Solid organ procurement and transplantation from deceased donors with vaccine-induced thrombosis and thrombocytopenia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Loupy A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8441882 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Solid organ procurement and transplantation from deceased donors with vaccine-induced thrombosis and thrombocytopenia.
Loupy Alexandre A Goutaudier Valentin V Jacquelinet Christian C Kerbaul François F
American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons 20210717 12
Similar Datasets
Project description:Uterus transplantation is a surgical treatment for women with congenital or acquired uterine factor infertility. While uterus transplantation is a life-enhancing transplant that is commonly categorized as a vascular composite allograft (e.g., face or hand), it is similar to many solid organ transplants (e.g., kidney) in that both living donors (LDs) and deceased donors (DDs) can be utilized for organ procurement. While many endpoints appear to be similar for LD and DD transplants (including graft survival, time to menses, livebirth rates), there are key medical, technical, ethical, and logistical differences between these modalities. Primary considerations in favor of a LD model include thorough screening of donors, enhanced logistics, and greater donor availability. The primary consideration in favor of a DD model is the lack of physical or psychological harm to a living donor. Other important factors, that may not clearly favor one approach over the other, are important to include in discussions of LD vs. DD models. We favor a stepwise approach to uterus transplantation, one in which programs first begin with DD procurement before attempting LD procurement to maximize successful organ recovery and to minimize potential harms to a living donor.
| S-EPMC9369769 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRecovery of donated organs at organ procurement organization (OPO)-based recovery facilities has been proposed to improve organ donation outcomes, but few data exist to characterize differences between facilities and acute-care hospitals.Research questionTo compare donation outcomes between organ donors that underwent recovery procedures in OPO-based recovery facilities and hospitals.DesignRetrospective study of Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data. From a population-based sample of deceased donors after brain death April 2017 to June 2021, donation outcomes were examined in 10 OPO regions with organ recovery facilities. Primary exposure was organ recovery procedure in an OPO-based organ recovery. Primary outcome was the number of organs transplanted per donor. Multivariable regression models were used to adjust for donor characteristics and managing OPO.ResultsAmong 5010 cohort donors, 2590 (51.7%) underwent recovery procedures in an OPO-based facility. Donors in facilities differed from those in hospitals, including recovery year, mechanisms of death, and some comorbid diseases. Donors in OPO-based facilities had higher total numbers of organs transplanted per donor (mean 3.5 [SD1.8] vs 3.3 [SD1.8]; adjusted mean difference 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.36). Organ recovery at an OPO-based facility was also associated with more lungs, livers, and pancreases transplanted.ConclusionOrgan recovery procedures at OPO-based facilities were associated with more organs transplanted per donor than in hospitals. Increasing access to OPO-based organ recovery facilities may improve rates of organ transplantation from deceased organ donors, although further data are needed on other important donor management quality metrics.
| S-EPMC10150267 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced organ transplantation decision making. Opinions regarding the utilization of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) donors are mixed. We hypothesize that COVID-19 infection of deceased solid organ transplant donors does not affect recipient survival. All deceased solid organ transplant donors with COVID-19 testing results from March 15, 2020 to September 30, 2021 were identified in the OPTN database. Donors were matched to recipients and stratified by the COVID-19 test result. Outcomes were assessed between groups. COVID-19 test results were available for 17 694 donors; 150 were positive. A total of 269 organs were transplanted from these donors, including 187 kidneys, 57 livers, 18 hearts, 5 kidney-pancreases, and 2 lungs. The median time from COVID-19 testing to organ recovery was 4 days for positive and 3 days for negative donors. Of these, there were 8 graft failures (3.0%) and 5 deaths (1.9%). Survival of patients receiving grafts from COVID-19-positive donors is equivalent to those receiving grafts from COVID-19-negative donors (30-day patient survival = 99.2% COVID-19 positive; 98.6% COVID-19 negative). Solid organ transplantation using deceased donors with positive COVID-19 results does not negatively affect early patient survival, though little information regarding donor COVID-19 organ involvement is known. While transplantation is feasible, more information regarding COVID-19-positive donor selection is needed.
| S-EPMC9349433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We present a summary of the evidence on testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and organ procurement from deceased donors and provide recommendations based on current clinical data and the guidelines from major transplant organizations. Because of the limited historical experience with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), certain recommendations in this document are based on theoretical rationales rather than clinical data. The recommendations in this manuscript may be subject to revision as subsequent clinical studies provide definitive evidence regarding COVID-19 in organ procurement.
| S-EPMC10583974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antibiotic use in deceased organ donors has not been previously described. In a retrospective cohort of 440 donors, we found 427 (97%) received at least one antibiotic course, 312 (71%) received broad-spectrum antibiotics, and 61 (14%) received potentially redundant antibiotics during their terminal hospitalization, suggesting a need for stewardship.
