Significance of pancreas graft biopsy in detection of rejection

Indications, Techniques, and Barriers for Pancreas Transplant Biopsy: A Consensus Perspective From a Survey of US Centers

BACKGROUND

Pancreas transplant biopsy practices for the diagnosis of rejection or other pathologies are not well described.

METHODS

We conducted a survey of staff at US pancreas transplant programs (March 22, 2022, to August 22, 2022) to assess current program practices and perceptions about the utility and challenges in the performance and interpretation of pancreas allograft biopsies.

RESULTS

Respondents represented 65% (76/117) of active adult pancreas transplant programs, capturing 66% of recent pancreas transplant volume in the United States. Participants were most often nephrologists (52%), followed by surgeons (46%), and other staff (4%). Pancreas allograft biopsies were performed mostly by interventional radiologists (74%), followed by surgeons (11%), nephrologists (8%), and gastroenterologists (1%). Limitations in the radiologist's or biopsy performer's comfort level or expertise to safely perform a biopsy, or to obtain sufficient/adequate samples were the two most common challenges with pancreas transplant biopsies. Pancreas transplant biopsies were read by local pathologists at a majority (86%) of centers. Challenges reported with pancreas biopsy interpretation included poor reliability, lack of reporting of C4d staining, lack of reporting of rejection grading, and inconclusive interpretation of the biopsy. Staff at a third of responding programs (34%) stated that they rarely or never perform pancreas allograft biopsies and treat presumed rejection empirically.

CONCLUSIONS

This national survey identified significant variation in clinical practices related to pancreas allograft biopsies and potential barriers to pancreas transplant utilization across the United States. Consideration of strategies to improve program experience with percutaneous pancreas biopsy and to support optimal management of pancreas allograft rejection informed by histology is warranted.

Enteroscopic biopsies in the management of pancreas transplants: a proof of concept study for a novel monitoring tool

BACKGROUND

Although percutaneous biopsies are considered to be the gold standard in diagnosing pancreas graft rejection, they are not performed routinely because of their association with severe complications. On the other hand, correct diagnosis of rejection is essential but may be difficult in cases of enteric drainage, particularly in patients with a pancreas transplant alone or a pancreas after kidney transplant.

METHODS

Pancreas recipients who underwent enteroscopy between May 2005 and September 2009 were included in this retrospective analysis. Biopsies were graded 0 to 4 for interstitial and vascular changes.

RESULTS

During the study period a total of 65 simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants, 13 pancreas after kidney transplants and 4 pancreas transplants alone were performed. Sixty-three patients underwent a single enteroscopy, 10 had two, and 6 had three or more. Indications were protocol graft monitoring (n=73), graft dysfunction (n=17), enteric hemorrhage (n=9), or other (n=3). The duodenal segment was accessed in 76 instances (75%) with abnormal findings in 23. A total of 69 biopsies were obtained and revealed normal mucosa in 49 cases (71%). Histology showed signs of acute rejection in 11 cases. The upper gastrointestinal tract was also assessed, and, in 13 cases, additional pathologies were identified including gastroduodenitis (n=10), gastric/duodenal ulcer (n=2), and hemorrhagic esophagitis (n=1). No procedure-related complication occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

This series of enteroscopies demonstrates that the duodenal segment of a pancreatic graft is accessible using our implant technique, and thus permitting biopsies to be obtained and endoscopic interventions to be performed.

Thymoglobulin induction decreases rejection in solitary pancreas transplantation

BACKGROUND

Solitary pancreas transplants, both pancreas transplant alone (PTA) and pancreas after kidney (PAK), have higher rejection rates and lower graft survivals than simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants (SPK). The aim of this study is to compare three different antibody induction regimens in solitary pancreas transplant recipients and to assess the role of surveillance pancreas biopsies in the management of these patients.

