Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical Outcomes of Perioperative Desensitization in Heart Transplant Recipients.
Plazak, Michael E; Gale, Stormi E; Reed, Brent N; Hammad, Sara; Ton, Van-Khue; Kaczorowski, David J; Madathil, Ronson J; Ravichandran, Bharath.
Afiliación
  • Plazak ME; Department of Pharmacy, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD.
  • Gale SE; Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD.
  • Reed BN; Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD.
  • Hammad S; Department of Pharmacy, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD.
  • Ton VK; Division of Cardiology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
  • Kaczorowski DJ; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Madathil RJ; Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Ravichandran B; Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Transplant Direct ; 7(2): e658, 2021 Feb.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33521247
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Sensitization remains a barrier to heart transplantation (HT). Perioperative desensitization strategies have been described; however, a paucity of evidence exists to demonstrate efficacy and safety in HT.

METHODS:

This single-center, retrospective study consisted of adults who received an HT. Perioperative desensitization was initiated if virtual crossmatch or flow-cytometry crossmatch was positive. Therapy consisted of plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, and rabbit antithymocyte globulin. Historical controls received standard immunosuppression or induction. The primary endpoint was survival at 12 mo. Secondary endpoints included freedom from acute rejection, cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), and infectious complications.

RESULTS:

Of the 104 patients included, 48 received no induction, 46 received induction, and 10 underwent perioperative desensitization. No differences were observed in the primary endpoint at 12 mo (90.0% versus 97.9%, P = 0.25 for desensitization versus no-induction; 90.0% versus 100%, P = 0.72 for desensitization versus induction). Rates of acute rejection were lower with induction and desensitization compared with no-induction. There were no significant differences in CAV between the groups. Infectious complications were also similar among the groups (10.0% versus 16.7%, P = 0.62 for desensitization versus no-induction; 10.0% versus 30.4%, P = 0.34 for desensitization versus induction).

CONCLUSIONS:

This study suggests that a perioperative desensitization strategy triggered by positive virtual crossmatch or flow-cytometry crossmatch allows for successful transplantation of sensitized HT recipients and results in acceptable rates of survival, rejection, CAV, and infection at 12 mo.

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: Transplant Direct Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Moldova

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: Transplant Direct Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Moldova