First-degree living-related donor liver transplantation in autoimmune liver diseases.

Liver transplantation (LT) is the treatment of choice for end‐stage autoimmune liver diseases. However, the underlying disease may recur in the graft in some 20% of cases. The aim of this study is to determine whether LT using living donor grafts from first‐degree relatives results in higher rates of recurrence than grafts from more distant/unrelated donors. Two hundred sixty‐three patients, who underwent a first LT in the Toronto liver transplant program between January 2000 and March 2015 for autoimmune liver diseases, and had at least 6 months of post‐LT follow‐up, were included in this study. Of these, 72 (27%) received a graft from a first‐degree living‐related donor, 56 (21%) from a distant/unrelated living donor, and 135 (51%) from a deceased donor for primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) (n = 138, 52%), primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) (n = 69, 26%), autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) (n = 44, 17%), and overlap syndromes (n = 12, 5%). Recurrence occurred in 52 (20%) patients. Recurrence rates for each autoimmune liver disease were not significantly different after first‐degree living‐related, living‐unrelated, or deceased‐donor LT. Similarly, time to recurrence, recurrence‐related graft failure, graft survival, and patient survival were not significantly different between groups. In conclusion, first‐degree living‐related donor LT for PSC, PBC, or AIH is not associated with an increased risk of disease recurrence

International Survey of Clinical Monitoring Practices in Pancreas and Islet Transplantation

Background. The long-term outcomes of both pancreas and islet allotransplantation have been compromised by difficulties in the detection of early graft dysfunction at a time when a clinical intervention can prevent further deterioration and preserve allograft function. The lack of standardized strategies for monitoring pancreas and islet allograft function prompted an international survey established by an International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association/European Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association working group. Methods. A global survey was administered to 24 pancreas and 18 islet programs using Redcap. The survey addressed protocolized and for-cause immunologic and metabolic monitoring strategies following pancreas and islet allotransplantation. All invited programs completed the survey. Results. The survey identified that in both pancreas and islet allograft programs, protocolized clinical monitoring practices included assessing body weight, fasting glucose/C-peptide, hemoglobin A1c, and donor-specific antibody. Protocolized monitoring in islet transplant programs relied on the addition of mixed meal tolerance test, continuous glucose monitoring, and autoantibody titers. In the setting of either suspicion for rejection or serially increasing hemoglobin A1c/fasting glucose levels postpancreas transplant, Doppler ultrasound, computed tomography, autoantibody titers, and pancreas graft biopsy were identified as adjunctive strategies to protocolized monitoring studies. No additional assays were identified in the setting of serially increasing hemoglobin A1c levels postislet transplantation. Conclusions. This international survey identifies common immunologic and metabolic monitoring strategies utilized for protocol and for cause following pancreas and islet transplantation. In the absence of any formal studies to assess the efficacy of immunologic and metabolic testing to detect early allograft dysfunction, it can serve as a guidance document for developing monitoring algorithms following beta-cell replacement

International Survey of Clinical Monitoring Practices in Pancreas and Islet Transplantation

Background. The long-term outcomes of both pancreas and islet allotransplantation have been compromised by difficulties in the detection of early graft dysfunction at a time when a clinical intervention can prevent further deterioration and preserve allograft function. The lack of standardized strategies for monitoring pancreas and islet allograft function prompted an international survey established by an International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association/European Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association working group. Methods. A global survey was administered to 24 pancreas and 18 islet programs using Redcap. The survey addressed protocolized and for-cause immunologic and metabolic monitoring strategies following pancreas and islet allotransplantation. All invited programs completed the survey. Results. The survey identified that in both pancreas and islet allograft programs, protocolized clinical monitoring practices included assessing body weight, fasting glucose/C-peptide, hemoglobin A1c, and donor-specific antibody. Protocolized monitoring in islet transplant programs relied on the addition of mixed meal tolerance test, continuous glucose monitoring, and autoantibody titers. In the setting of either suspicion for rejection or serially increasing hemoglobin A1c/fasting glucose levels postpancreas transplant, Doppler ultrasound, computed tomography, autoantibody titers, and pancreas graft biopsy were identified as adjunctive strategies to protocolized monitoring studies. No additional assays were identified in the setting of serially increasing hemoglobin A1c levels postislet transplantation. Conclusions. This international survey identifies common immunologic and metabolic monitoring strategies utilized for protocol and for cause following pancreas and islet transplantation. In the absence of any formal studies to assess the efficacy of immunologic and metabolic testing to detect early allograft dysfunction, it can serve as a guidance document for developing monitoring algorithms following beta-cell replacement.Nephrolog