Mee K Kim1, Won R Wee, Chung-gyu Park, Sang J Kim. 1. Seoul Artificial Eye Center, Seoul National University Hospital Clinical Research Institute, and Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Donor shortage in corneal transplantation is a significant problem in Asian countries and is an emerging issue worldwide. This review will discuss current knowledge of the pathogenesis of the rejection mechanism, recent advances in xenocorneal transplantation, and feasibility of porcine xenocorneal graft. RECENT FINDINGS: α-Gal epitopes which are expressed on the porcine cornea, however less than in other vascularized organs. A small animal model provided evidence of complement-mediated or antibody-mediated rejection in porcine xenocorneal transplantation. Recent progress in genetic engineering of the pig or biomedical engineering for removal of the α-Gal epitope appears to have resulted in reduction of antibody-mediated rejection. Porcine corneal xenograft is not rejected hyperacutely in all animal models. T cells predominantly mediate xenocorneal rejection through various animal models. Survival of lamellar fresh porcine grafts is longer than that of full-thickness fresh porcine grafts. Decellularized porcine grafts also demonstrate significantly longer survival than fresh grafts do. SUMMARY: Recent studies have documented the potential of the porcine corneal graft as a substitute for use in human allograft and have highlighted the mechanisms of rejection of xenocorneal transplantation. Antibody-mediated or complement-mediated xenogeneic rejection should be further explored in a large animal model.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Donor shortage in corneal transplantation is a significant problem in Asian countries and is an emerging issue worldwide. This review will discuss current knowledge of the pathogenesis of the rejection mechanism, recent advances in xenocorneal transplantation, and feasibility of porcine xenocorneal graft. RECENT FINDINGS: α-Gal epitopes which are expressed on the porcine cornea, however less than in other vascularized organs. A small animal model provided evidence of complement-mediated or antibody-mediated rejection in porcine xenocorneal transplantation. Recent progress in genetic engineering of the pig or biomedical engineering for removal of the α-Gal epitope appears to have resulted in reduction of antibody-mediated rejection. Porcine corneal xenograft is not rejected hyperacutely in all animal models. T cells predominantly mediate xenocorneal rejection through various animal models. Survival of lamellar fresh porcine grafts is longer than that of full-thickness fresh porcine grafts. Decellularized porcine grafts also demonstrate significantly longer survival than fresh grafts do. SUMMARY: Recent studies have documented the potential of the porcine corneal graft as a substitute for use in human allograft and have highlighted the mechanisms of rejection of xenocorneal transplantation. Antibody-mediated or complement-mediated xenogeneic rejection should be further explored in a large animal model.
Authors: Vladimir Lamm; Hidetaka Hara; Alex Mammen; Deepinder Dhaliwal; David K C Cooper Journal: Xenotransplantation Date: 2014-02-21 Impact factor: 3.907
Authors: Whayoung Lee; Alex Mammen; Deepinder K Dhaliwal; Cassandra Long; Yuko Miyagawa; David Ayares; David K C Cooper; Hidetaka Hara Journal: Xenotransplantation Date: 2016-11-05 Impact factor: 3.907
Authors: Minoru Fujita; Ruhina Mehra; Seung Eun Lee; Danny S Roh; Cassandra Long; James L Funderburgh; David L Ayares; David K C Cooper; Hidetaka Hara Journal: Ophthalmic Res Date: 2012-12-18 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: David K C Cooper; Vikas Satyananda; Burcin Ekser; Dirk J van der Windt; Hidetaka Hara; Mohamed B Ezzelarab; Henk-Jan Schuurman Journal: Xenotransplantation Date: 2014-09-01 Impact factor: 3.907
Authors: Robert Henker; Michael Scholz; Simone Gaffling; Nagayoshi Asano; Ulrike Hampel; Fabian Garreis; Joachim Hornegger; Friedrich Paulsen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 3.240