| S-EPMC8561239 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAcute kidney injury in deceased donors (D-AKI) is one of the common causes of donor kidney discard. The risk factors for D-AKI and its impact on kidney transplantation outcomes are not yet fully understood.MethodsThis single-center, retrospective cohort study included 388 donors referred between June 2021 and December 2022. D-AKI was defined and staged according to kidney disease: Improving global outcomes criteria, and donor clinical variables were analyzed to identify risk factors for D-AKI. Delayed graft function and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 6 mo were evaluated in 369 kidney grafts transplanted from donors with and without D-AKI.ResultsAKI was present in 171 deceased donors (44.1%), with 117 (30.2%) classified as AKI stage 1 and 54 (14%) as AKI stages 2 or 3. Donor history of hypertension (odds ratio [OR] 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-3.10; P = 0.005), history of diabetes (OR 2.2; 95% CI, 1.21-3.98; P = 0.008), and anoxia as the cause of death (OR 2.61; 95% CI, 1.5-4.61; P < 0.001) were independently associated with an increased risk of D-AKI. Multivariable mixed models identified donor age (β -0.49; 95% CI, -0.71 to -0.28; P < 0.001) as the only independent risk factor for lower eGFR at 6 mo. D-AKI was not associated with delayed graft function or lower eGFR at 6 mo.ConclusionsHypertension, diabetes, and anoxia as the cause of death were identified as risk factors for AKI in deceased donors. D-AKI should not be used as the sole criterion to assess the risk of poor graft outcomes. A broader range of donor variables should be considered when evaluating graft viability.
| S-EPMC11567699 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9511609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a rare yet serious adverse effect of the adenoviral vector vaccines ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) and Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen) against COVID-19. The mechanisms involved in clot formation and thrombocytopenia in VITT are yet to be fully determined. Here we show neutrophils undergoing NETosis and confirm expression markers of NETs in VITT patients. VITT antibodies directly stimulate neutrophils to release NETs and induce thrombus formation containing abundant platelets, neutrophils, fibrin, extracellular DNA and citrullinated histone H3 in a flow microfluidics system and in vivo. Inhibition of NETosis prevents VITT-induced thrombosis in mice but not thrombocytopenia. In contrast, in vivo blockage of FcγRIIa abrogates both thrombosis and thrombocytopenia suggesting these are distinct processes. Our findings indicate that anti-PF4 antibodies activate blood cells via FcγRIIa and are responsible for thrombosis and thrombocytopenia in VITT. Future development of NETosis and FcγRIIa inhibitors are needed to treat VITT and similar immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia conditions more effectively, leading to better patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC9441824 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT) is a new syndrome associated with the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 adenoviral vector vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Data are lacking on the clinical features of and the prognostic criteria for this disorder.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients with suspected VITT who presented to hospitals in the United Kingdom between March 22 and June 6, 2021. Data were collected with the use of an anonymized electronic form, and cases were identified as definite or probable VITT according to prespecified criteria. Baseline characteristics and clinicopathological features of the patients, risk factors, treatment, and markers of poor prognosis were determined.ResultsAmong 294 patients who were evaluated, we identified 170 definite and 50 probable cases of VITT. All the patients had received the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and presented 5 to 48 days (median, 14) after vaccination. The age range was 18 to 79 years (median, 48), with no sex preponderance and no identifiable medical risk factors. Overall mortality was 22%. The odds of death increased by a factor of 2.7 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4 to 5.2) among patients with cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, by a factor of 1.7 (95% CI, 1.3 to 2.3) for every 50% decrease in the baseline platelet count, by a factor of 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.3) for every increase of 10,000 fibrinogen-equivalent units in the baseline d-dimer level, and by a factor of 1.7 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.5) for every 50% decrease in the baseline fibrinogen level. Multivariate analysis identified the baseline platelet count and the presence of intracranial hemorrhage as being independently associated with death; the observed mortality was 73% among patients with platelet counts below 30,000 per cubic millimeter and intracranial hemorrhage.ConclusionsThe high mortality associated with VITT was highest among patients with a low platelet count and intracranial hemorrhage. Treatment remains uncertain, but identification of prognostic markers may help guide effective management. (Funded by the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.).
| S-EPMC10662971 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the spring of 2021, reports of rare and unusual venous thrombosis in association with the ChAdOx1 and Ad26.COV2.S adenovirus-based coronavirus vaccines led to a brief suspension of their use by several countries. Thromboses in the cerebral and splanchnic veins among patients vaccinated in the preceding 4 weeks were described in 17 patients out of 7.98 million recipients of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine (with 3 fatalities related to cerebral vein thrombosis) and 169 cases of cerebral vein thrombosis among 35 million ChAdOx1 recipients. Events were associated with thrombocytopenia and anti-PF4 (antibodies directed against platelet factor 4), leading to the designation vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia. Unlike the related heparin-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia, with an estimated incidence of <1:1000 patients treated with heparin, and a mortality rate of 25%, vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia has been reported in 1:150 000 ChAdOx1 recipients and 1:470 000 Ad26.COV.2 recipients, with a reported mortality rate of 20% to 30%. Early recognition of this complication should prompt testing for anti-PF4 antibodies and acute treatment targeting the autoimmune and prothrombotic processes. Intravenous immunoglobulin (1 g/kg for 2 days), consideration of plasma exchange, and nonheparin anticoagulation (argatroban, fondaparinux) are recommended. In cases of cerebral vein thrombosis, one should monitor for and treat the known complications of venous congestion as they would in patients without vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia. Now that the Ad26.COV2.S has been reapproved for use in several countries, it remains a critical component of our pharmacological armamentarium in stopping the spread of the human coronavirus and should be strongly recommended to patients. At this time, the patient and community-level benefits of these two adenoviral vaccines vastly outweigh the rare but serious risks of vaccination. Due to the relatively low risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in young women (<50 years), it is reasonable to recommend an alternative vaccine if one is available. Ongoing postmarketing observational studies are important for tracking new vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia cases and other rare side effects of these emergent interventions.
| S-EPMC8378439 | biostudies-literature