Trends in the Perioperative Practices for Immunological Assessment and Immunosuppression Strategies for Patients Undergoing Intestinal Transplantation at American Transplant Centers
Intestinal transplantation (IT) is a complex procedure that requires nuanced immunosuppressive strategies to optimize patient outcomes. Despite advancements, significant variability remains in immunosuppressive protocols across transplant centers due to a lack of consensus on the optimal approaches...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transplantation proceedings 2025-01 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Transplantation proceedings |
container_volume | |
creator | Abusuliman, Mohammed Jafri, Syed-Mohammed Summers, Bryant B. Beduschi, Thiago Boike, Justin Farmer, Douglas G. Horslen, Simon Lyer, Kishore Langnas, Alan N. Mangus, Richard S. Matsumoto, Cal S. Mavis, Alisha M. Mazariegos, George V. Nagai, Shunji O'Leary, Jacqueline Schiano, Thomas D. Sudan, Debra L. Abusuliman, Amr Sulejmani, Nimisha Segovia, Maria Cristina |
description | Intestinal transplantation (IT) is a complex procedure that requires nuanced immunosuppressive strategies to optimize patient outcomes. Despite advancements, significant variability remains in immunosuppressive protocols across transplant centers due to a lack of consensus on the optimal approaches for induction, maintenance, and clinical testing. This variability complicates standardization and identification of best practices for IT recipients.
A descriptive survey study was conducted to characterize immunosuppressive and testing strategies in IT at major transplant centers in the United States. Ten centers known to have performed over 10 ITs since 2015 were selected from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. A 22-question survey was distributed to surgical directors, collecting data on pre-, peri-, and post-transplant immunological testing, desensitization strategies, immunosuppressive regimens, and management of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and acute cellular rejection (ACR).
Nine centers (90%) responded. All centers conducted pretransplant human leukocyte antigen (HLA) and donor-specific antibody (DSA) testing, with varying frequencies and methodologies. Desensitization was reported by 44% of centers for isolated IT and by 22% for multivisceral transplants. Induction therapy predominantly involved antithymocyte globulin (89%) and rituximab (44%). Tacrolimus was universally used for maintenance, with varying trough level targets across centers. Post-transplant DSA testing was performed by all centers, and protocol-driven endoscopic bowel biopsies were routine at 67% of centers. AMR was diagnosed at 89% of centers, with plasmapheresis and IVIG being the most common treatments. Variability was noted in desensitization practices and AMR management.
This survey highlights considerable consistency in pre- and post-transplant testing and immunosuppressive regimens for IT recipients, while significant variability exists in desensitization strategies and AMR management. Further research is needed to standardize these practices to improve patient outcomes across transplant centers |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.transproceed.2025.01.002 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3162573135</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0041134525000053</els_id><sourcerecordid>3162573135</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1683-3eb2229a48f464b0d0cb4fe6287337042ba7142664001d1e08631b4e4c0ae2603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNUU2P0zAQtRCILQt_AVmcuCT4K27KrSpflVZiJbpny3EmxVViB9tZiR_G_2OWdqU9crLG897Mm_cIecdZzRnXH051STbkOUUH0NeCiaZmvGZMPCMr3q5lJbSQz8mKMcUrLlVzRV7lfGJYCyVfkiu5aTes4XJF_hwShD5TH2j5CfQWko8zJFv8PVbJuuIdZDrERPfTtIQ4xqN3dqTbnCHnCUKhNvSXZl7mOeG3j4H-QJEFjv7CvsWRCM70LvSQjtGHI92HArn4gOMO_y4abSiIQ7YtdDuhGGfDkx7d4QhI-TV5Mdgxw5vLe03uvnw-7L5VN9-_7nfbm8px3cpKQieE2FjVDkqrjvXMdWoALdAjuUYzOrvmSmitGOM9B9ZqyTsFyjELQjN5Td6f56LXvxbUaiafHYyoBeKSjeRaNGvJZYPQj2eoSzHnBIOZk59s-m04Mw-xmZN5Gpt5iM0wbjA2JL-97Fm6CXuP1MecEPDpDAC89t5DMtmhnQ56n8AV00f_P3v-Aq32tPA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3162573135</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Trends in the Perioperative Practices for Immunological Assessment and Immunosuppression Strategies for Patients Undergoing Intestinal Transplantation at American Transplant Centers</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Abusuliman, Mohammed ; Jafri, Syed-Mohammed ; Summers, Bryant B. ; Beduschi, Thiago ; Boike, Justin ; Farmer, Douglas G. ; Horslen, Simon ; Lyer, Kishore ; Langnas, Alan N. ; Mangus, Richard S. ; Matsumoto, Cal S. ; Mavis, Alisha M. ; Mazariegos, George V. ; Nagai, Shunji ; O'Leary, Jacqueline ; Schiano, Thomas D. ; Sudan, Debra L. ; Abusuliman, Amr ; Sulejmani, Nimisha ; Segovia, Maria Cristina</creator><creatorcontrib>Abusuliman, Mohammed ; Jafri, Syed-Mohammed ; Summers, Bryant B. ; Beduschi, Thiago ; Boike, Justin ; Farmer, Douglas G. ; Horslen, Simon ; Lyer, Kishore ; Langnas, Alan N. ; Mangus, Richard S. ; Matsumoto, Cal S. ; Mavis, Alisha M. ; Mazariegos, George V. ; Nagai, Shunji ; O'Leary, Jacqueline ; Schiano, Thomas D. ; Sudan, Debra L. ; Abusuliman, Amr ; Sulejmani, Nimisha ; Segovia, Maria Cristina</creatorcontrib><description>Intestinal transplantation (IT) is a complex procedure that requires nuanced immunosuppressive strategies to optimize patient outcomes. Despite advancements, significant variability remains in immunosuppressive protocols across transplant centers due to a lack of consensus on the optimal approaches for induction, maintenance, and clinical testing. This variability complicates standardization and identification of best practices for IT recipients.
