No abstract

Intense efforts to improve public awareness and knowledge about organ donation/transplantation are necessary to maximize donation and the overall success of transplantation.

Nonhuman primates, primarily rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta), cynomolgus macaques (Macaca fascicularis), and baboons (Papio spp.), have been used extensively in research models of solid organ transplantation, mainly because the nonhuman primate (NHP) immune system closely resembles that of the human. Nonhuman primates are also frequently the model of choice for preclinical testing of new immunosuppressive strategies. But the management of post-transplant nonhuman primates is complex, because it often involves multiple immunosuppressive agents, many of which are new and have unknown effects. Additionally, the resulting immunosuppression carries a risk of infectious complications, which are challenging to diagnose. Last, because of the natural tendency of animals to hide signs of weakness, infectious complications may not be obvious until the animal becomes severely ill. For these reasons the diagnosis of infectious complications is difficult among post-transplant NHPs. Because most nonhuman primate studies in organ transplantation are quite small, there are only a few published reports concerning infections after transplantation in nonhuman primates. Based on our survey of these reports, the incidence of infection in NHP transplant models is 14%. The majority of reports suggest that many of these infections are due to reactivation of viruses endemic to the primate species, such as cytomegalovirus (CMV), polyomavirus, and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-related infections. In this review, we address the epidemiology, pathogenesis, role of prophylaxis, clinical presentation, and treatment of infectious complications after solid organ transplantation in nonhuman primates.

Hepatic artery aneurysms/pseudoaneurysms (HAAs) are rare but serious complications after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Revascularization should accompany aneurysmectomy if possible and is more feasible if the aneurysm presents late after transplantation. The optimal conduits for revascularization in this situation are not known. Two patients with hepatic artery aneurysms/pseudoaneurysms who had aneurysmectomy and revascularization with thirdparty cadaveric iliac arterial grafts 1 and 4 years after OLT are presented in detail, with an emphasis on the preservation method used for the grafts. Both livers were successfully revascularized with arterial grafts preserved for 21 and 26 days after procurement. Hepatic patency was documented in both 5 and 6 months after repair; graft function has remained normal 13 and 32 months after repair. Third-party vessels preserved for shorter periods have been used successfully in four other situations, including living-donor liver transplantation, and are briefly discussed. In conclusion, properly preserved vascular homografts are useful in LT for purposes other than initial vascular reconstruction. They also provide an excellent vascular conduit in recipients of livers from other (possibly living) donors.

Liver recipients with and without pretransplant renal dysfunction have less acute rejection with daclizumab induction therapy. This is not associated with an increased risk of over-immunosuppression. Sustained renal improvement in recipients with pretransplant renal dysfunction is possible with daclizumab induction.