Adverse effects of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors during the postoperative period after cardiac transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Safety of treatment with mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTORi) in the postoperative period after heart transplantation (HT) is controversial. METHODS: We evaluated the incidence of postoperative complications (pericardial, pleural, and surgical wound complications) among nine de novo heart transplant recipients treated with mTORi compared with 19 patients who did not receive them during the same period (control group). RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding sex, age, body mass index, pretransplant diagnosis, history of diabetes mellitus, prior cardiac surgery, or baseline renal function. The main laboratory parameters at 1 month were also similar. During the first 2 months after HT, four patients (44%) in the mTORi group developed severe pericardial effusions requiring drainage, compared to 1 (5%) in the control group (P = .026). All patients presenting this complication in the mTORi group received everolimus. In addition, two cases of sternal dehiscence were observed in the mTORi group, compared to none in the control group (P = .09); one patient on everolimus required sternal reopening and debridement for clinically suspected mediastinitis. Duration of chest tube drainage, quantity of collected pleural fluid, and need for thoracentesis were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In our series, patients receiving mTORi-particularly everolimus-during the postoperative period after HT showed a higher incidence of severe pericardial effusion requiring drainage, as well as a trend toward a higher incidence of sternal dehiscence, as compared to a group not receiving mTORi. The use of mTORi during the early postcardiac transplant period should be individualized.

The efficacy and safety of ezetimibe for treatment of dyslipidemia after heart transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Statins, although the treatment of choice for dyslipidemia after heart transplantation (HT), are not always well tolerated or effective. In such cases, administration of ezetimibe may be useful. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe, with or without statins, after HT. METHOD: Thirty-six HT patients, 97% of whom were males of overall mean age of 57 +/- 13 years, were all unable to reach target lipid levels with statins alone and/or were intolerant of statins. They were prescribed ezetimibe, with or without a statin. Efficacy and safety were evaluated after 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were evaluated at 1 month and 12 months. Ezetimibe was prescribed to 27 patients (75%) because of statin inefficacy, and to 9 patients (25%) because of statin intolerance, manifested by myalgia in 4 cases (11%), hepatotoxicity in 2 cases (6%), and rhabdomyolysis in 3 cases (8%). Lipid levels (mg/dL; baseline vs 1 year) were as follows: cholesterol, 235 +/- 49 versus 167 +/- 32 (P = .013); LDL cholesterol, 137 +/- 47 versus 89 +/- 29 (P = .001); HDL cholesterol, 54 +/- 13 versus 51 +/- 10 (P = .235); and triglycerides, 243 +/- 187 versus 143 +/- 72 (P = .022). There were no cases of liver toxicity, renal dysfunction, or significant alteration of immunosuppressive pharmacokinetics. Ezetimibe was withdrawn from 2 patients because of hand edema or asymptomatic recurrence of rhabdomyolysis first caused by statins. CONCLUSIONS: With or without a statin, ezetimibe was generally well tolerated, reducing total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglyceride levels with no long-term alteration of HDL cholesterol levels. CPK surveillance is recommended because of a slight continued risk of adverse effects. Further studies should evaluate the benefit for survival.

Reversal of cardiac cirrhosis following orthotopic heart transplantation.

Irreversible hepatic cirrhosis greatly increases the risks attending heart transplantation (HT), and is accordingly considered to be an absolute contraindication for HT unless combined heart and liver transplantation can be performed. It is now recognized that hepatic cirrhosis can undergo regression if the source of insult is removed, but no cases of post-HT regression of cirrhosis of cardiac origin have hitherto been reported. Here we report a case of cardiac cirrhosis that underwent complete regression following orthotopic HT, and we discuss the implications of this case.

Late steroid withdrawal after heart transplantation and incidence of acute rejection.