A descriptive survey study was conducted to characterize immunosuppressive and testing strategies in IT at major transplant centers in the United States. Ten centers known to have performed over 10 ITs since 2015 were selected from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. A 22-question survey was distributed to surgical directors, collecting data on pre-, peri-, and post-transplant immunological testing, desensitization strategies, immunosuppressive regimens, and management of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and acute cellular rejection (ACR).
Nine centers (90%) responded. All centers conducted pretransplant human leukocyte antigen (HLA) and donor-specific antibody (DSA) testing, with varying frequencies and methodologies. Desensitization was reported by 44% of centers for isolated IT and by 22% for multivisceral transplants. Induction therapy predominantly involved antithymocyte globulin (89%) and rituximab (44%). Tacrolimus was universally used for maintenance, with varying trough level targets across centers. Post-transplant DSA testing was performed by all centers, and protocol-driven endoscopic bowel biopsies were routine at 67% of centers. AMR was diagnosed at 89% of centers, with plasmapheresis and IVIG being the most common treatments. Variability was noted in desensitization practices and AMR management.
This survey highlights considerable consistency in pre- and post-transplant testing and immunosuppressive regimens for IT recipients, while significant variability exists in desensitization strategies and AMR management. Further research is needed to standardize these practices to improve patient outcomes across transplant centers</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-1345</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1873-2623</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2623</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2025.01.002</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39890513</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><ispartof>Transplantation proceedings, 2025-01</ispartof><rights>2025 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2025 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1683-3eb2229a48f464b0d0cb4fe6287337042ba7142664001d1e08631b4e4c0ae2603</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041134525000053$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65534</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39890513$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Abusuliman, Mohammed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jafri, Syed-Mohammed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Summers, Bryant B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beduschi, Thiago</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boike, Justin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farmer, Douglas G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Horslen, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lyer, Kishore</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Langnas, Alan N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mangus, Richard S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsumoto, Cal S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mavis, Alisha M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mazariegos, George V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nagai, Shunji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Leary, Jacqueline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schiano, Thomas D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sudan, Debra L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abusuliman, Amr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sulejmani, Nimisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Segovia, Maria Cristina</creatorcontrib><title>Trends in the Perioperative Practices for Immunological Assessment and Immunosuppression Strategies for Patients Undergoing Intestinal Transplantation at American Transplant Centers</title><title>Transplantation proceedings</title><addtitle>Transplant Proc</addtitle><description>Intestinal transplantation (IT) is a complex procedure that requires nuanced immunosuppressive strategies to optimize patient outcomes. Despite advancements, significant variability remains in immunosuppressive protocols across transplant centers due to a lack of consensus on the optimal approaches for induction, maintenance, and clinical testing. This variability complicates standardization and identification of best practices for IT recipients.
