Introduction: Contemporary dosing strategies for rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG) in kidney transplantation aim to reduce cumulative exposure, minimizing long-term adverse events. The use of ideal body weight-based dosing has been trialed, however concern for increased rejection post-transplant exists due to lower doses of rATG. Research Questions: The primary aim of this study was to compare rejection rates between rATG dosing protocols using actual body weight and ideal body weight and secondarily to evaluate cost savings following protocol implementation. Design: This was a retrospective study surrounding implementation of an ideal body weight-based dosing protocol for rATG. We compared 75 kidney transplant recipients in whom rATG was dosed based on actual body weight (pre-protocol group) to 64 in whom dosing was based on ideal body weight (post-protocol group), following a nine-month washout. Results: The mean cumulative rATG dose in the pre-protocol group was 6.3 mg/kg of actual body weight. When ideal body weight was used in the post-protocol group, the mean dose was 4.5 mg/kg of actual body weight. The rejection rate was 18.7% pre-protocol and 23.4% postprotocol, which did not represent a statistically significant difference (p = 0.491). The actual annual cost savings after protocol implementation exceeded $162,000, approximately $2,500 per patient. Conclusion: Results suggest ideal body weight-based dosing of rATG may reduce exposure and cost, without significantly impacting the risk of rejection in kidney transplant recipients. More studies are needed to confirm these findings.

No abstract

Summary Post‐transplant malignancy is diagnosed in approximately 18% of heart transplant patients and is a leading cause of death post‐transplant. One modifiable risk factor is the type and amount of immunosuppression received. Contemporary rabbit anti‐thymocyte globulin (rATG) dosing strategy using T‐cell‐guided dosing, and its effect on malignancy in heart transplant patients is unclear. This was a single‐center, retrospective chart review of heart transplant recipients receiving rATG for induction. Patients diagnosed with malignancy post‐transplant were matched 1:2 to controls using a nested case‐control design. The primary endpoint was to determine the relative risk of rATG exposure with the actual incidence of malignancy post‐transplant. The secondary endpoint was the impact of maintenance immunosuppression on malignancy risk. Of the 126 patients included in the study, 25 developed malignancy and were matched to 50 control patients. The median cumulative rATG dose in milligrams (mg) between groups was 365 mg in malignancy cases and 480 mg in controls (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.75–1.08, P = 0.28). In both the univariate and multivariable analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in malignancy risk found with any maintenance immunosuppressant. The results of this study showed that patient‐tailored rATG dosing strategies may not be associated with malignancy development as previously thought.

No abstract

Background. Surgical-site infection (SSI) is the most common early infectious complication after pancreas transplantation (PT). Although SSI has been shown to worsen outcomes, little data exist to guide optimal choices in perioperative prophylaxis. Methods. We performed a retrospective cohort study of PT recipients from 2010-2020 to examine the effect of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis with Enterococcus coverage. Enterococcus coverage included antibiotics that would be active for penicillin-susceptible Enterococcus isolates. The primary outcome was SSI within 30 d of transplantation, and secondary outcomes were Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and a composite of pancreas allograft failure or death. Outcomes were analyzed by multivariable Cox regression. Results. Of 477 PT recipients, 217 (45.5%) received perioperative prophylaxis with Enterococcus coverage. Eighty-seven recipients (18.2%) developed an SSI after a median of 15 d from transplantation. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, perioperative Enterococcus prophylaxis was associated with reduced risk of SSI (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.96; P = 0.034). Anastomotic leak was also significantly associated with elevated risk of SSI (HR 13.95; 95% CI,; P < 0.001). Overall, 90-d CDI was 7.4%, with no difference between prophylaxis groups (P = 0.680). SSI was associated with pancreas allograft failure or death, even after adjusting for clinical factors (HR 1.94; 95% CI, 1.16-3.23; P = 0.011). Conclusions. Perioperative prophylaxis with Enterococcus coverage was associated with reduced risk of 30-d SSI but did not seem to influence risk of 90-d CDI after PT. This difference may be because of the use of beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, which provide better activity against enteric organisms such as Enterococcus and anaerobes compared with cephalosporin. Risk of SSI was also related to anastomotic leak from surgery, and SSI itself was associated with subsequent risk of a poor outcome. Measures to mitigate or prevent early complications are warranted.