Lack of sensitization and equivalent post-transplant outcomes with the Novacor left ventricular assist device

Significance of HLA-matching and anti-HLA antibodies in heart transplant patients receiving induction therapy?

OBJECTIVES

Though Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) matching benefits are demonstrated in renal transplantation, evidence in heart transplantation is lacking, and its clinical feasibility is uncertain. Post-transplantation anti-HLA antibodies are being increasingly studied in organ transplantation, with diverging conclusions between transplantated organs.

METHODS

We analyzed retrospectively the influence of HLA matching and anti-HLA antibodies on overall survival, acute rejection and chronic allograft vasculopathy in 309 patients receiving induction therapy and triple-drug immunosuppression.

RESULTS

The average number of HLA-A/B/DR mismatches between donor and recipient was 4.9 ± 1. The majority of mismatches was for Class I HLA-A/B with an average of 3.3, then for Class I HLA-DR with an average of 1.6. Overall, the HLA-A/-B/-DR mismatches had no influence on the cardiac allograft survival (p = 0.28). However, HLA-DR mismatches were negatively correlated to severe cellular and/or humoral allograft rejection (p = 0.04). Our analysis found anti-HLA antibodies in 27% of recipients, de novo anti-HLA antibodies in 16% of recipients, and donor-specific anti-HLA (DSA) antibodies in 8% of recipients. Furthermore, de novo DSA had no influence on the 5-year survival (78% with DSA vs. 92% without DSA; p = 0.49), which may be masked by the limited number of recipients in analysis By univariable analysis, anti-HLA antibodies (preexisting or de novo) unrelated or related to the donor had no influence on severe cellular and/or humoral rejection or on chronic allograft vasculopathy.

CONCLUSIONS

HLA-DR mismatch was negatively correlated to severe cellular and/or humoral allograft rejection but had no influence on cardiac allograft survival. In this study, anti-HLA antibodies (preexisting or de novo) unrelated or related to the donor had no influence on cellular and/or humoral rejection or on chronic allograft vasculopathy. The results of this study add to the controversy on the impact of allo-antibodies in heart transplant recipients receiving induction therapy and contemporary immunosuppression.

Long-term prognosis and cost-effectiveness of left ventricular assist device as bridge to transplantation: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) used as bridge to transplantation (BTT), compared to orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) without a bridge.

METHOD

Systematic searches were performed in electronic databases with available data extracted from text and digitized figures. Meta-analysis of short and long-term term post-transplantation outcomes was performed with summation of cost-effectiveness analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty studies reported clinical outcomes of 4575 patients (1083 LVAD BTT and 3492 OHT). Five studies reported cost-effectiveness data on 837 patients (339 VAD BTT and 498 OHT). There was no difference in long-term post-transplantation survival (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.00-1.54), acute rejection (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.93-1.30), or chronic rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.73-1.36). No differences were found in 30-day post-operative mortality (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.42-2.00), stroke (OR 1.64, 95% CI 0.43-6.27), renal failure (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.58-3.54), bleeding (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.78-3.13), or infection (OR 2.44, 95% CI 0.81-7.38). Three of the five studies demonstrated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios below the acceptable maximum threshold. The total cost of VAD BTT ranged from $316,078 to $1,025,500, and OHT ranged from $179,051 to $802,200.

CONCLUSION

LVADs used as BTT did not significantly alter post-transplantation long-term survival, rejection, and post-operative morbidity. LVAD BTT may be cost-effective, particularly in medium and high-risk patients with expected prolonged waiting times, renal dysfunction, and young patients.

Allosensitization does not alter post-transplant outcomes in pediatric patients bridged to transplant with a ventricular assist device

Patients supported with a VAD are at increased risk for sensitization. We aimed to determine risk factors for sensitization as well as the impact of sensitization on post-transplant outcomes. The UNOS database (January 2004-June 2014) was used to identify patients (≤18 yrs) supported with a durable VAD. Rates and degree of sensitization in the VAD cohort were calculated. Post-transplant survival was determined comparing outcomes of sensitized vs. non-sensitized patients. There were 3097 patients included in the study; 19% (n = 579) were bridged with a VAD. Of these, 41.8% were sensitized vs. 29.9% of the patients who were not bridged with a VAD (p < 0.001). VAD was an independent predictor of sensitization (OR 2.05 [1.63-2.57]; p < 0.001). There was no difference in sensitization based on device type (continuous vs. pulsatile flow, p = 0.990). Post-transplant survival rates between the sensitized and non-sensitized VAD patients were not different, including patients with a PRA >50% and VAD patients with a positive DSC (p = 0.280 and 0.160, respectively). In conclusion, pediatric VAD patients are more likely to be sensitized, but there was no difference in sensitization based on device type. In addition, sensitization does not appear to impact outcomes.