A descriptive survey study was conducted to characterize immunosuppressive and testing strategies in IT at major transplant centers in the United States. Ten centers known to have performed over 10 ITs since 2015 were selected from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. A 22-question survey was distributed to surgical directors, collecting data on pre-, peri-, and post-transplant immunological testing, desensitization strategies, immunosuppressive regimens, and management of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and acute cellular rejection (ACR).
Nine centers (90%) responded. All centers conducted pretransplant human leukocyte antigen (HLA) and donor-specific antibody (DSA) testing, with varying frequencies and methodologies. Desensitization was reported by 44% of centers for isolated IT and by 22% for multivisceral transplants. Induction therapy predominantly involved antithymocyte globulin (89%) and rituximab (44%). Tacrolimus was universally used for maintenance, with varying trough level targets across centers. Post-transplant DSA testing was performed by all centers, and protocol-driven endoscopic bowel biopsies were routine at 67% of centers. AMR was diagnosed at 89% of centers, with plasmapheresis and IVIG being the most common treatments. Variability was noted in desensitization practices and AMR management.
This survey highlights considerable consistency in pre- and post-transplant testing and immunosuppressive regimens for IT recipients, while significant variability exists in desensitization strategies and AMR management. Further research is needed to standardize these practices to improve patient outcomes across transplant centers</description><issn>0041-1345</issn><issn>1873-2623</issn><issn>1873-2623</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2025</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNUU2P0zAQtRCILQt_AVmcuCT4K27KrSpflVZiJbpny3EmxVViB9tZiR_G_2OWdqU9crLG897Mm_cIecdZzRnXH051STbkOUUH0NeCiaZmvGZMPCMr3q5lJbSQz8mKMcUrLlVzRV7lfGJYCyVfkiu5aTes4XJF_hwShD5TH2j5CfQWko8zJFv8PVbJuuIdZDrERPfTtIQ4xqN3dqTbnCHnCUKhNvSXZl7mOeG3j4H-QJEFjv7CvsWRCM70LvSQjtGHI92HArn4gOMO_y4abSiIQ7YtdDuhGGfDkx7d4QhI-TV5Mdgxw5vLe03uvnw-7L5VN9-_7nfbm8px3cpKQieE2FjVDkqrjvXMdWoALdAjuUYzOrvmSmitGOM9B9ZqyTsFyjELQjN5Td6f56LXvxbUaiafHYyoBeKSjeRaNGvJZYPQj2eoSzHnBIOZk59s-m04Mw-xmZN5Gpt5iM0wbjA2JL-97Fm6CXuP1MecEPDpDAC89t5DMtmhnQ56n8AV00f_P3v-Aq32tPA</recordid><startdate>20250130</startdate><enddate>20250130</enddate><creator>Abusuliman, Mohammed</creator><creator>Jafri, Syed-Mohammed</creator><creator>Summers, Bryant B.</creator><creator>Beduschi, Thiago</creator><creator>Boike, Justin</creator><creator>Farmer, Douglas G.</creator><creator>Horslen, Simon</creator><creator>Lyer, Kishore</creator><creator>Langnas, Alan N.</creator><creator>Mangus, Richard S.</creator><creator>Matsumoto, Cal S.</creator><creator>Mavis, Alisha M.</creator><creator>Mazariegos, George V.</creator><creator>Nagai, Shunji</creator><creator>O'Leary, Jacqueline</creator><creator>Schiano, Thomas D.</creator><creator>Sudan, Debra L.</creator><creator>Abusuliman, Amr</creator><creator>Sulejmani, Nimisha</creator><creator>Segovia, Maria Cristina</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20250130</creationdate><title>Trends in the Perioperative Practices for Immunological Assessment and Immunosuppression Strategies for Patients Undergoing Intestinal Transplantation at American Transplant Centers</title><author>Abusuliman, Mohammed ; Jafri, Syed-Mohammed ; Summers, Bryant B. ; Beduschi, Thiago ; Boike, Justin ; Farmer, Douglas G. ; Horslen, Simon ; Lyer, Kishore ; Langnas, Alan N. ; Mangus, Richard S. ; Matsumoto, Cal S. ; Mavis, Alisha M. ; Mazariegos, George V. ; Nagai, Shunji ; O'Leary, Jacqueline ; Schiano, Thomas D. ; Sudan, Debra L. ; Abusuliman, Amr ; Sulejmani, Nimisha ; Segovia, Maria Cristina</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1683-3eb2229a48f464b0d0cb4fe6287337042ba7142664001d1e08631b4e4c0ae2603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2025</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Abusuliman, Mohammed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jafri, Syed-Mohammed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Summers, Bryant B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beduschi, Thiago</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boike, Justin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farmer, Douglas G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Horslen, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lyer, Kishore</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Langnas, Alan N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mangus, Richard S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsumoto, Cal S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mavis, Alisha M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mazariegos, George V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nagai, Shunji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Leary, Jacqueline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schiano, Thomas D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sudan, Debra L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abusuliman, Amr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sulejmani, Nimisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Segovia, Maria Cristina</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Transplantation proceedings</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Abusuliman, Mohammed</au><au>Jafri, Syed-Mohammed</au><au>Summers, Bryant B.