We have located links that may give you full text access.
Endomyocardial Biopsy and Prevalence of Acute Cellular Rejection in Heart Transplantation.
Transplantation Proceedings 2020 October 9
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) remains the criterion standard method for surveillance of allograft rejection after heart transplant (HT). However, data regarding utility of EMBs and prevalence of acute cellular rejection (ACR) in Asian populations are still limited. We aimed to report our experience in the use of EMBs and prevalence of ACR in HT recipients.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated all EMBs from consecutive HT recipients between January 2008 and December 2018. EMB pathology results were according to International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation 2004 revision of biopsy grading. We also divided patients into previous era and current era group (underwent HT before and after 2015) to compare prevalence of ACR and survival outcome.
RESULTS: A total of 832 EMBs from 81 HT recipients were included. Pathologic reports revealed ACR grade 1R 22.8%, 2R 4.2%, and 3R 0.6%. At patient level, at least 1 episode of ACR grade 1R, 2R, and 3R were found in 70.6%, 24.7%, and 3.5% of the patients, respectively. When compared between era, frequency of EMB during the first year after HT in current era was significantly higher (9.74 ± 3.38 vs 4.93 ± 3.29, P < .001), but lower frequency of rejection grade ≥ 2R were found (2.3% vs 8.1%, P < .001). However, 1-year survival was not statistically different (76% in previous era vs 80% in current era, P = .37).
CONCLUSIONS: From our study, prevalence of grade ≥ 2R rejection was approximately 5%, which is comparable with previous studies. Further studies are needed to evaluate proper interval and number of EMBs in HT recipients.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated all EMBs from consecutive HT recipients between January 2008 and December 2018. EMB pathology results were according to International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation 2004 revision of biopsy grading. We also divided patients into previous era and current era group (underwent HT before and after 2015) to compare prevalence of ACR and survival outcome.
RESULTS: A total of 832 EMBs from 81 HT recipients were included. Pathologic reports revealed ACR grade 1R 22.8%, 2R 4.2%, and 3R 0.6%. At patient level, at least 1 episode of ACR grade 1R, 2R, and 3R were found in 70.6%, 24.7%, and 3.5% of the patients, respectively. When compared between era, frequency of EMB during the first year after HT in current era was significantly higher (9.74 ± 3.38 vs 4.93 ± 3.29, P < .001), but lower frequency of rejection grade ≥ 2R were found (2.3% vs 8.1%, P < .001). However, 1-year survival was not statistically different (76% in previous era vs 80% in current era, P = .37).
CONCLUSIONS: From our study, prevalence of grade ≥ 2R rejection was approximately 5%, which is comparable with previous studies. Further studies are needed to evaluate proper interval and number of EMBs in HT recipients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app