Anja C Roden, Dara L Aisner, Timothy Craig Allen, Marie Christine Aubry, Roberto J Barrios, Mary B Beasley, Philip T Cagle, Vera L Capelozzi, Sanja Dacic, Yimin Ge, Lida P Hariri, Sylvie Lantuejoul, Ross A Miller, Mari Mino-Kenudson, Andre L Moreira, Kirtee Raparia, Natasha Rekhtman, Lynette Sholl, Maxwell L Smith, Ming S Tsao, Marina Vivero, Yasushi Yatabe, Eunhee S Yi1. 1. From the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, Minnesota (Drs Roden, Aubry, and Yi); the Department of Pathology, University of Colorado, Denver (Dr Aisner); the Department of Pathology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston (Dr Allen); the Department of Pathology and Genomic Medicine, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas (Drs Barrios, Cagle, Ge, and Miller); the Department of Pathology, Mount Sinai Health System, Icahn School of Medicine, New York, New York (Dr Beasley); the Department of Pathology, University of São Paolo, Brazil (Dr Capelozzi); the Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Dr Dacic); the Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston (Drs Hariri and Mino-Kenudson); Département de Biopathologie, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, Université Joseph Fourier INSERM U 823, Institut A. Bonniot, La Tronche, France (Dr Lantuejoul); the Department of Pathology, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, New York (Dr Moreira); the Department of Pathology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois (Dr Raparia); the Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York (Dr Rekhtman); the Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (Drs Sholl and Vivero); the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale (Dr Smith); the Department of Pathology, University Health Network/Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Dr Tsao); and the Department of Pathology and Molecular Diagnostics, Aichi Cancer Center, Nagoya, Japan (Dr Yatabe).
Abstract
CONTEXT: - The diagnosis and grading of acute cellular and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in lung allograft biopsies is important because rejection can lead to acute graft dysfunction and/or failure and may contribute to chronic graft failure. While acute cellular rejection is well defined histologically, no reproducible specific features of AMR are currently identified. Therefore, a combination of clinical features, serology, histopathology, and immunologic findings is suggested for the diagnosis of AMR. OBJECTIVE: - To describe the perspective of members of the Pulmonary Pathology Society (PPS) on the workup of lung allograft transbronchial biopsy and the diagnosis of acute cellular rejection and AMR in lung transplant. DATA SOURCES: - Reports by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT), experience of members of PPS who routinely review lung allograft biopsies, and search of literature database (PubMed). CONCLUSIONS: - Acute cellular rejection should be assessed and graded according to the 2007 working formulation of the ISHLT. As currently no specific features are known for AMR in lung allografts, the triple test (clinical allograft dysfunction, donor-specific antibodies, pathologic findings) should be used for its diagnosis. C4d staining might be performed when morphologic, clinical, and/or serologic features suggestive of AMR are identified.
CONTEXT: - The diagnosis and grading of acute cellular and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in lung allograft biopsies is important because rejection can lead to acute graft dysfunction and/or failure and may contribute to chronic graft failure. While acute cellular rejection is well defined histologically, no reproducible specific features of AMR are currently identified. Therefore, a combination of clinical features, serology, histopathology, and immunologic findings is suggested for the diagnosis of AMR. OBJECTIVE: - To describe the perspective of members of the Pulmonary Pathology Society (PPS) on the workup of lung allograft transbronchial biopsy and the diagnosis of acute cellular rejection and AMR in lung transplant. DATA SOURCES: - Reports by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT), experience of members of PPS who routinely review lung allograft biopsies, and search of literature database (PubMed). CONCLUSIONS: - Acute cellular rejection should be assessed and graded according to the 2007 working formulation of the ISHLT. As currently no specific features are known for AMR in lung allografts, the triple test (clinical allograft dysfunction, donor-specific antibodies, pathologic findings) should be used for its diagnosis. C4d staining might be performed when morphologic, clinical, and/or serologic features suggestive of AMR are identified.
Authors: P R Aguilar; D Carpenter; J Ritter; R D Yusen; C A Witt; D E Byers; T Mohanakumar; D Kreisel; E P Trulock; R R Hachem Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Nicole E Speck; Elisabeth Probst-Müller; Sarah R Haile; Christian Benden; Malcolm Kohler; Lars C Huber; Cécile A Robinson Journal: Cytokine Date: 2019-08-07 Impact factor: 3.861