METHODS

Solitary pancreas transplant recipients between 01/98 to 02/00 (n=29) received induction with either daclizumab (1 mg/kg on day 0, 7, 14), OKT 3 (5 mg/day x0-7), or thymoglobulin (1.5 mg/kg/day x0-10). Maintenance immunosuppression was similar for the three groups. All rejections were biopsy-proven either by surveillance/protocol or when clinically indicated.

RESULTS

The 1-year graft survival was 89.3% overall and 91.7% in the thymoglobulin group. Thymoglobulin significantly decreased rejection in the first 6 months when compared with OKT3 or daclizumab (7.7 vs. 60 vs. 50%). Acute rejections were seen on surveillance biopsies in the absence of biochemical abnormalities in 40% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Thymoglobulin induction regimen led to a low incidence of acute rejection and a high rate of graft survival in solitary pancreas transplants. In addition, surveillance biopsies were useful in the detection of early acute rejection in the absence of biochemical abnormalities.

Lessons learned from more than 1,000 pancreas transplants at a single institution

OBJECTIVE

To determine outcome in diabetic pancreas transplant recipients according to risk factors and the surgical techniques and immunosuppressive protocols that evolved during a 33-year period at a single institution.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus is associated with a high incidence of management problems and secondary complications. Clinical pancreas transplantation began at the University of Minnesota in 1966, initially with a high failure rate, but outcome improved in parallel with other organ transplants. The authors retrospectively analyzed the factors associated with the increased success rate of pancreas transplants.

METHODS

From December 16, 1966, to March 31, 2000, the authors performed 1,194 pancreas transplants (111 from living donors; 191 retransplants): 498 simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) and 1 simultaneous pancreas-liver transplant; 404 pancreas after kidney (PAK) transplants; and 291 pancreas transplants alone (PTA). The analyses were divided into five eras: era 0, 1966 to 1973 (n = 14), historical; era 1, 1978 to 1986 (n = 148), transition to cyclosporine for immunosuppression, multiple duct management techniques, and only solitary (PAK and PTA) transplants; era 2, 1986 to 1994 (n = 461), all categories (SPK, PAK, and PTA), predominantly bladder drainage for graft duct management, and primarily triple therapy (cyclosporine, azathioprine, and prednisone) for maintenance immunosuppression; era 3, 1994 to 1998 (n = 286), tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil used; and era 4, 1998 to 2000 (n = 275), use of daclizumab for induction immunosuppression, primarily enteric drainage for SPK transplants, pretransplant immunosuppression in candidates awaiting PTA.

RESULTS

Patient and primary cadaver pancreas graft functional (insulin-independence) survival rates at 1 year by category and era were as follows: SPK, era 2 (n = 214) versus eras 3 and 4 combined (n = 212), 85% and 64% versus 92% and 79%, respectively; PAK, era 1 (n = 36) versus 2 (n = 61) versus 3 (n = 84) versus 4 (n = 92), 86% and 17%, 98% and 59%, 98% and 76%, and 98% and 81%, respectively; in PTA, era 1 (n = 36) versus 2 (n = 72) versus 3 (n = 30) versus 4 (n = 40), 77% and 31%, 99% and 50%, 90% and 67%, and 100% and 88%, respectively. In eras 3 and 4 combined for primary cadaver SPK transplants, pancreas graft survival rates were significantly higher with bladder drainage (n = 136) than enteric drainage (n = 70), 82% versus 74% at 1 year (P =.03). Increasing recipient age had an adverse effect on outcome only in SPK recipients. Vascular disease was common (in eras 3 and 4, 27% of SPK recipients had a pretransplant myocardial infarction and 40% had a coronary artery bypass); those with no vascular disease had significantly higher patient and graft survival rates in the SPK and PAK categories. Living donor segmental pancreas transplants were associated with higher technically successful graft survival rates in each era, predominately solitary (PAK and PTA) in eras 1 and 2 and SPK in eras 3 and 4. Diabetic secondary complications were ameliorated in some recipients, and quality of life studies showed significant gains after the transplant in all recipient categories.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and graft survival rates have significantly improved over time as surgical techniques and immunosuppressive protocols have evolved. Eventually, islet transplants will replace pancreas transplants for suitable candidates, but currently pancreas transplants can be applied and should be an option at all stages of diabetes. Early transplants are preferable for labile diabetes, but even patients with advanced complications can benefit.

