Extracorporeal photopheresis and its role in heart transplant rejection: prophylaxis and treatment.

Heart transplantation is the gold standard therapeutic option for select patients with end-stage heart failure. Unfortunately, successful long-term outcomes of heart transplantation can be hindered by immune-mediated rejection of the cardiac allograft, specifically acute cellular rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Extracorporeal photopheresis is a cellular immunotherapy that involves the collection and treatment of white blood cells contained in the buffy coat with a photoactive psoralen compound, 8-methoxy psoralen, and subsequent irradiation with ultraviolet A light. This process is thought to cause DNA and RNA crosslinking, ultimately leading to cell destruction. The true mechanism of therapeutic action remains unknown. In the last three decades, extracorporeal photopheresis has shown promising results and is indicated for a variety of conditions. The American Society for Apheresis currently recommends the use of extracorporeal photopheresis for the treatment of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, scleroderma, psoriasis, pemphigus vulgaris, atopic dermatitis, graft-versus-host disease, Crohn's disease, nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, and solid organ rejection in heart, lung, and liver transplantation. In this review, we aim to explore the proposed effects of extracorporeal photopheresis and to summarize published data on its use as a prophylactic and therapy in heart transplant rejection.

A Comparison of the Minimal-Touch Technique and the Eversion Technique for Microvascular Anastomosis in a Rat Model.

Background During microvascular anastomosis, needle placement is facilitated by inserting the tips of the forceps into the lumen of the vessel, rather than grasping and everting the luminal wall, to minimize trauma to the vessel. This study examines whether the vessel wall can be grasped and everted during microvascular anastomosis without compromising surgical outcomes. Methods A total of 20 Sprague-Dawley rats weighing between 252 and 483 g were used. Bilateral anastomoses of the animals' femoral arteries (mean size: 0.90 mm) were performed using two different techniques: the classic minimal-touch approach and the eversion technique. The first 10 animals were survived for 48 hours and the second 10 animals were survived for 2 weeks. Patency was assessed immediately after surgery and just before sacrifice. Hematoxylin and eosin stains were performed and each anastomosis scored according to a grading rubric assessing endothelial cell loss, neointimal proliferation, medial necrosis, adventitial inflammation, and inflammation thickness. Results The patency rates of both techniques were identical (100%). There was no difference in the patency rates of anastomoses evaluated 48 hours after surgery (100%) and 2 weeks after surgery (100%). Histological outcomes between the minimal-touch technique and the eversion method were similar. The thickness of adventitial inflammation at 2 weeks was the only outcome found to be statistically different (p = 0.046) between the two treatments and this difference favored the eversion technique (i.e., less inflammation thickness). Conclusion The eversion method of performing microvascular anastomosis provides comparable results to the classic minimal-touch approach in rat femoral artery anastomoses.

Attitudes, Practices, and Training on Informed Consent for Transfusions and Procedures: A Survey of Medical Students and Physicians.

OBJECTIVES: While many studies have demonstrated problems with informed consent in current practice, there remains controversy on how to address this. The aim of this study was to evaluate the opinions, attitudes, practices, and training for informed consent. METHODS: Medical students, residents, advanced practice providers, and attending physicians at an academic institution were invited to complete a survey on informed consent for transfusions and procedures through an electronic platform. RESULTS: Most (94%, n = 304) respondents indicated previous training in informed consent, only 60% (n = 192) felt the training was adequate, and 35% (n = 92) indicated difficulties with informed consent. When asked what would aid in obtaining consent, 59% (n = 189) selected a written guideline, and 36% (n = 117) selected patient simulation. CONCLUSIONS: Only 60% of respondents felt their informed consent training was adequate. Multiple areas of difficulty in obtaining proper informed consent were identified that should be addressed with focused training or written guidelines.