RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Vascularized Composite Allografts (VCA) are usually performed in a full major histocompatibility complex mismatch setting, with a risk of acute rejection depending on factors such as the type of immunosuppression therapy and the quality of graft preservation. In this systematic review, we present the different immunosuppression protocols used in VCA and point out relationships between acute rejection rates and possible factors that might influence it. METHODS: This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We systematically searched Medline (PubMed), Embase, and The Cochrane Library between November 2022 and February 2023, using following Mesh Terms: Transplant, Transplantation, Hand, Face, Uterus, Penis, Abdominal Wall, Larynx, and Composite Tissue Allografts. All VCA case reports and reviews describing multiple case reports were included. RESULTS: We discovered 211 VCA cases reported. The preferred treatment was a combination of antithymocyte globulins, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), tacrolimus, and steroids; and a combination of MMF, tacrolimus, and steroids for induction and maintenance treatment, respectively. Burn patients showed a higher acute rejection rate (P = 0.073) and were administered higher MMF doses (P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to previous statements, the field of VCA is not rapidly evolving, as it has encountered challenges in addressing immune-related concerns. This is highlighted by the absence of a standardized immunosuppression regimen. Consequently, more substantial data are required to draw more conclusive results regarding the immunogenicity of VCAs and the potential superiority of one immunosuppressive treatment over another. Future efforts should be made to report the VCA surgeries comprehensively, and muti-institutional long-term prospective follow-up studies should be performed to compare the number of acute rejections with influencing factors.
