Shokouh-Amiri, Hosein M.

Background. Pancreas transplant biopsy practices for the diagnosis of rejection or other pathologies are not well described. Methods. We conducted a survey of staff at US pancreas transplant programs (March 22, 2022, to August 22, 2022) to assess current program practices and perceptions about the utility and challenges in the performance and interpretation of pancreas allograft biopsies. Results. Respondents represented 65% (76/117) of active adult pancreas transplant programs, capturing 66% of recent pancreas transplant volume in the United States. Participants were most often nephrologists (52%), followed by surgeons (46%), and other staff (4%). Pancreas allograft biopsies were performed mostly by interventional radiologists (74%), followed by surgeons (11%), nephrologists (8%), and gastroenterologists (1%). Limitations in the radiologist’s or biopsy performer’s comfort level or expertise to safely perform a biopsy, or to obtain sufficient/adequate samples were the two most common challenges with pancreas transplant biopsies. Pancreas transplant biopsies were read by local pathologists at a majority (86%) of centers. Challenges reported with pancreas biopsy interpretation included poor reliability, lack of reporting of C4d staining, lack of reporting of rejection grading, and inconclusive interpretation of the biopsy. Staff at a third of responding programs (34%) stated that they rarely or never perform pancreas allograft biopsies and treat presumed rejection empirically. Conclusions. This national survey identified significant variation in clinical practices related to pancreas allograft biopsies and potential barriers to pancreas transplant utilization across the United States. Consideration of strategies to improve program experience with percutaneous pancreas biopsy and to support optimal management of pancreas allograft rejection informed by histology is warranted.

Background Donor safety and the impact on quality of life continue to concern transplant centers as living liver transplantation increases. Methods Living liver donors participated in a focus group to discuss their perceptions of the donation process. Results The decision to donate was a personal choice made before the request by the recipient or transplant service. Spouses verified their support, but indicated that they were not included in the process. No donors felt coerced. The explanation of the procedure was thorough but excessive. Hospital care was good; however, donors admitted being unprepared for the pain and side effects of pain medications. Ongoing incisional discomfort continued beyond 6 weeks and prevented donors from feeling normal. Donors felt conflicted about competing with the “true” patient for healthcare. Conclusions Donors were positive about the need and willingness to donate. Sensitivity to the order of the disclosure process is identified.

To achieve the fullest potential of transplantation, continuing concern for the recipients' quality of life must be a part of the process. Database records of patients who are currently alive and received transplants between 1982 and 1991 were retrospectively analyzed. Recipients were contacted and asked to answer a quality-of-life questionnaire. Of 105 liver transplant recipients, 51 died within 10 years after transplantation; 47 were contacted. Posttransplant complications included hypertension (64%), posttransplant diabetes mellitus (17%), osteopenia (40%), osteoporosis (26%), and heart disease (17%). Most recipients reported all aspects of their life to be average, if not better than their age-matched peers. Although most recipients complained about side effects of immunosuppressive agents, they were all happy to be alive and agreed that their quality of life showed an impressive favorable change to a level exceeding that of the general population. These results suggest that liver transplantation not only improved survival but also quality of life.