Immunologic Aspects of Transplant Management: Pharmacotherapy and Rejection

The intensivist caring for the critically ill transplant patient must be knowledgeable in the management of immunosuppression or have expert help. Critical illness often has a major impact on the absorption and metabolism of immunosuppressive drugs, increasing or decreasing net immunosuppression. Too little immunosuppression brings the risk of graft loss, while too much increases the morbidity and mortality of serious infection. Optimum management often requires the skillful manipulation of dosage and/or routes of drug delivery. In many cases of life-threatening infection, immunosuppression must be discontinued altogether and restarted prior to significant graft injury. The cost of miscalculation is very high. Loss of a renal, pancreas, or small bowel transplant is tragic, while loss of a heart, lung, or liver is usually fatal. Unfortunately the management of immunosuppression is becoming more complex. As the field of transplantation matures, new immunosuppressants are being introduced. Also, more experience and growing numbers of clinical trials are making the required knowledge base ever larger. Each type of transplant has its own set of evolving immunosuppression strategies. This review presents the basic mechanisms of the most widely used drugs and the dangers of immunosuppression. The drugs are then discussed in the context of liver, small bowel, kidney, pancreas, heart, and lung transplantation. Finally, a brief section on the practical pharmacokinetics of the drugs is presented.

Histologic grading of acute allograft rejection in pancreas needle biopsy: correlation to serum enzymes, glycemia, and response to immunosuppressive treatment

BACKGROUND

Allograft rejection continues to be the most common cause of graft failure in technically successful pancreas transplants. Early diagnosis and treatment of rejection is essential for long-term graft survival. Pancreas graft biopsies are now used routinely for the diagnosis of acute allograft rejection. The correlation between clinical evidence of graft dysfunction (increased serum enzymes and glucose), severity of acute rejection on biopsy (rejection grade), and response to treatment has not been previously studied.

METHODS

A total of 151 pancreas transplant needle biopsy specimens from 57 patients were evaluated. Statistical correlation was done between the histologic rejection grade (O-V) and the peak level of enzymes in serum, glycemia, type of antirejection treatment instituted, and response to treatment. Differentiation between grades was also evaluated statistically.

RESULTS

Response to antirejection treatment was 25%, 40%, 88%, 78%, 50%, and 17% for grades O-V, respectively. The response for grades II and III was better than for grades 0-I and IV-V (P=0.0003 and 0.0008, respectively). The response to corticosteroids alone was 36%, 86%, 68%, and 0% for grades I, II, III, and IV, respectively. The response to antilymphocyte regimen was 50%, 89%, 85%, 71%, and 17% for grades I, II, III, IV, and V, respectively. Overall correlation between the mean levels of enzymes and rejection grade was seen; the increase of lipase was statistically significant (r=0.24, P=0.012). Amylase and lipase correlated very well with each other (r=0.84, P=0.0001). No correlation was found in the mean values of blood glucose with the serum enzyme increase and with severity of rejection. Hyperglycemia was present in 12 patients; this abnormality in patients with grades II-IV responded promptly to treatment, whereas in patients with grade V, hyperglycemia persisted despite antirejection treatment. Other causes of increased enzymes were found in patients with biopsy specimens showing no rejection (grades 0 and I, 43% and 31%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased serum enzymes, particularly lipase, correlate with the grade of acute rejection, but their lack of specificity precludes their use as sole markers of acute rejection. Glucose levels are not a sensitive marker for acute rejection. Rejection grades II and III are the most responsive to treatment, and a significant proportion of these cases respond to treatment with corticosteroids only. The higher rejection grades (IV and V) require treatment with antilymphocytic regimens, and their overall response to treatment is moderate to poor, respectively.