Ventricular assist devices and increased blood product utilization for cardiac transplantation

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF STUDY

The purpose of this study was to examine whether blood product utilization, one-year cell-mediated rejection rates, and mid-term survival significantly differ for ventricular assist device (VAD patients compared to non-VAD (NVAD) patients following cardiac transplantation.

METHODS

From July 2004 to August 2011, 79 patients underwent cardiac transplantation at a single institution. Following exclusion of patients bridged to transplantation with VADs other than the HeartMate II® LVAD (n = 10), patients were stratified by VAD presence at transplantation: VAD patients (n = 35, age: 54.0 [48.0-59.0] years) vs. NVAD patients (n = 34, age: 52.5 [42.8-59.3] years). The primary outcomes of interest were blood product transfusion requirements, one-year cell-mediated rejection rates, and mid-term survival post-transplantation.

RESULTS

Preoperative patient characteristics were similar for VAD and NVAD patients. NVAD patients presented with higher median preoperative creatinine levels compared to VAD patients (1.3 [1.1-1.6] vs. 1.1 [0.9-1.4], p = 0.004). VAD patients accrued higher intraoperative transfusion of all blood products (all p ≤ 0.001) compared to NVAD patients. The incidence of clinically significant cell-mediated rejection within the first posttransplant year was higher in VAD compared to NVAD patients (66.7% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.02). During a median follow-up period of 3.2 (2.0, 6.3) years, VAD patients demonstrated an increased postoperative mortality that did not reach statistical significance (20.0% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

During the initial era as a bridge to transplantation, the HeartMate II® LVAD significantly increased blood product utilization and one-year cell-mediated rejection rates for cardiac transplantation. Further study is warranted to optimize anticoagulation strategies and to define causal relationships between these factors for the current era of cardiac transplantation.

Ventricular assistance devices as bridge to transplantation

The authors herein review the rationale and indications for the use of ventricular assistance devices as a bridge to heart transplantation and discuss the current evidence on the subject. The potential effects of device implantation on posttransplant outcomes and the therapeutic strategies in acute and elective cases are revised and illustrated.

Management of children undergoing cardiac transplantation with high Panel Reactive Antibodies

Highly sensitised children in need of cardiac transplantation have overall poor outcomes because of increased risk for dysfunction of the cardiac allograft, acute cellular and antibody-mediated rejection, and vasculopathy of the cardiac allograft. Cardiopulmonary bypass and the frequent use of blood products in the operating room and cardiac intensive care unit, as well as the frequent use of homografts, have predisposed potential recipients of transplants to allosensitisation. The expansion in the use of ventricular assist devices and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has also contributed to increasing rates of allosensitisation in candidates for cardiac transplantation. Antibodies to Human Leukocyte Antigen can be detected before transplantation using several different techniques, the most common being the "complement-dependent lymphocytotoxicity assays". "Solid-phase assays", particularly the "Luminex® single antigen bead method", offer improved specificity and more detailed information regarding specificities of antibodies, leading to improved matching of donors with recipients. Allosensitisation prolongs the time on the waiting list for potential recipients of transplantation and increases the risk of complications and death after transplantation. Aggressive reduction of antibodies to Human Leukocyte Antigen in these high-risk patients is therefore of vital importance for long-term survival of the patient and cardiac allograft. Strategies to decrease Panel Reactive Antibody or percent reactive antibody before transplantation include plasmapheresis, intravenous administration of immunoglobulin, and specific treatment to reduce B-cells, particularly Rituximab. These strategies have resulted in varying degrees of success. Antibody-mediated rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy are two of the most important complications of transplantation in patients with high Panel Reactive Antibody. The treatment of antibody-mediated rejection in recipients of cardiac transplants is largely empirical and includes the use of high-dose corticosteroids, plasmapheresis, intravenous administration of immunoglobulins, anti-thymocyte globulin, and Rituximab. Cardiac allograft vasculopathy is believed to be secondary to chronic complement-mediated endothelial injury and chronic vascular rejection. The use of proliferation signal inhibitors, such as sirolimus and everolimus, has been shown to delay the progression of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. In some non-sensitised recipients of cardiac transplants, the de novo formation of antibodies to Human Leukocyte Antigen after transplantation may increase the likelihood of adverse clinical outcomes. The use of serial testing for donor-specific antibodies after cardiac transplantation may be advisable in patients with frequent episodes of rejection and patients with history of sensitisation. Allosensitisation before transplantation can negatively influence outcomes after transplantation. A high incidence of antibody-mediated rejection and graft vasculopathy can result in graft failure and decreased survival. Current strategies to decrease allosensitisation have helped to expand the pool of donors, improve times on the waiting list, and decrease mortality. Centres of transplantation offering desensitisation are currently using plasmapheresis to remove circulating antibodies; intravenous immunoglobulin to inactivate antibodies; cyclophosphamide to suppress B-cell proliferation; and Rituximab to deplete B-lymphocytes. Similar approaches are also used to treat antibody-mediated rejection after transplantation with promising results.

