Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA for the Detection of Heart Allograft Injury:The Impact of the Timing of the Liquid Biopsy

Background: In heart transplant recipients, donor-derived cell-free DNA (ddcfDNA) is a potential biomarker for acute rejection (AR), in that increased values may indicate rejection. For the assessment of ddcfDNA as new biomarker for rejection, blood plasma sampling around the endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) seems a practical approach. To evaluate the effect of the EMB procedure on ddcfDNA values, ddcfDNA values before the EMB were pairwise compared to ddcfDNA values after the EMB. We aimed at evaluating whether it matters whether the ddcfDNA sampling is done before or after the EMB-procedure. Methods: Plasma samples from heart transplant recipients were obtained pre-EMB and post-EMB. A droplet digital PCR method was used for measuring ddcfDNA, making use of single-nucleotide polymorphisms that allowed both relative quantification, as well as absolute quantification of ddcfDNA. Results: Pairwise comparison of ddcfDNA values pre-EMB with post-EMB samples (n = 113) showed significantly increased ddcfDNA concentrations and ddcfDNA% in post-EMB samples: an average 1.28-fold increase in ddcfDNA concentrations and a 1.31-fold increase in ddcfDNA% was observed (p = 0.007 and p = 0.03, respectively). Conclusion: The EMB procedure causes iatrogenic injury to the allograft that results in an increase in ddcfDNA% and ddcfDNA concentrations. For the assessment of ddcfDNA as marker for AR, collection of plasma samples before the EMB procedure is therefore essential

Waiting list mortality and the potential of donation after circulatory death heart transplantations in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND: With more patients qualifying for heart transplantation (HT) and fewer hearts being transplanted, it is vital to look for other options. To date, only organs from brain-dead donors have been used for HT in the Netherlands. We investigated waiting list mortality in all Dutch HT centres and the potential of donation after circulatory death (DCD) HT in the Netherlands. METHODS: Two different cohorts were evaluated. One cohort was defined as patients who were newly listed or were already on the waiting list for HT between January 2013 and December 2017. Follow-up continued until September 2018 and waiting list mortality was calculated. A second cohort of all DCD donors in the Netherlands (lung, liver, kidney and pancreas) between January 2013 and December 2017 was used to calculate the potential of DCD HT. RESULTS: Out of 395 patients on the waiting list for HT, 196 (50%) received transplants after a median waiting time of 2.6 years. In total, 15% died while on the waiting list before a suitable donor heart became available. We identified 1006 DCD donors. After applying exclusion criteria and an age limit of 50 years, 122 potential heart donors remained. This number increased to 220 when the age limit was extended to 57 years. CONCLUSION: Waiting list mortality in the Netherlands is high. HT using organs from DCD donors has great potential in the Netherlands and could lead to a reduction in waiting list mortality. Cardiac screening will eventually determine the true potential

Listing criteria for heart transplantation in the Netherlands

The updated listing criteria for heart transplantation are presented on behalf of the three heart transplant centres in the Netherlands. Given the shortage of donor hearts, selection of those patients who may expect to have the greatest benefit from a scarce societal resource in terms of life expectancy and quality of life is inevitable. The indication for heart transplantation includes end-stage heart disease not remediable by more conservative measures, accompanied by severe physical limitation while on optimal medical therapy, including ICD/CRT‑D. Assessment of this condition requires cardiopulmonary stress testing, prognostic stratification and invasive haemodynamic measurements. Timely referral to a tertiary centre is essential for an optimal outcome. Chronic mechanical circulatory support is being used more and more as an alternative to heart transplantation and to bridge the progressively longer waiting time for heart transplantation and, thus, has become an important treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure

Preoperative right heart hemodynamics predict postoperative acute kidney injury after heart transplantation

