Literature DB >> 25706277

Surveillance Endomyocardial Biopsy in the Modern Era Produces Low Diagnostic Yield for Cardiac Allograft Rejection.

Keyur B Shah1, Maureen P Flattery, Melissa C Smallfield, Grace Merinar, Daniel G Tang, Emily H Sheldon, Leroy R Thacker, Vigneshwar Kasirajan, Richard H Cooke, Michael L Hess.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The changing epidemiology of cardiac allograft rejection has prompted many to question the yield of surveillance endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) in heart transplantation (HT) patients. We sought to determine the yield of EMB in the modern era.
METHODS: We evaluated 2597 EMBs in 182 consecutive HT patients who survived to their first EMB. The EMBs were categorized as asymptomatic or clinically driven and were compared based on era of antiproliferative therapy use at our center (early azathioprine era: 1990-2000 vs modern mycophenolate era: 2000-2011).
RESULTS: In the modern era, patients had a higher prevalence of risk factors for developing rejection (≥ International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation grade 2R); however, the frequency of rejection was decreased at all times (0-6 months: 60.2% vs 21.5%, P < 0.001, 6-12 months: 26.8% vs 1.8%, P < 0.001, 12-36 months: 32.3% vs 10.5%, P = 0.006). The yield of asymptomatic EMB decreased in the modern era between 0 and 6 months (10.9% vs 3.12%), 6 to 12 months (17% vs 0%), and years 2 to 3 (6.1% vs 1.5%). In the early era, the odds ratio of rejection during asymptomatic EMB compared to a clinically driven EMB was 0.47 (95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.71) and was decreased in the modern era (0.17 [0.07-0.42], P = 0.04). The probability of detecting rejection on asymptomatic EMB was significantly reduced in the modern era, even after adjustment for tacrolimus and induction therapy (1% vs 8%, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The clinical yield of surveillance EMB has decreased in the modern era. The EMB in asymptomatic patients longer than 6 months after HT warrants further scrutiny.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25706277      PMCID: PMC4545483          DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000000615

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transplantation        ISSN: 0041-1337            Impact factor:   4.939


  15 in total

1.  The Registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: Twenty-eighth Adult Heart Transplant Report--2011.

Authors:  Josef Stehlik; Leah B Edwards; Anna Y Kucheryavaya; Christian Benden; Jason D Christie; Fabienne Dobbels; Richard Kirk; Axel O Rahmel; Marshall I Hertz
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 10.247

2.  The International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients.

Authors:  Maria Rosa Costanzo; Anne Dipchand; Randall Starling; Allen Anderson; Michael Chan; Shashank Desai; Savitri Fedson; Patrick Fisher; Gonzalo Gonzales-Stawinski; Luigi Martinelli; David McGiffin; Jon Smith; David Taylor; Bruno Meiser; Steven Webber; David Baran; Michael Carboni; Thomas Dengler; David Feldman; Maria Frigerio; Abdallah Kfoury; Daniel Kim; Jon Kobashigawa; Michael Shullo; Josef Stehlik; Jeffrey Teuteberg; Patricia Uber; Andreas Zuckermann; Sharon Hunt; Michael Burch; Geetha Bhat; Charles Canter; Richard Chinnock; Marisa Crespo-Leiro; Reynolds Delgado; Fabienne Dobbels; Kathleen Grady; W Kao; Jaqueline Lamour; Gareth Parry; Jignesh Patel; Daniela Pini; Jeffrey Towbin; Gene Wolfel; Diego Delgado; Howard Eisen; Lee Goldberg; Jeff Hosenpud; Maryl Johnson; Anne Keogh; Clive Lewis; John O'Connell; Joseph Rogers; Heather Ross; Stuart Russell; Johan Vanhaecke
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 10.247

3.  Gene expression profiling and cardiac allograft rejection monitoring: is IMAGE just a mirage?

Authors:  Mandeep R Mehra; Jayan Parameshwar
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 10.247

Review 4.  Is induction therapy still needed in heart transplantation?

Authors:  Arezu Aliabadi; Martina Grömmer; Andreas Zuckermann
Journal:  Curr Opin Organ Transplant       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 2.640

5.  Utility of long-term surveillance endomyocardial biopsy: a multi-institutional analysis.

Authors:  J Stehlik; R C Starling; M A Movsesian; J C Fang; R N Brown; M L Hess; N P Lewis; J K Kirklin
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 10.247

6.  Superior prevention of acute rejection by tacrolimus vs. cyclosporine in heart transplant recipients--a large European trial.

