis. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that PIT should be performed by a small number of experienced interventional radiologists using ultrasound guidance and posttransplant embolization of the hepatic parenchymal tract.

Achievement of insulin independence in three consecutive type-1 diabetic patients via pancreatic islet transplantation using islets isolated at a remote islet isolation center.

BACKGROUND: As a result of advances in both immunosuppressive protocols and pancreatic islet isolation techniques, insulin independence has recently been achieved in several patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus via pancreatic islet transplantation (PIT). Although the dissemination of immunosuppressive protocols is quite easy, transferring the knowledge and expertise required to isolate a large number of quality human islets for transplantation is a far greater challenge. Therefore, in an attempt to centralize the critical islet processing needed for islet transplantation and to avoid the development of another islet processing center, we have established a collaborative islet transplant program between two geographically distant transplant centers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three consecutive patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus with a history of severe hypoglycemia and metabolic instability underwent PIT at the Methodist Hospital (TMH), Houston, Texas, using pancreatic islets. All pancreatic islets were isolated from pancreata procured in Houston and subsequently transported for isolation to the Human Islet Cell Processing Facility of the Diabetes Research Institute (DRI) at the University of Miami, Miami, Florida. Pancreatic islets were isolated at DRI after enzymatic ductal perfusion (Liberase-HI) by the automated method (Ricordi Chamber) using endotoxin-free and xenoprotein-free media. After purification, the islets were immediately transported back to TMH and transplanted via percutaneous transhepatic portal embolization. Immunosuppression consisted of sirolimus, tacrolimus, and daclizumab. RESULTS: After donor cross-clamp in Houston, donor pancreata arrived at DRI and the isolation process began within 6.5 hr in all cases (median, 5.4 hr; range, 4.8-6.5 hr). At the completion of the isolation process, the islets were immediately transported back to TMH and transplanted. All three patients attained sustained insulin independence after transplantation of 395,567, 394,381, and 563,206 pancreatic islet equivalents (IEQ), respectively. Despite insulin independence, the first two patients received less than 10,000 IEQ/kg; therefore, to increase their functional pancreatic islet reserve, they underwent a second islet transplant with 326,720 and 768,132 IEQ, respectively. Posttransplantation follow-up for these three patients is 4, 3, and 0.5 months, respectively. The mean glycosylated hemoglobin values have been dramatically reduced in the first two patients. In addition, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions have also been reduced in all three recipients (patient 1: before transplantation 197 mg/dL vs. after transplantation 61 mg/dL; patient 2: before transplantation 202 mg/dL vs. after transplantation 52 mg/dL; patient 3: before transplantation 245 mg/dL vs. after transplantation 58 mg/dL) after PIT. All pancreatic islet allografts demonstrated the ability to respond to an in vitro glucose stimulus at the DRI before shipment and at TMH after shipment and final processing with a median stimulation index of 2.1 and 2.2, respectively. None of the transplant recipients have had a hyper- or hypoglycemic episode since PIT and no complications have occurred. CONCLUSIONS: These early data demonstrate that (1) pancreatic islets remain viable after shipment to remote transplant sites; (2) pancreatic islet isolation techniques and experience can be concentrated at a small number of regional facilities that could supply islets to remote transplant centers; and (3) insulin independence via PIT can be achieved using a remote pancreatic islet isolation center.