Search

Background and aimsIn patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV), recurrence of infection after liver transplant (LT) is universal and associated with worst survival. We present the results of an Italian cohort to compare the 3-year outcome of HCV-Ab-positive and HCV-Ab-negative LT recipients and to assess the potential interaction between HCV-Ab sero-status and other risk factors for LT failure.MethodsThe study is a multicentre cohort including a sample of liver transplant centres. Participant's information was collected at the local level. The best functional form of variables was decided according to the objective methods based on information theory. Association between transplant failure and potential risk factors was assessed in univariate and multivariate Poisson regression model with random intercept.ResultsBetween June 2007 and May 2009, 1164 LT recipients were enrolled in 16 Italian transplant centres, of them 275 (23.63%) experienced LT failure. Incidence rates of LT failure was 0.32 and 0.23 per 1000 person-days in HCV-Ab-positive and HCV-Ab-negative recipients respectively (P = 0.003). Inferential models according to Akaike information criterion indicated that donor-recipient age difference and donor-recipient sex matching were more informative to predict LT failure than the age and the sex as separate variables. Multivariate analysis provided evidence that HCV-Ab sero-status, time after LT, donor-recipient age difference, donor-recipient sex matching and recipient's MELD score were significantly associated with LT failure. Moreover, the effect of HCV-Ab sero-status on LT failure was modified by the simultaneous action of time after LT and donor-recipient age difference. No interaction was found between recipient's HCV-Ab sero-status and either recipient's MELD or donor-recipient sex matching.ConclusionIn view of the imminent introduction of new anti-HCV therapies, our study provides information to assess which LT recipients should be prioritized for receiving these highly effective, but expensive, new treatments. This is particularly relevant for those clinical settings where healthcare prioritization is endorsed by national authorities.

Author(s): Ignacio Martin-Loeches [sup.1], Alberto Sandiumenge [sup.2], Julien Charpentier [sup.3], John A. Kellum [sup.4], Alan M. Gaffney [sup.5], Francesco Procaccio [sup.6], Glauco A. Westphal [sup.7] Author Affiliations: (1) 0000 0004 [...], The success of any donation process requires that potential brain-dead donors (PBDD) are detected and referred early to professionals responsible for their evaluation and conversion to actual donors. The intensivist plays a crucial role in organ donation. However, identification and referral of PBDDs may be suboptimal in the critical care environment. Factors influencing lower rates of detection and referral include the lack of specific training and the need to provide concomitant urgent care to other critically ill patients. Excellent communication between the ICU staff and the procurement organization is necessary to ensure the optimization of both the number and quality of organs transplanted. The organ donation process has been improved over the last two decades with the involvement and commitment of many healthcare professionals. Clinical protocols have been developed and implemented to better organize the multidisciplinary approach to organ donation. In this manuscript, we aim to highlight the main steps of organ donation, taking into account the following: early identification and evaluation of the PBDD with the use of checklists; donor management, including clinical maintenance of the PBDD with high-quality intensive care to prevent graft failure in recipients and strategies for optimizing donated organs by simplified care standards, clinical guidelines and alert tools; the key role of the intensivist in the donation process with the interaction between ICU professionals and transplant coordinators, nurse protocol managers, and communication skills training; and a final remark on the importance of the development of research with further insight into brain death pathophysiology and reversible organ damage.

Author(s): Alexander Manara [sup.1], Francesco Procaccio [sup.2], Beatriz Domínguez-Gil [sup.3] Author Affiliations: (1) 0000 0004 0380 7221, grid.418484.5, The Intensive Care Unit, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, , Bristol, [...]

Author(s): Beatriz Domínguez-Gil [sup.1], Paul Murphy [sup.2], Francesco Procaccio [sup.3] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.419914.0, 0000000449039088, Organización Nacional de Trasplantes, , C/Sinesio Delgado 6, pabellón 3, 28029, Madrid, Spain (2) grid.436365.1, [...]