BACKGROUND: Steroid withdrawal (SW) after heart transplantation (HT) reduces steroid-associated side effects, although it can increase acute rejection episodes (ARE). Patient selection criteria for SW and the time elapsed after HT for this maneuver are controversial issues. The objective of this study was to assess the safety of late SW after HT with regard to the occurrence of ARE and to analyze risk factors resulting in a poor evolution. METHODS: We studied a cohort of 24 patients who underwent SW late after HT. All of them had gone at least 4 years without any ARE. Independent variables were time after HT, general recipient and donor data, risk factors for ARE, and immunosuppression. The dependent variables were occurrence of ARE (proven or not proven with endomyocardial biopsy) and time and severity of ARE. RESULTS: Among 24 HT patients including 96% men with an overall mean age of 57 years who underwent SW, the mean follow-up was 2.32 +/- 0.86 years. Six patients (25%) displayed an ARE >or=2R according to the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) at 5 +/- 3 months after SW. There were no deaths. Time from the last rejection episode to SW was 6.6 +/- 2 years. All ARE were treated with steroid boluses (mean total dose 1583 +/- 1044 mg). Among the HT patients with ARE, 5 (85%) had never experienced ARE after HT. Upon long-term follow-up, there were 2 deaths: 1 sudden death at 30 months after SW and 1 due to allograft vasculopathy at 20 months post-SW. Currently 92% are New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I with a mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 67% +/- 10%. CONCLUSIONS: In our series of HT with late SW after HT (even among an HT population with a low risk of rejection), there was a 25% rate of ARE. This study did not allow us to identify risk factors for ARE after SW. We believe that based upon these observations SW should be implemented with caution.

Late noncardiac surgery in heart transplant patients.

OBJECTIVE: Because of improved long-term survival of heart transplants (HT), patients often need noncardiac surgery (NCS). Immunosuppression may increase the infection rate. Inadequate management may increase the risk of dysfunction or acute rejection episodes (ARE). Long-term outcomes of NCS and optimal immunosuppressive management in the perioperative period are not well known. The objective of this study was to analyze the incidence, morbidity, and mortality of late NCS after HT. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the incidence and type of late NCS as well as the risk factors for complications and the mortality among 207 HT patients. Immunosuppression and ARE rates were also analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen late NCS (84.5% elective) were performed in 72 HT patients (34.8%). Interventions were: 35 urologic (30.2%), 29 abdominal (25%), 14 vascular (12.1%), 13 ENT (11.2%), 11 skin and soft tissue (9.5%), and 7 orthopedic (6%). Malignancy was the main indication for NCS (33.6%). Only 4 patients (5.6%) died preoperatively. Mortality was higher among emergent vs elective procedures (16.6% vs 1%; P = .012) and among patients with preoperative high vs middle/low risk (26.6% vs 0%). Postsurgical infection was the most frequent complication (6.9%). However, there were no relevant complications in 82.8% of HT patients. Hospitalization time was <15 days in two thirds of patients. Immunosuppression was modified in 33 patients (28.4%), especially when the surgical indication was neoplasia (P < .001). None of the patients with NCS displayed allograft dysfunction or an ARE. CONCLUSIONS: More than one-third of HT patients needed a late NCS. In our experience, elective surgical procedures with middle/low preoperative cardiovascular risk are safe. In this context, the risk of rejection was low when immunosuppression was carefully monitored to reduce the risk of infection.

Long-term results of heart transplant in recipients older and younger than 65 years: a comparative study of mortality, rejections, and neoplasia in a cohort of 445 patients.

BACKGROUND: Whether being older than 65 years should be considered an absolute counterindication to heart transplant (HT), as it is in some centers, is controversial. In our centre, patients older than 65 years are accepted for HT if they satisfy stringent conditions. The aim of this study was to examine whether heart recipients older than 65 years have a greater risk of rejection, neoplasia, or mortality than younger ones. METHODS: We studied 445 patients who underwent HT between April 1991 and December 2003, 42 of whom were older than 65 years and 403 who were 65 years or younger. The parameters evaluated were the cumulative incidences of neoplasias and rejections (ISHLT grade > or = 3A), and the survival rates 1 month, 1 year, and 5 years post-HT. RESULTS: The two groups had similar percentages of patients with at least one rejection episode (< or =65 years 56.9%, >65 years 51.3%; P > .05), and although there were proportionally almost twice as many tumors in the older group (14.2%) as in the younger (7.9%), this difference was not statistically significant either. Nor were there any significant differences in survival, the 1-month, 1-year, and 5-year rates being 87.8%, 82.1%, and 68.8%, respectively, in the younger group and 85.7%, 78.6%, and 73.4%, respectively, in the older. CONCLUSIONS: Among carefully selected patients aged more than 65 years, HT can be performed without incurring greater risk of rejection, malignancy, or death than is found among recipients younger than 65 years.