MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3014864494 · doi:10.1111/ajt.15886

Hepatitis B surface antigen–positive donor to negative recipient lung transplantation

2020· letter· en· W3014864494 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Sara Belga, Dima Kabbani, Karen Doucette

Notice bibliographique

RevueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2020
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHepatitis B Virus Studies
Établissements canadiensUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesHealth Resources and Services Administration
Mots-clésMedicineHBsAgEntecavirTransplantationHepatitis B virusBasiliximabHepatitis BLiver transplantationImmunosuppressionGastroenterologyInternal medicineImmunologySurgeryLamivudineTacrolimusVirus

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

To the Editor: A 63-year-old man presented with hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to newly diagnosed idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Three weeks after his initial presentation, a compatible but increased risk donor with positive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) became available. A decision was made to accept the available lungs because the patient’s clinical condition was deteriorating rapidly and the chances of survival were otherwise slim. Due to previous cardiac surgery resulting in mediastinal adhesions, a single right lung transplantation was performed. The patient received induction immunosuppression with basiliximab and maintenance with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and low-dose prednisone. The recipient was negative for HBsAg, hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs), and hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc), with no documented immunization before transplantation. The donor had low-level hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA, at 38 IU/mL, at the time of procurement and was confirmed to have negative hepatitis delta serology. The recipient received hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) immediately before and after lung transplantation daily for 7 days. Entecavir was initiated immediately after surgery. HBV serologies at 12 months after transplantation revealed positive anti-HBc and anti-HBs titers of 58 IU/mL, but negative HBsAg and HBV DNA. Postoperative course was complicated by slow weaning from the ventilator. The patient was discharged home 4.5 months after transplantation and his lung function remains stable with forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) 71% of predicted at 18 months after transplantation. He will continue entecavir lifelong, and repeat HBV markers, including HBV DNA, every 6 months for the second year posttransplant. HBV D+/R− organ transplantation is rarely considered in nonendemic regions due to limited outcome data. Chronic HBV infection is highly prevalent in Southeast Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, with about 350 million people chronically infected worldwide. Given the scarcity of organs and the increasing number of transplant candidates on the waiting list, expanding the donor pool to include donors with chronic HBV infection in urgent nonrenal transplant candidates must be considered.1Huprikar S Danziger-Isakov L Ahn J et al.Solid organ transplantation from hepatitis B virus-positive donors: consensus guidelines for recipient management.Am J Transplant. 2015; 15: 1162-1172Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (133) Google Scholar, 2Levitsky J Doucette K AST Infectious Diseases Community of PracticeViral hepatitis in solid organ transplantation.Am J Transplant. 2013; 13: 147-168Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (65) Google Scholar, 3Te H Doucette K. Viral hepatitis: guidelines by the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Disease Community of Practice.Clin Transplant. 2019; 33: e13514Crossref PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar It is important to note that antiviral drugs, such as entecavir and tenofovir, are safe and effective to prevent and/or control HBV infection posttransplant. There are presently no published studies on the use of HBsAg-positive donors in lung transplantation, and limited evidence is available in heart transplantation.1Huprikar S Danziger-Isakov L Ahn J et al.Solid organ transplantation from hepatitis B virus-positive donors: consensus guidelines for recipient management.Am J Transplant. 2015; 15: 1162-1172Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (133) Google Scholar Based on Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) data as of October 18, 2019, there were 23 HBV D+/R− (HBsAg-positive-to-negative) transplants, 14 hearts and 9 lungs, out of 48 199 thoracic organs transplanted between February 1, 2009 and February 28, 2019; however, a total of 54 lungs from anti-HBc-positive and/or HBsAg-positive donors were discarded out of a total of 2056 discarded lungs. OPTN patient survival data from HBsAg-positive donors suggest comparable outcomes in lung transplant recipients (Figure 1). Studies from Taiwan have reported successful heart transplantation from HBsAg-positive donors.4Ko W-J Chou N-K Hsu R-B et al.Hepatitis B virus infection in heart transplant recipients in a hepatitis B endemic area.J Heart Lung Transplant. 2001; 20: 865-875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (43) Google Scholar, 5Wang S-S Chou N-K Ko W-J et al.Heart transplantation using donors positive for hepatitis.Transplant Proc. 2004; 36: 2371-2373Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar, 6Chen YC Chuang MK Chou NK et al.Twenty-four year single-center experience of hepatitis B virus infection in heart transplantation.Transplant Proc. 2012; 44: 910-912Crossref PubMed Scopus (14) Google Scholar With appropriate antiviral and/or immunoprophylaxis in HBV-naïve patients, no HBV-related morbidity or mortality was encountered.6Chen YC Chuang MK Chou NK et al.Twenty-four year single-center experience of hepatitis B virus infection in heart transplantation.Transplant Proc. 2012; 44: 910-912Crossref PubMed Scopus (14) Google Scholar In conclusion, the use of HBsAg-positive donors must be considered in urgent thoracic transplantation; we demonstrate good short-term outcome with combination of antiviral therapy and HBIG. Optimal monitoring strategies and duration of antiviral prophylaxis should be addressed in future studies. The authors would like to thank Dr Ali Kapasi and the Alberta Lung Transplant Program for the assistance given in the successful management of this case. This work was supported in part by Health Resources and Services Administration contract 234-2005-37011C. The content is the responsibility of the authors alone and does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the US Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US Government. The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose as described by the American Journal of Transplantation. Conceptualization: Sara Belga, Dima Kabbani, and Karen Doucette. Supervision: Karen Doucette. Writing of original draft: Sara Belga. Survival analysis: Dima Kabbani. Review and Editing: Sara Belga, Dima Kabbani, and Karen Doucette. All the authors were directly involved in the patient’s care.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,633
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,272
Écart entre enseignants0,259 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations14
Publié2020
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAmerican Journal of TransplantationMême sujetHepatitis B Virus StudiesTravaux en français237 207