Authors:  M Grimm; M Rinaldi; N A Yonan; G Arpesella; J M Arizón Del Prado; L A Pulpón; J P Villemot; M Frigerio; J L Rodriguez Lambert; M G Crespo-Leiro; L Almenar; D Duveau; A Ordonez-Fernandez; J Gandjbakhch; M Maccherini; G Laufer
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 8.086

7.  Usefulness of routine surveillance endomyocardial biopsy 6 months after heart transplantation.

Authors:  Carlos M Orrego; Andrea M Cordero-Reyes; Jerry D Estep; Matthias Loebe; Guillermo Torre-Amione
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 10.247

8.  Long-term outcomes after cardiac transplantation: an experience based on different eras of immunosuppressive therapy.

Authors:  R John; H A Rajasinghe; J M Chen; A D Weinberg; P Sinha; D M Mancini; Y Naka; M C Oz; C R Smith; E A Rose; N M Edwards
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Gene-expression profiling for rejection surveillance after cardiac transplantation.

Authors:  Michael X Pham; Jeffrey J Teuteberg; Abdallah G Kfoury; Randall C Starling; Mario C Deng; Thomas P Cappola; Andrew Kao; Allen S Anderson; William G Cotts; Gregory A Ewald; David A Baran; Roberta C Bogaev; Barbara Elashoff; Helen Baron; James Yee; Hannah A Valantine
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-04-22       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Limited utility of endomyocardial biopsy in the first year after heart transplantation.

Authors:  Iman M Hamour; Margaret M Burke; Alex D Bell; Mathen G Panicker; Rajasi Banerjee; Nicholas R Banner
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 4.939

View more
  10 in total

1.  Long-term surveillance biopsy: Is it necessary after pediatric heart transplant?

Authors:  David M Peng; Victoria Y Ding; Seth A Hollander; Tigran Khalapyan; John C Dykes; David N Rosenthal; Christopher S Almond; Charlotte Sakarovitch; Manisha Desai; Doff B McElhinney
Journal:  Pediatr Transplant       Date:  2018-12-01

2.  Myocardial velocity, intra-, and interventricular dyssynchrony evaluated by tissue phase mapping in pediatric heart transplant recipients.

Authors:  Haben Berhane; Alexander Ruh; Nazia Husain; Joshua D Robinson; Cynthia K Rigsby; Michael Markl
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-09-12       Impact factor: 4.813

3.  Endothelial Stromal PD-L1 (Programmed Death Ligand 1) Modulates CD8+ T-Cell Infiltration After Heart Transplantation.

Authors:  William Bracamonte-Baran; Nisha A Gilotra; Taejoon Won; Katrina M Rodriguez; Monica V Talor; Byoung C Oh; Jan Griffin; Ilan Wittstein; Kavita Sharma; John Skinner; Roger A Johns; Stuart D Russell; Robert A Anders; Qingfeng Zhu; Marc K Halushka; Gerald Brandacher; Daniela Čiháková
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 10.447

4.  Impact of routine surveillance biopsy intensity on the diagnosis of moderate to severe cellular rejection and survival after pediatric heart transplantation.

Authors:  Matthew D Zinn; Michael J Wallendorf; Kathleen E Simpson; Ashley D Osborne; James K Kirklin; Charles E Canter
Journal:  Pediatr Transplant       Date:  2018-01-29

5.  Lower frequency routine surveillance endomyocardial biopsies after heart transplantation.

Authors:  Ludwig T Weckbach; Ulrich Maurer; Rene Schramm; Bruno C Huber; Korbinian Lackermair; Max Weiss; Bruno Meiser; Christian Hagl; Steffen Massberg; Sandra Eifert; Ulrich Grabmaier
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-25       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The Zabrze'18 protocol is a feasible option to reduce the number of endomyocardial biopsies after heart transplantation.

Authors:  Grzegorz M Kubiak; Radosław Kwieciński; Michał Zakliczyński; Piotr Przybyłowski; Michał O Zembala
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2019-09-18       Impact factor: 1.426

7.  Multi-parametric cardiovascular magnetic resonance with regadenoson stress perfusion is safe following pediatric heart transplantation and identifies history of rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy.

Authors:  Nazia Husain; Kae Watanabe; Haben Berhane; Aditi Gupta; Michael Markl; Cynthia K Rigsby; Joshua D Robinson
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 8.  A Review of Biomarkers of Cardiac Allograft Rejection: Toward an Integrated Diagnosis of Rejection.

Authors:  Guillaume Coutance; Eva Desiré; Jean-Paul Duong Van Huyen
Journal:  Biomolecules       Date:  2022-08-18

9.  Native T1 mapping detects both acute clinical rejection and graft dysfunction in pediatric heart transplant patients.

Authors:  Devika P Richmann; Nyshidha Gurijala; Jason G Mandell; Ashish Doshi; Karin Hamman; Christopher Rossi; Avi Z Rosenberg; Russell Cross; Joshua Kanter; John T Berger; Laura Olivieri
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2022-10-03       Impact factor: 6.903

10.  Utility of routine evaluations for rejection in patients greater than 2 years after heart transplantation.

Authors:  Jessica R Golbus; Matthew C Konerman; Keith D Aaronson
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2020-06-03
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.