MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325531565 · doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000000410

Does Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury After Solid Organ Transplantation Damage Native Organs?

2014· letter· en· W2325531565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leonard J. Lobo, Peter I. Lobo, Robert M. Aris

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransplantationProinflammatory cytokineReperfusion injuryCell biologyImmunologyImmune systemBiologyInnate immune systemNitric oxideReactive oxygen speciesInflammationChemistryIschemiaMedicineEndocrinologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CORRESPONDENCE Ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) is an unfortunate consequence of organ transplantation. During ischemia, macrophages and endothelial cells generate reactive oxygen species, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate, nuclear factor-κB, nitric oxide synthases, and other proinflammatory cytokines. After blood reintroduces oxygen to the ischemic cells, the reactive oxygen species and cytokines activate neutrophils and alveolar macrophages further damaging cellular proteins, DNA, and plasma membranes. The damaged cells release allopeptides, glycolipids, and damage-associated molecular pattern molecules which are intracellular lipids and proteins that initiate and perpetuate the noninfectious inflammatory response. The allopeptides, damage-associated molecular pattern molecules, and glycolipids enter the circulation and are presented as foreign peptides or bind to the toll-like receptors on resident dendritic cells (DC), where an immune response is initiated. The triggered DCs interact with and activate natural killer (NK), NK T cells, and T cells (1). The activated lymphocytes release cytokines, activating other inflammatory cells, especially granulocytes and macrophages. This appears to be a mixed adaptive or innate immune response, and primary, secondary, and tertiary lymph organs, including the liver, augment IRI (Fig. 1).FIGURE 1: Schematic diagram of potentially important events leading to a systemic inflammatory response syndrome after organ transplantation. ROS, reactive oxygen species; NF-κB, nuclear factor-κB; NOS, nitric oxide synthases; DAMPS, damage-associated molecular pattern molecules; NK, natural killer.In this issue of Transplantation, Rancan et al. (2) confirmed previous studies demonstrating that IRI within the lung allograft might damage nontransplanted organs, namely, the liver, using a swine autotransplantation model. In addition, they showed that preconditioning with sevoflurane, a volatile anesthetic, attenuated these effects. Although these authors showed that lung IRI induced a proinflammatory cytokine response by measuring RNA and protein levels in the liver, they did not report an increase in liver enzymes, histologic evidence of leukocytes infiltration, or hepatocyte injury or apoptosis. Multiple studies have shown that volatile anesthetics can reduce the IRI in transplanted organs; however, no study has shown that it reduces the downstream effects outside the transplanted organ. In 2011, Casanova et al. (3) were the first to show that sevoflurane decreased the inflammatory response and oxidative stress in an ischemia-reperfusion swine auto lung transplant model. Volatile anesthetics may be protective in several ways. First, they decrease the Na, K-ATPase, and sodium channel activities within the cells of the lung decreasing their metabolic needs; and second, they decrease the tumor necrosis factor-α–induced microvascular endothelial permeability. Further studies are needed to determine if sevoflurane inhibits DC or NK-cell function. We analyzed the last 100 patients transplanted at our center to see if liver dysfunction was a notable downstream effect of lung transplantation. Surprisingly, posttransplant liver function testing was not routine so we were unable to determine if there was liver damage, even if transient, after transplantation. To further investigate, we reached out to the lung transplant programs at Duke University Medical Center in the United States (L. Snyder), University of Toronto Medical Center in Canada (S. Keshavjee), St Vincent’s Hospital in Australia (A. Glanville), University Hospital Zurich in Switzerland (A. Boehler), and Hospital Foch in France (M. Stern). The other centers followed liver function immediately after transplantation and only noted episodes of ischemic hepatitis from operative complications. In addition, none noted significant long-term issues with liver dysfunction other than associated with azole antifungal therapy or pretransplant underlying liver disease. Several factors may contribute to the absence of clinically significant native organ inflammation after lung transplantation in humans. First, all transplants are done using a volatile anesthetic, such as isoflurane or sevoflurane. Second, all transplants use high-dose corticosteroids before implantation, and the corticosteroids downregulate the ischemia-reperfusion inflammatory cascade by decreasing the numbers of circulating and organ-resident DCs, inhibiting interleukin-2 and tumor necrosis factor-α production and inhibiting a host of other proinflammatory mechanisms (4). Third, many centers use an induction agent at the time of transplant. Alemtuzumab and antithymocyte globulin suppress DC function and deplete a broad number of cell types, including most lymphocytes, which are thought to play a role in IRI. Additionally, basiliximab prevents the interleukin-2–induced differentiation and proliferation of NK-cells (5). Lastly, fluids and blood products may dilute transaminase levels in blood, making it harder to detect a signal. Hopefully, with the growing use of ex vivo lung perfusion, IRI will decrease. Glimpses of this are seen with a lower incidence of primary graft dysfunction (Cypel M, et al. Am J Transplant 2009;9:2262–9). The IRI is an unwanted consequence of lung transplantation, leading to primary graft dysfunction, earlier onset bronchiolitis obliterans, and increased mortality. Clinically, most of the effects seem to be contained within the allograft. However, there is no compelling reason to believe that the systemic inflammatory response induced by organ transplantation would remain limited to the more vulnerable transplanted organ. In addition, native organ injury after IRI may be transplant organ-dependent as some transplanted organs receive 100% of the cardiac output, such as the lungs, while other organs, such as the kidneys, only receive 10 to 15%. Clinicians should remain vigilant for “innocent bystander” injury to additional organs with the liver and kidney being two of the most susceptible ones.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207