Antibody desensitization therapy in highly sensitized lung transplant candidates.

As HLAs antibody detection technology has evolved, there is now detailed HLA antibody information available on prospective transplant recipients. Determining single antigen antibody specificity allows for a calculated panel reactive antibodies (cPRA) value, providing an estimate of the effective donor pool. For broadly sensitized lung transplant candidates (cPRA ≥ 80%), our center adopted a pretransplant multi-modal desensitization protocol in an effort to decrease the cPRA and expand the donor pool. This desensitization protocol included plasmapheresis, solumedrol, bortezomib and rituximab given in combination over 19 days followed by intravenous immunoglobulin. Eight of 18 candidates completed therapy with the primary reasons for early discontinuation being transplant (by avoiding unacceptable antigens) or thrombocytopenia. In a mixed-model analysis, there were no significant changes in PRA or cPRA changes over time with the protocol. A sub-analysis of the median fluorescence intensity (MFI) change indicated a small decline that was significant in antibodies with MFI 5000-10,000. Nine of 18 candidates subsequently had a transplant. Posttransplant survival in these nine recipients was comparable to other pretransplant-sensitized recipients who did not receive therapy. In summary, an aggressive multi-modal desensitization protocol does not significantly reduce pretransplant HLA antibodies in a broadly sensitized lung transplant candidate cohort.

[Multidisciplinary experience in the approach to the hypertensive patient]. / Uma experiência multiprofissional na abordagem ao paciente hipertenso.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of the educational activities on the approach of patients with hypertension, with an interdisciplinary team. METHODS: Fifty patients divided into two groups: A) with 25 patients who participated in educational activities in the Hypertension League (HL) and B) who were also registered and did not take part in the activities. They were studied regarding blood pressure (BP), weight control, smoking habits, alcoholic beverage consumption, physical activities and frequency of medical care. RESULTS: There was a drop in BP of 84% of the patients in group A and 88% in group B, a drop in weight in 60% of group A and 44% of group B. We registered the presence of 4% of smokers in group A and 16% in group B. Physical activities were regular in 56% of group A and 36% in group B. Absenteeism to meetings was slightly higher among group B (44%) when compared with group A (30%). CONCLUSION: In spite of not having observed any significant differences between both approaches, regarding to strict BP control, we were able to observe a noticeable advantage in favor of the educational approach to the group, with participation of interdisciplinary team.