</au><au>Beduschi, Thiago</au><au>Boike, Justin</au><au>Farmer, Douglas G.</au><au>Horslen, Simon</au><au>Lyer, Kishore</au><au>Langnas, Alan N.</au><au>Mangus, Richard S.</au><au>Matsumoto, Cal S.</au><au>Mavis, Alisha M.</au><au>Mazariegos, George V.</au><au>Nagai, Shunji</au><au>O'Leary, Jacqueline</au><au>Schiano, Thomas D.</au><au>Sudan, Debra L.</au><au>Abusuliman, Amr</au><au>Sulejmani, Nimisha</au><au>Segovia, Maria Cristina</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Trends in the Perioperative Practices for Immunological Assessment and Immunosuppression Strategies for Patients Undergoing Intestinal Transplantation at American Transplant Centers</atitle><jtitle>Transplantation proceedings</jtitle><addtitle>Transplant Proc</addtitle><date>2025-01-30</date><risdate>2025</risdate><issn>0041-1345</issn><issn>1873-2623</issn><eissn>1873-2623</eissn><abstract>Intestinal transplantation (IT) is a complex procedure that requires nuanced immunosuppressive strategies to optimize patient outcomes. Despite advancements, significant variability remains in immunosuppressive protocols across transplant centers due to a lack of consensus on the optimal approaches for induction, maintenance, and clinical testing. This variability complicates standardization and identification of best practices for IT recipients.
A descriptive survey study was conducted to characterize immunosuppressive and testing strategies in IT at major transplant centers in the United States. Ten centers known to have performed over 10 ITs since 2015 were selected from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. A 22-question survey was distributed to surgical directors, collecting data on pre-, peri-, and post-transplant immunological testing, desensitization strategies, immunosuppressive regimens, and management of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and acute cellular rejection (ACR).
Nine centers (90%) responded. All centers conducted pretransplant human leukocyte antigen (HLA) and donor-specific antibody (DSA) testing, with varying frequencies and methodologies. Desensitization was reported by 44% of centers for isolated IT and by 22% for multivisceral transplants. Induction therapy predominantly involved antithymocyte globulin (89%) and rituximab (44%). Tacrolimus was universally used for maintenance, with varying trough level targets across centers. Post-transplant DSA testing was performed by all centers, and protocol-driven endoscopic bowel biopsies were routine at 67% of centers. AMR was diagnosed at 89% of centers, with plasmapheresis and IVIG being the most common treatments. Variability was noted in desensitization practices and AMR management.
This survey highlights considerable consistency in pre- and post-transplant testing and immunosuppressive regimens for IT recipients, while significant variability exists in desensitization strategies and AMR management. Further research is needed to standardize these practices to improve patient outcomes across transplant centers</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>39890513</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.transproceed.2025.01.002</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0041-1345 |
ispartof | Transplantation proceedings, 2025-01 |
issn | 0041-1345 1873-2623 1873-2623 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3162573135 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
title | Trends in the Perioperative Practices for Immunological Assessment and Immunosuppression Strategies for Patients Undergoing Intestinal Transplantation at American Transplant Centers |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T14%3A04%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Trends%20in%20the%20Perioperative%20Practices%20for%20Immunological%20Assessment%20and%20Immunosuppression%20Strategies%20for%20Patients%20Undergoing%20Intestinal%20Transplantation%20at%20American%20Transplant%20Centers&rft.jtitle=Transplantation%20proceedings&rft.au=Abusuliman,%20Mohammed&rft.date=2025-01-30&rft.issn=0041-1345&rft.eissn=1873-2623&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.transproceed.2025.01.002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3162573135%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3162573135&rft_id=info:pmid/39890513&rft_els_id=S0041134525000053&rfr_iscdi=true |