Intestinal transplantation: an update.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The role of intestinal transplant has expanded in recent years and is no longer only considered for patients with no other options remaining. 5 year survival in high-volume centres is over 80% for certain graft types. The aim of this review is to update the audience on the current state of intestinal transplant, with a focus on recent medical and surgical advances. RECENT FINDINGS: There has been a greater understanding of the interplay and balance of host and graft immune responses, which may facilitate individualized immunosuppression. Some centres are now performing 'no-stoma' transplants, with preliminary data showing no adverse effects from this strategy and other surgical advances have lessened the physiological insult of the transplant operation. Earlier referrals are encouraged by transplant centres, such that vascular access or liver disease has not progressed too much to increase the technical and physiological challenge of the procedure. SUMMARY: Clinicians should consider intestinal transplant as a viable option for patients with intestinal failure, benign unresectable abdominal tumours or acute abdominal catastrophes.

Decline in renal function following intestinal transplant: is the die cast at 3 months?

INTRODUCTION: This study reports the incidence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) after intestinal transplant (IT) at a single, adult center in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A retrospective review of IT was undertaken. Methods of renal function assessment pre-transplant were compared. Post-transplant renal function and renal sparing strategies were analyzed. RESULTS: There was a 30% variation (p < .001) in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and normalized GFR at assessment. In the first 3 months post-transplant, there was a 40% decline in eGFR which was irreversible. Liver inclusion was not protective with similar eGFR at 3 months (60 ml/min/1.73 m2 ) compared with IT (55 ml/min/1.73 m2 ). The rate of decline in the first 2 months was less in multivisceral transplant (MVT; 21%) than IT (52%) suggesting surgical magnitude did not contribute. Thirty percentage of recipients had acute cellular rejection post-transplant; 58% of these were in the first 3 months with a higher proportion in MVT (64%) than IT (27%). Tacrolimus exposure did not correlate with decline in renal function over the first 3 months post-transplant. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated a 40% decline in renal function within 3 months post-IT which was irreversible despite renal sparing strategies. Early intervention should be considered in patients with an acute decline in this post-transplant period.

Renal transplantation during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the UK: Experience from a large-volume center.

There is uncertainty about the safety of kidney transplantation during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic due to the risk of donor transmission, nosocomial infection and immunosuppression use. We describe organ donation and transplant practice in the UK and assess whether kidney transplantation conferred a substantial risk of harm. Data from the UK transplant registry were used to describe kidney donation and transplant activity in the UK, and a detailed analysis of short-term, single-center, patient results in two periods: during the pre-pandemic era from 30th December 2019 to 8th March 2020 ("Pre-COVID era") and the 9th March 2020 to 19th May 2020 ("COVID era"). Donor and recipient numbers fell by more than half in the COVID compared to the pre-COVID era in the UK, but there were more kidney transplants performed in our center (42 vs. 29 COVID vs. pre-COVID respectively). Overall outcomes, including re-operation, delayed graft function, primary non-function, acute rejection, length of stay and graft survival were similar between COVID and pre-COVID era. 6/71 patients became infected with SARS-CoV-2 but all were discharged without critical care requirement. Transplant outcomes have remained similar within the COVID period and no serious sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection were observed in the peri-transplant period.

Graft versus host disease after multivisceral transplantation: A UK center experience and update on management.

Graft versus host disease (GVHD) following transplantation of an intestine-containing graft occurs more frequently than with other solid organ transplants and is known to have a poor outcome. The presentation differs from other solid organ transplants, as the gastrointestinal tract is not involved following intestinal transplant. Diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms arising due to native tissue damage and the detection of donor T lymphocytes in circulating blood (T-cell chimerism). The ideal treatment strategy has not been defined, with advocates for both increased and decreased immunosuppression. We reviewed all cases of GVHD in an adult intestinal transplant center in the United Kingdom and report on management strategies of five cases and methods of detecting T-cell chimerism. The practice in our center has evolved with experience. The first two patients received an increase in immunosuppression, which was only successful in one case. Subsequently, reducing immunosuppression has been more effective. However, patients with bone marrow involvement have a poorer prognosis. We demonstrate successful treatment of GVHD after multivisceral transplant with a reduction in immunosuppression. This should be followed by vigilant graft surveillance and serial monitoring of the level of T-cell chimerism, with reintroduction of immunosuppression at the earliest sign of graft dysfunction.

