Immunosuppressive strategies in face and hand transplantation: a comprehensive systematic review of current therapy regimens and outcomes.
face transplant
hand transplant
immunosuppressive therapy
outcome
vascularized composite allograft (VCA)
Journal
Frontiers in transplantation
ISSN: 2813-2440
Titre abrégé: Front Transplant
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 9918573988006676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2024
2024
Historique:
received:
05
01
2024
accepted:
21
02
2024
medline:
12
7
2024
pubmed:
12
7
2024
entrez:
12
7
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Recipients of Vascularized Composite Allotransplants require effective immunosuppressive therapy to prevent graft rejection. This systematic review summarizes the current body of literature on immunosuppressive regimens used in face and hand transplants while summarizing their outcome in terms of rejection, renal failure, and infections. A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify relevant studies from 1998 until July 1st, 2023. We included all studies that discussed immunosuppressive strategies in face and hand transplant recipients according to PRISMA. The standard triple maintenance therapy was mostly adjusted due to nephrotoxicity or high incidence of rejection. The most common alternative treatments utilized were sirolimus (25/91; 27.5%) or everolimus (9/91; 9.9%) following hand- and photophoresis (7/45; 15.6%), sirolimus (5/45; 11.1%) or belatacept (1/45; 2.2%) following face transplantation. Episodes of rejection were reported in 60 (65.9%) of hand- and 33 (73%) of face transplant patients respectively. Graft loss of 12 (13.2%) hand and 4 (8.9%) face transplants was reported. Clinical CMV infection was observed in 6 (6.6%) hand and 7 (15.5%) face transplant recipients. Based on the herein presented data, facial grafts exhibited a heightened incidence of rejection episodes and CMV infections. Facial mucosa adds complexity to the immunological graft composition highlighting the need of individualized immunosuppressive regimens and further research.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Recipients of Vascularized Composite Allotransplants require effective immunosuppressive therapy to prevent graft rejection. This systematic review summarizes the current body of literature on immunosuppressive regimens used in face and hand transplants while summarizing their outcome in terms of rejection, renal failure, and infections.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify relevant studies from 1998 until July 1st, 2023. We included all studies that discussed immunosuppressive strategies in face and hand transplant recipients according to PRISMA.
Results
UNASSIGNED
The standard triple maintenance therapy was mostly adjusted due to nephrotoxicity or high incidence of rejection. The most common alternative treatments utilized were sirolimus (25/91; 27.5%) or everolimus (9/91; 9.9%) following hand- and photophoresis (7/45; 15.6%), sirolimus (5/45; 11.1%) or belatacept (1/45; 2.2%) following face transplantation. Episodes of rejection were reported in 60 (65.9%) of hand- and 33 (73%) of face transplant patients respectively. Graft loss of 12 (13.2%) hand and 4 (8.9%) face transplants was reported. Clinical CMV infection was observed in 6 (6.6%) hand and 7 (15.5%) face transplant recipients.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
Based on the herein presented data, facial grafts exhibited a heightened incidence of rejection episodes and CMV infections. Facial mucosa adds complexity to the immunological graft composition highlighting the need of individualized immunosuppressive regimens and further research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38993787
doi: 10.3389/frtra.2024.1366243
pmc: PMC11235358
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
1366243Informations de copyright
© 2024 Huelsboemer, Boroumand, Kochen, Dony, Moscarelli, Hauc, Stögner, Formica, Pomahac and Kauke-Navarro.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
LH is receiving an individual research grant by the German Research Foundation (DFG). The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.