Purpose: Acute kidney injury (AKI) frequently occurs after heart transplantation (HTx), but its relation to preoperative right heart hemodynamic (RHH) parameters remains unknown. Therefore, we aimed to determine their predictive properties for postoperative AKI severity within 30 days after HTx. Methods: From 1984 to 2016, all consecutive HTx recipients (n = 595) in our tertiary referral center were included and analyzed for the occurrence of postoperative AKI staged by the kidney disease improving global outcome criteria. The effects of preoperative RHH parameters on postoperative AKI were calculated using logistic regression, and predictive accuracy was assessed using integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), net reclassification improvement (NRI), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Results: Postoperative AKI occurred in 430 (72%) patients including 278 (47%) stage 1, 66 (11%) stage 2, and 86 (14%) stage 3 cases. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) was administered in 41 (7%) patients. Patients with higher AKI stages had also higher baseline right atrial pressure (RAP; median 7, 7, 8, and in RRT 11 mmHg, p trend = 0.021), RAP-to-pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio (median 0.37, 0.36, 0.40, 0.47, p trend = 0.009), and lower pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) values (median 2.83, 3.17, 2.54, 2.31, p trend = 0.012). Higher RAP and lower PAPi values independently predicted AKI severity [adjusted odds ratio (OR) per doubling of RAP 1.16 (1.02–1.32), p = 0.029; of PAPi 0.85 (0.75–0.96), p = 0.008]. Based on IDI, NRI, and delta AUC, inclusion of these parameters improved the models’ predictive accuracy. Conclusions: Preoperative PAPi and RAP strongly predict the development of AKI early after HTx and can be used as early AKI predictors

Practical guidelines for rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection

The potential for ischemic preconditioning to reduce infarct size was first recognized more than 30 years ago. Despite extension of the concept to ischemic postconditioning and remote ischemic conditioning and literally thousands of experimental studies in various species and models which identified a multitude of signaling steps, so far there is only a single and very recent study, which has unequivocally translated cardioprotection to improved clinical outcome as the primary endpoint in patients. Many potential reasons for this disappointing lack of clinical translation of cardioprotection have been proposed, including lack of rigor and reproducibility in preclinical studies, and poor design and conduct of clinical trials. There is, however, universal agreement that robust preclinical data are a mandatory prerequisite to initiate a meaningful clinical trial. In this context, it is disconcerting that the CAESAR consortium (Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective therapies) in a highly standardized multi-center approach of preclinical studies identified only ischemic preconditioning, but not nitrite or sildenafil, when given as adjunct to reperfusion, to reduce infarct size. However, ischemic preconditioning—due to its very nature—can only be used in elective interventions, and not in acute myocardial infarction. Therefore, better strategies to identify robust and reproducible strategies of cardioprotection, which can subsequently be tested in clinical trials must be developed. We refer to the recent guidelines for experimental models of myocardial ischemia and infarction, and aim to provide now practical guidelines to ensure rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection. In line with the above guideline, we define rigor as standardized state-of-the-art design, conduct and reporting of a study, which is then a prerequisite for reproducibility, i.e. replication of results by another laboratory when performing exactly the same experiment

The prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis after heart transplantation assessed using CT

Objective: Osteoporosis is frequently observed in patients after heart transplantation (HT), although the prevalence long-term post-HT is unknown. Most studies investigating bone mineral density (BD) after HT were performed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. In this study BD, including the prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis, was investigated using coronary computed tomography (CCT) long-term post-HT. Moreover, risk factors for abnormal BD were investigated. Methods: All first CCT scans between February 2018 and June 2020 used for the annual screening for cardiac allograft vasculopathy were included. Retransplantations and scans with not fully imaged vertebrae were excluded. BD was measured as a mean of the BD of three consecutive thoracic vertebrae and categorized into normal BD, osteopenia or osteoporosis. Binary logistic regression was used to find determinants for an abnormal BD. Linear regression was used to explore determinants for the mean Hounsfield unit (HU) value of the BD. Results: In total, 140 patients were included (median age 55.2 [42.9-64.9] years, 51 (36%) female). Time between HT and CT scan was 11.0 [7.3-16.1] years. In total, 80 (57%), 43 (31%), and 17 (12%) patients had a normal BD, osteopenia, or osteoporosis, respectively. Osteoporotic fracture or vertebrae fractures was seen in 11 (8%) patients. Determinants for an abnormal BD were recipient age (OR 1.10 (1.06-1.14), p&lt;0.001) and prednisolone use (OR 3.75 (1.27-11.01), p=0.016). In linear regression, left ventricular assist device use pre-HT (p=0.024) and time since HT (p=0.046) were additional BD determinants. Discussion: Osteopenia and osteoporosis are frequently seen on CCT post-HT. More investigation on appropriate measures to maintain a normal BD in these patients are needed.</p

Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in heart transplantation recipients in the Netherlands

Background Immunocompromised patients are at high risk of complicated severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 infection. The aim of this retrospective study was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of heart transplantation (HTx) recipients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Netherlands. Methods HTx patients from one of the three HTx centres in the Netherlands with COVID-19 (proven by positive reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction or serology test result) between February 2020 and June 2021 were included. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality and the secondary endpoint was disease severity. Results COVID-19 was diagnosed in 54/665 HTx patients (8%), with a mean (+/- standard deviation (SD)) time after HTx of 11 +/- 8 years. Mean (+/- SD) age was 53 +/- 14 years and 39% were female. Immunosuppressive therapy dosage was reduced in 37% patients (20/54). Hospitalisation was required in 39% patients (21/54), and 13% patients (7/54) had severe COVID-19 (leading to intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death). In-hospital mortality was 14% (3/21), and all-cause mortality was 6%. Compared with patients with moderate COVID-19 (hospitalised without ICU indication), severe COVID-19 patients tended to be transplanted earlier and had a significantly higher mean (+/- SD) body mass index (26 +/- 3 vs 30 +/- 3 kg/m(2), p = 0.01). Myocardial infarction, cellular rejection and pulmonary embolism were observed once in three different HTx patients. Conclusion HTx patients were at increased risk of complicated COVID-19 with frequent hospitalisation, but the all-cause mortality was substantially lower than previously described (7-33%)

Use of Cardiac CT in the Routine Assessment of Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy in Heart Transplant Patients: Results from the First 100 Consecutive Patients

PURPOSE: Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) is an accelerated form of coronary artery disease that affects heart transplant patients (HTx). Routine screening for CAV is warranted. We evaluated the feasibility and utility of cardiac CT to screen for CAV in 100 consecutive HTx patients at our center. METHODS: From Feb 2018 to Jan 2019 all consecutive HTxs who were more than five-years post-transplant were converted from using stress myocardial perfusion imaging to cardiac CT for the annual assessment of CAV. CAV was scored (0 (absent), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate), 3 (severe)) based on coronary CT angiography (CCTA) findings and compared with the most recently known CAV score before CCTA. RESULTS: CCTA was performed in 99 out of 100 patients who were planned for cardiac CT (56 (42-63) years, 65% men, and 11 (8-16) years post-transplant), 1 patient underwent only a calcium scan due to IV access problems. The median Agatston calcium score was 6 (0-85), and 38 patients had no detectable calcium. CCTA showed new obstructive coronary disease (>50% stenosis) in 20 patients. The CAV score was reclassified based on CCTA findings in 37 patients (p<0.001) (Figure 1). There were 53 CAV0, 22 CAV1, 11 CAV2 and 14 CAV3 patients. Mean heart rate during scanning was 75±11 beats per minute and beta-blockers were required in 63 patients. Median radiation dose was 2.5 (1.9-3.5) mSv. Two cases are presented in Figure 2. CONCLUSION: Cardiac CT can be successfully performed in HTxs with a low radiation dose. CCTA detects patients with significant coronary disease which leads to substantial reclassification of CAV grades