A single-centre experience of Roux-en-Y enteric drainage for pancreas transplantation.

Exocrine drainage following pancreas transplantation can be achieved by drainage into the bladder or bowel, the latter typically by direct duodeno-jejunostomy; the use of Roux-en-Y enteric drainage is uncommon. We report a retrospective analysis of a single-centre experience of Roux-en-Y enteric drainage following pancreas transplantation. Over a 14-year period (2001-2015), 204 consecutive adult pancreas transplants were performed (96.6% simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplants), of which 26.0% were from donors after circulatory death (DCD). During a median follow-up of 67 months (range 13-183 months), 14 (6.9%) recipients experienced complications related to their enteric drainage. Complications during follow-up included early enteric anastomotic haemorrhage (five patients), non-anastomotic enteric bleeding (one patient), small bowel obstruction (four patients) and graft duodenal perforation (two within 6 weeks, five beyond 12 months). No recipient lost their graft as a direct result of complications related to enteric drainage. Patient and pancreas graft survival at 1 year was 99.0% and 94.0% and at 5 years 91.3% and 84.9%, respectively. We conclude that Roux-en-Y enteric drainage following pancreas transplantation is a safe and effective procedure and facilitates graft salvage in the event of graft duodenal perforation.

Simultaneous Intestinal and Kidney Transplantation in Adults.

Aim of the study: Intestinal transplantation (IT) is a life-saving procedure for carefully selected patients with intestinal failure. We evaluated patients who had undergone simultaneous intestinal and kidney transplantation (SIKT) to determine whether UK guidelines for inclusion of a renal allograft (dialysis dependent or estimated glomerular filtration rate ((eGFR)) < 45 ml/min/1.73 m2) are justified. Methods: A single centre analysis was undertaken of adults undergoing IT at the Cambridge Transplant Centre between December 2007 and January 2016. A prospectively maintained database was used to identify SIKT recipients and determine outcomes. Results: Over this period, 63 intestinal transplants were performed. Seven (11.1%) recipients received a SIKT. Five were pre-dialysis (median eGFR 29 ml/min/1.73 m2, range 16-36 ml/min/1.73 m2). One recipient was on dialysis, and one needed bilateral nephrectomy at transplant. There were no primary kidney allograft failures and at three months, the median eGFR (55 ml/min/1.73 m2 range 39-124) was similar to recipients of IT alone (median eGFR 56 ml/min/1.73 m2 range 17-143 ml/min/1.73 m2). Two recipients required dialysis due to sepsis related kidney injury and died from multi-organ failure (20 and 63 months). Two died with a functioning renal transplant (10 and 15 months). The remaining three patients are alive at follow up (12-96 months) with an eGFR of 20-45 ml/min/1.73 m2. Conclusion: Patients with significant renal impairment (eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m2), and receiving dialysis may benefit from SIKT. Patient survival and renal function are broadly comparable to those undergoing IT alone. Further studies are required to justify allocation of a kidney to this complex high risk group.

Alemtuzumab (Campath-1H): a systematic review in organ transplantation.