Changing outcomes in patients bridged to heart transplantation with continuous- versus pulsatile-flow ventricular assist devices: an analysis of the registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Patients bridged to heart transplantation with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been reported to have higher post-transplant mortality compared with those without LVADs. Our aim was to determine the impact of the type of LVAD and implant era on post-transplant survival.

METHODS

In this study we included 8,557 patients from the registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. We examined post-transplant outcomes in 1,100 patients bridged to transplant with pulsatile-flow LVADs between January 2000 and June 2004 (first era), 880 patients bridged with pulsatile-flow LVADs between July 2004 and May 2008 (second era), and 417 patients bridged with continuous-flow LVADs in the second era. Patients who required intravenous inotropes but not LVAD support (n = 2,728) and patients who did not require either LVAD or inotropes (n = 3,432) served as controls.

RESULTS

Post-transplant survival of patients bridged with pulsatile LVADs improved significantly between the first and the second era (p = 0.03). In the second era, there was no significant difference in post-transplant survival of patients bridged with pulsatile- vs continuous-flow LVADs (p = 0.26), and survival rates in the 2 groups were not statistically different from that of the non-LVAD group. Graft rejection was similar in patients bridged with LVADs compared to those without LVADs.

CONCLUSIONS

In the most recent era, the use of either pulsatile- or continuous-flow LVADs did not result in increased post-transplant mortality. This finding is important as the proportion of patients with LVADs at the time of transplant has been rising.

Management of allosensitized cardiac transplant candidates

Cardiac transplantation remains the best treatment in patients with advanced heart failure with a high risk of death. However, an inadequate supply of donor hearts decreases the likelihood of transplantation for many patients. Ventricular assist devices (VADs) are being increasingly used as a bridge to transplantation in patients who may not survive long enough to receive a heart. This expansion in VAD use has been associated with increasing rates of allosensitization in cardiac transplant candidates. Anti-HLA antibodies can be detected before transplantation using different techniques. Complement-dependent lymphocytotoxicity assays are widely used for measurement of panel-reactive antibody (PRA) and for crossmatch purposes. Newer assays using solid-phase flow techniques feature improved specificity and offer detailed information concerning antibody specificities, which may lead to improvements in donor-recipient matching. Allosensitization prolongs the wait time for transplantation and increases the risk of post-transplantation complications and death; therefore, decreasing anti-HLA antibodies in sensitized transplant candidates is of vital importance. Plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, and rituximab have been used to decrease the PRA before transplantation, with varying degrees of success. The most significant post-transplantation complications seen in allosensitized recipients are antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV). Often, AMR manifests with severe allograft dysfunction and hemodynamic compromise. The underlying pathophysiology is not fully understood but appears to involve complement-mediated activation of endothelial cells resulting in ischemic injury. The treatment of AMR in cardiac recipients is largely empirical and includes high-dose corticosteroids, plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, and rituximab. Diffuse concentric stenosis of allograft coronary arteries due to intimal expansion is a characteristic of CAV. Its pathophysiology is unclear but may involve chronic complement-mediated endothelial injury. Sirolimus and everolimus can delay the progression of CAV. In some nonsensitized cardiac transplant recipients, the de novo formation of anti-HLA antibodies after transplantation may increase the likelihood of adverse clinical outcomes. Serial post-transplantation PRAs may be advisable in patients at high risk of de novo allosensitization.