Abstract Background Heart transplantation is limited by a severe donor organ shortage. Potential donors with brain death (BD) and left ventricular dysfunction due to neurogenic stunning are currently excluded from donation – although such abnormalities can be reversible with aggressive treatment including Hormonal Treatment (HT) and deferred organ retrieval. Aim To assess the recovery of left ventricular dysfunction in potential brain-dead donors with hemodynamic instability treated by aggressive treatment and HT. Methods In a single-center, observational study design, we evaluated 15 consecutive brain-dead potential donors (DBD) (8 males, age = 48 ± 15 years) with hemodynamic instability. All underwent standard hemodynamic monitoring and transthoracic 2-dimensional echo (2-DE) with assessment of Ejection Fraction (EF). Measurements were obtained before BD and after BD within 6 h, at 24 h and within 48 h. HT (with insulin, methylprednisolone, vasopressin and T3) was started as soon as possible to treat hemodynamic instability and avoid administration of norepinephrine (NE). Eligible potential heart donors underwent coronary angiography. Results After HT, we observed a normalization of hemodynamic conditions with improvement of mean arterial pressure (pre = 68 ± 8 mmHg vs post = 83 ± 13 mmHg, p 2 vs post 3.7 ± 1.2 L/min/m2, p , coronary artery stenosis was present in 2 of the 10 consented donors. Eight hearts were uneventfully transplanted. No early graft failure occurred and all eight recipients were alive at 6-month follow-up. Conclusion In BD donors, intensive treatment including HT is associated with improvement of regional and global LV function and reverse remodeling detectable by transthoracic 2DE. Donor hearts with recovered LV function may be eligible for uneventful heart transplant. The wait (in brain death), treat (with HT) and see (with 2D echo) strategy can help rescue organs suitable for heart donation.

Summary: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) has become an accepted practice in many countries and remains a focus of intense interest in the transplant community. The present study is aimed at providing a description of the current situation of DCD in European countries. Specific questionnaires were developed to compile information on DCD practices, activities and post‐transplant outcomes. Thirty‐five countries completed the survey. DCD is practiced in 18 countries: eight have both controlled DCD (cDCD) and uncontrolled DCD (uDCD) programs, 4 only cDCD and 6 only uDCD. All these countries have legally binding and/or nonbinding texts to regulate the practice of DCD. The no‐touch period ranges from 5 to 30 min. There are variations in ante and post mortem interventions used for the practice of cDCD. During 2008–2016, the highest DCD activity was described in the United Kingdom, Spain, Russia, the Netherlands, Belgium and France. Data on post‐transplant outcomes of patients who receive DCD donor kidneys show better results with grafts obtained from cDCD versus uDCD donors. In conclusion, DCD is becoming increasingly accepted and performed in Europe, importantly contributing to the number of organs available and providing acceptable post‐transplantation outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bacterial infections remain a challenge to solid organ transplantation. Due to the alarming spread of carbapenem-resistant gram negative bacteria, these organisms have been frequently recognized as cause of severe infections in solid organ transplant recipients. Methods and Findings: Between 15 May and 30 September 2012 we enrolled 887 solid organ transplant recipients in Italy with the aim to describe the epidemiology of gram negative bacteria spreading, to explore potential risk factors and to assess the effect of early isolation of gram negative bacteria on recipients’ mortality during the first 90 days after transplantation. During the study period 185 clinical isolates of gram negative bacteria were reported, for an incidence of 2.39 per 1000 recipient-days. Positive cultures for gram negative bacteria occurred early after transplantation (median time 26 days; incidence rate 4.33, 1.67 and 1.14 per 1,000 recipient-days in the first, second and third month after SOT, respectively). Forty-nine of these clinical isolates were due to carbapenem-resistant gram negative bacteria (26.5%; incidence 0.63 per 1000 recipient-days). Carbapenems resistance was particularly frequent among Klebsiella spp. isolates (49.1%). Recipients with longer hospital stay and those who received either heart or lung graft were at the highest risk of testing positive for any gram negative bacteria. Moreover recipients with longer hospital stay, lung recipients and those admitted to hospital for more than 48h before transplantation had the highest probability to have culture(s) positive for carbapenem-resistant gram negative bacteria. Forty-four organ recipients died (0.57 per 1000 recipient-days) during the study period. Recipients with at least one positive culture for carbapenem-resistant gram negative bacteria had a 10.23-fold higher mortality rate than those who did not. Conclusion: The isolation of gram-negative bacteria is most frequent among recipient with hospital stays >48 hours prior to transplant and in those receiving either heart or lung transplants. Carbapenem-resistant gram negative isolates are associated with significant mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is a valuable option for the procurement of functioning organs for transplantation. Clinical results are promising and public acceptance is quite good in most western countries. Yet, although DCD is widespread in Europe, several problems still persist in Italy as well as in some other countries. This paper aims to describe the main clinical, organisational, ethical and legal issues at stake, bearing in mind the particular situation created by Italian legislation. Currently, as regards DCD, Italy is somewhat different from other countries. Therefore, every effort should be made for the safe and effective implementation of DCD programs: uncontrolled DCD programs should be promoted and encouraged, within the framework of shared and authoritative rules. At the same time, we need to tackle the question of controlled DCD, promoting debate among all involved subjects regarding the fundamental issues of end-of-life care within protocols that best integrate the highest standard of care for the dying and the legitimate interests of those awaiting a life-saving organ.