Alemtuzumab (Campath-1H) is a powerful antilymphocyte antibody that produces profound and long-lasting lymphopenia. It is being used with increasing frequency for induction in organ transplantation, with the aim of allowing steroid-free and/or calcineurin-free/sparing maintenance immunosuppressive protocols. Despite a considerable experience with this agent, mostly in kidney transplantation, there are only two relatively small randomized controlled trials available, and therefore the level of evidence for its role in transplantation is limited. Nevertheless, it does appear that the incidence of acute rejection is low after induction with alemtuzumab, perhaps if used with a calcineurin inhibitor, and that steroid-free and calcineurin-sparing protocols are possible. Although there is a profound and long-lasting T cell lymphopenia after administration of alemtuzumab, there is no apparent increase in infection, posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disease, or other side effects, other than perhaps autoimmune disease. Whether alemtuzumab is more effective than Thymoglobulin or anti-interleukin 2 receptor antibodies cannot be answered at this time. However from a cost aspect, the use of alemtuzumab for induction compares more than favorably with other lymphocyte-depleting agents. Alemtuzumab is an attractive agent for induction in organ transplantation, but there is a need for more and larger randomized trials with long-term follow-up before its true role can be established, particularly with respect to safety.

Urgent Multivisceral Transplantation for Widespread Splanchnic Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Multivisceral transplantation (transplantation of the stomach, intestine, liver, and pancreas) is usually undertaken as a semi-elective procedure after thorough assessment in patients who have intestinal failure with cirrhosis, cirrhosis with portomesenteric venous thrombosis, or tumors such as desmoids involving the liver and mesentery. STUDY DESIGN: Data were collected prospectively from the time of referral and held in a central database. We used it to report the first cases of urgent multivisceral transplantation (MVT) in patients with widespread splanchnic ischemia (occlusion of the celiac axis and superior mesenteric artery) resulting in small bowel infarction and hepatic failure. RESULTS: Three women (ages 33, 48, and 50 years) were referred to our center with superior mesenteric artery and celiac axis occlusion. All other modes of treatment had been considered and/or attempted. After transfer to our institution, all patients were assessed, urgently listed, and underwent transplantation in 10, 7, and 5 days. Two patients are still alive after 2 years and 1 died at 8 months from multiorgan failure due to infections and graft vs host disease. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment options for patients presenting with widespread splanchnic ischemia with hepatic and intestinal failure/infarction were previously limited to salvage surgery and attempted revascularization. In situations in which these failed, the only previous option would have been palliation. In selected cases, we propose that urgent multivisceral transplantation should be considered as a life-saving treatment. This represents a previously unreported indication for MVT.

Mycophenolate mofetil decreases acute rejection and may improve graft survival in renal transplant recipients when compared with azathioprine: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) has increasingly replaced azathioprine (AZA) as the antimetabolite of choice in immunosuppressive protocols. Initial trials comparing MMF with AZA in patients receiving cyclosporine A sandimmune showed a clinical benefit in reducing the incidence of acute rejections. It has been questioned whether this benefit remains significant when using newer formulations of cyclosporine A (neoral) and tacrolimus. METHODS: Literature searches were performed using the Transplant Library, Cochrane library, Medline, and Embase for all randomized controlled trials directly comparing MMF with AZA in renal transplant recipients. Trials were assessed for quality using the Jadad scoring system. Trials were pooled using meta-analysis software. Confidence intervals were set at 95%. RESULTS: Nineteen relevant studies were identified, including a total of 3143 patients. MMF significantly reduces the risk of acute rejection when used in combination with any calcineurin inhibitor (relative risk 0.62, 0.55-0.87, P<0.00001). The hazard for graft loss, including death with a functioning graft, is also significantly reduced in patients treated with MMF (hazard ratio 0.76, 0.59-0.98, P=0.037). There is no significant difference in patient survival or renal transplant function between groups. Risk of adverse events, including cytomegalovirus infection, anemia, leukopenia or rates of malignancy, does not differ significantly. A greater risk of diarrhea is seen in MMF-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that MMF used with a calcineurin inhibitor does indeed confer a clinical benefit over AZA by reducing the risk of acute rejection and also possibly reducing graft loss. This effect is independent of whether MMF is used in combination with sandimmune, neoral or tacrolimus.