Lack of significant de novo HLA allosensitization in ventricular assist device recipients transfused with leukoreduced, ABO identical blood products

Ventricular assist devices provide support for a failing heart and often serve as a bridge to transplantation. The use of these devices has also been associated with allosensitization to HLA antigens because of transfusion of blood products. Our program established a protocol mandating the use of leukoreduced, irradiated and ABO identical products, including platelets, in patients receiving initial implantations of VADs as a bridge to transplantation. Recipients were tested for anti-HLA antibodies before VAD implantation and monthly post-implantation by cytotoxicity and solid phase assays. We observed minimal de novo anti-HLA sensitization (<10%) in this population of 55 patients, each receiving a mean of 90 blood components, using this approach. No patient developed broad sensitization (PRA>50%). In conclusion, The use of leukoreduced, irradiated, ABO identical blood products abrogates broad allosensitization in this highly transfused population.

Prevalence and risks of allosensitization in HeartMate left ventricular assist device recipients: The impact of leukofiltered cellular blood product transfusions

OBJECTIVE

Allosensitization of left ventricular assist device recipients has been associated with perioperative transfusion of cellular blood products. The relative sensitizing contribution of leukofiltered cellular blood products, however, remains unclear. We investigated the pattern of sensitization in left ventricular assist device recipients in relation to cellular blood product transfusions received.

METHODS

Seventy-one consecutive nonsensitized recipients of the HeartMate left ventricular assist device (Thoratec Corporation, Pleasanton, Calif) as a bridge to transplantation were reviewed. Panel-reactive HLA antibody levels at consecutive times after device implantation were correlated with perioperative cellular blood product transfusions.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients received leukofiltered cellular blood products (transfused), whereas 17 patients received only fresh-frozen plasma (nontransfused). Among nontransfused patients, 58.8% (10/17) became sensitized during mechanical support, versus 35.2% of transfused patients (19/54, P = .15). There was a trend toward more sensitization during the 12 weeks after device placement in nontransfused patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed significantly more sensitization in nontransfused patients than in transfused patients, despite equal rates of transplantation (P = .05). A dose-response analysis revealed significant trends toward less sensitization and lower peak panel-reactive antibody level with more cellular blood product transfusions (P = .04). Multivariate Cox regression revealed only increasing transfusions to be associated with a reduced risk of sensitization (hazard ratio 0.18, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Sensitization becomes more prevalent with increasing length of support. Avoidance of perioperative leukocyte-filtered cellular blood product transfusions does not decrease the incidence or degree of HLA sensitization. Conversely, cellular blood product transfusions may be associated with lessened alloimmunization and may mitigate the sensitization seen in recipients of the HeartMate left ventricular assist device as a bridge to transplantation.

Ventricular assist devices in the adult

Ventricular assist devices (VADs) play an increasingly important role in the care of cardiovascular patients. Developed initially for support of cardiothoracic surgery patients experiencing difficulty in weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass, these devices have been used extensively as a bridge to cardiac transplantation for patients who are failing on medical management. Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of a VAD as destination therapy, providing a permanent means of support for patients with advanced heart failure who are not eligible for heart transplantation. Applications for VADs are expanding and advances in technology occurring to support these new applications. This article provides an overview of current and emerging VADs and nursing management of the VAD patient.

Successful Management of Antibody-Mediated Cardiac Allograft Rejection With Combined Immunoadsorption and Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibody Treatment: Case Report and Literature Review

Chronic rejection is still the major limitation of long-term outcome of heart transplant recipients. Several recent studies demonstrated that a not negligible proportion of chronic allograft rejection episodes are not only mediated by T-cell response but also triggered by pre-transplant and de novo post-transplant donor-specific alloantibodies. This points at a fundamental role of humoral immune response mechanisms that contribute to early and late graft failure. This type of rejection is an unsolved problem solid organ transplantation because current immunosuppressive regimens are generally intended to interfere in T-cell signalling pathways. Various options for the removal of circulating alloantibodies and the prevention of alloantibody formation by B-cell depletion have been described. Nevertheless, effective standardized schemes for the treatment of antibody-mediated graft rejection have to be defined. We present a heart transplant recipient with sustained antibody-mediated graft rejection who was successfully managed with a combination treatment consisting of 3 cycles of immunoadsorption and a single-dose administration of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody rituximab.