How to obtain and maintain favorable results after heart transplantation: keys to success?

Combination prophylaxis in CMV high risk heart transplant recipients: A single center experience

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most clinically relevant infectious agent following heart transplantation (HTX). Data on the beneficial effects of prophylactic use of CMV immunoglobulins (CMVIG) are scarce.

METHODS

In this single-center, retrospective study, we reported patient outcomes following cardiac transplantation using prophylactic CMV treatment, including CMVIG. Distinct clinically relevant outcomes were compared across different CMV risk groups (CMV D-/R-, CMV D-/R+, CMV D+/R+, and CMV D+/R- or CMV high risk group).

RESULTS

We included 272 heart transplant procedures, performed between 1/1/2009 and 1/11/2020. Sixty-one (22%) procedures belonged to the CMV high risk group, while 96 (35%), 50 (18%), and 65 (24%) were CMV D-/R-, CMV D-/R+, and CMV D+/R+, respectively. Baseline donor and recipient characteristics (sex, age, body mass index, cause of death, indication for HTX), ischemia times and baseline immunosuppressive regimens were similar across the different CMV risk groups, yet fewer patients were bridged with a mechanical circulatory support in the CMV D+/R- group. CMV disease following cardiac transplantation was more common in the CMV D+/R- risk group (n = 40 or 66.7%; p < .001), yet mortality and re-transplantation rates, cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) severity, rejection episodes, and development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA), post-transplant lymphoproliferative diseases (PTLD), and EBV infections were similar across all four CMV risk groups.

CONCLUSION

High risk CMV D+/R- patients had a similar survival compared to low and intermediate CMV risk groups using a prophylactic strategy combining CMVIG and viral DNA polymerase inhibitors. This may be related to a number of factors unrelated to prophylaxis strategy as two out of three CMV D+/R- recipients developed CMV primary infection after prophylaxis was discontinued.

Review of interactions between high-risk pediatric heart transplant recipients and marginal donors including utilization of risk score models

BACKGROUND

Donor organ acceptance practices vary among pediatric heart transplant professionals. We sought to understand what is known about the interactions between the "high-risk" recipient and the "marginal donor," and how donor risk scores can impact this discussion.

METHODS

A systematic review of published literature on pediatric HTx was undertaken with the assistance of a medical librarian. Two authors independently assessed search results, and papers were reviewed for inclusion.

RESULTS

We found that there are a large number of individual factors, and clusters of factors, that have been used to label individual recipients "high-risk" and individual donors "marginal." The terms "high-risk recipient" and "marginal donor" have been used broadly in the literature making it virtually impossible to make comparisons between publications. In general, the data support that patients who could be easily agreed to be "sicker recipients" are at more risk compared to those who are clearly "healthier," albeit still "sick enough" to need transplantation. Given this variability in the literature, we were unable to define how being a "high-risk" recipient interplays with accepting a "marginal donor." Existing risk scores are described, but none were felt to adequately predict outcomes from factors available at the time of offer acceptance.

CONCLUSIONS

We could not determine what makes a donor "marginal," a recipient "high-risk," or how these factors interplay within the specific recipient-donor pair to determine outcomes. Until there are better risk scores predicting outcomes at the time of organ acceptance, programs should continue to evaluate each organ and recipient individually.