Urgent desensitization in patients bridged to heart transplantation under extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support: A preliminary experience

Antihuman leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies restrict the access to cardiac allografts. Desensitization therapy is a major challenge in patients with cardiogenic shock waiting for urgent heart transplantation (HT). We retrospectively reviewed six patients (mean age of 37.5 years [16–70]) who underwent plasmapheresis (PP) under extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) before transplant between January 2017 and September 2018. The average duration of follow‐up was 25 months [20–32]. Mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of HLA‐specific antibodies was reported as follows: score 4 for MFI < 1000, score 6 for 1000 < MFI < 3000 and score 8 for MFI > 3000. The mean duration of ECMO support was 29 days [1–74] and 6.8 [1–29] PP sessions were performed per patient before transplant. The mean number of HLA‐specific antibodies before HT was 9.6 for score 6 [4–13] and 5.8 for score 8 [1–12]. Four patients had major complications after transplantation (2 hemorrhagic shocks, 5 infectious events). Mean MFI reduction rate was 94% [79–100] for Class I and 44.2% for Class II [0–83]. Hospital survival was 100%, and early antibody‐mediated rejection was diagnosed in one patient at 7 days after HT. Plasmapheresis under ECMO support was associated with favorable early outcomes in highly sensitized candidates for urgent heart transplantation.     

Optimal donation of kidney transplants after controlled circulatory death

Controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) is used for “extended criteria” donors with poorer kidney transplant outcomes. The French cDCD program started in 2015 and is characterized by normothermic regional perfusion, hypothermic machine perfusion, and short cold ischemia time. We compared the outcomes of kidney transplantation from cDCD and brain-dead (DBD) donors, matching cDCD and DBD kidney transplants by propensity scoring for donor and recipient characteristics. The matching process retained 442 of 499 cDCD and 809 of 6185 DBD transplantations. The DGF rate was 20% in cDCD recipients compared with 28% in DBD recipients (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12–1.82). When DBD transplants were ranked by cold ischemia time and machine perfusion use and compared with cDCD transplants, the aRR of DGF was higher for DBD transplants without machine perfusion, regardless of the cold ischemia time (aRR with cold ischemia time <18 h, 1.57; 95% CI 1.20–2.03, vs aRR with cold ischemia time ≥18 h, 1.79; 95% CI 1.31–2.44). The 1-year graft survival rate was similar in both groups. Early outcome was better for kidney transplants from cDCD than from matched DBD transplants with this French protocol.     

Increased incidence and unusual presentations of CMV disease in kidney transplant recipients after conversion to belatacept

Belatacept may increase cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease risk after conversion from CNI-based therapy. We analyzed CMV disease characteristics after belatacept conversion. Propensity score matching was used to compare CMV disease incidence in belatacept- and CNI-treated kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). CMV disease characteristics and risk factors under belatacept were analyzed. In total, 223 KTRs (median age [IQR] 59.2 years [45.4–68.5]) were converted to belatacept (median of 11.5 months [2.5–37.0] post-transplantation); 40/223 (17.9%) developed CMV disease. Independent risk factors included increased age (p = .0164), D+/R− CMV serostatus (p = .0220), and low eGFR at conversion (p = .0355). Among 181 belatacept-treated patients matched to 181 controls, 32/181 (17.7%) experienced CMV disease (vs. 5/181 controls [2.8%]). CMV disease cumulative incidences were 6.33 and 0.91/100 person-years (p-y) in belatacept and control groups, respectively. CMV disease risk was particularly high in elderly patients (converted >70 years) and those with eGFR <30 ml/min; cumulative incidences were 18.4 and 5.2/100 p-y, respectively. CMV diseases under belatacept were atypical, with late-onset disease (24/40 patients [60%]), high CMV seropositivity (27/40, 67%), increased severe and tissue-invasive disease rates (gastrointestinal involvement in 32/40 [80%]) and life-threatening diseases (4/40 [10%]). These findings should stimulate further research to secure the use of belatacept as a valuable rescue therapy in KTRs.     

Translation,cultural adaptation and construct validity of the German version of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for informal Carers (German ASCOT-Carer)

Quality of Life Research - The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (ASCOT-Carer), developed in England, measures the effects of long-term care (LTC) services and carer support on informal...     

Colorectal cancer screening practices among cancer survivors five years after diagnosis

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has a high incidence worldwide, especially in high-income countries. In France, a national CRC screening program targeting residents aged 50–74 years has been in place since 2009. Little is known about CRC screening practices in cancer survivors, even though some have an increased risk of developing a second cancer in the colorectum. This study aims to identify the barriers to CRC screening among cancer survivors.

Methods

This cross-sectional study based on the French national VICAN survey included individuals diagnosed in 2010 with a cancer in 1 of 11 locations other than the colorectum and interviewed 5 years after diagnosis about various health-related issues. Binary logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with lack of up-to-date CRC screening in cancer survivors without cancer progression.

Results

Of the 2935 cancer survivors included in the study, 35.3% reported undergoing a screening test in the previous 2 years. The rate of up-to-date CRC screening rose to 49.3% in survivors aged 51–75 years. Among these, lack of CRC screening in the recommended time frame was associated with obesity, current smoking, non-use of complementary medicine, perceived financial difficulties, and poor access to general practitioners.

Conclusions

Barriers to CRC screening can be personal and/or institutional.