Pomahač, Bohdan

Importance Since 2005, a total of 50 face transplants have been reported from 18 centers in 11 countries. The overall survival of the grafts has not yet been established. Objective To assess the survival of the face transplant grafts and evaluate factors potentially influencing it. Design, Setting, and Participants Data on all the transplants included in this multicenter cohort study were collected at participating transplant centers for updated nonpublished data, supplemented with literature review for nonparticipating centers. Data from 2005 until September 2023, were included. Data were analyzed from November 11, 2005, through September 18, 2023. Patients included the first 50 patients in the world to have received a face transplant. Exposure Face transplant graft. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the overall survival of the face transplant graft, defined as either transplant loss or patient death. The secondary outcome was the number of acute rejection episodes per year. Results The 50 transplants were performed on 39 men (81%) and 9 women (19%) with a median age of 35 (range, 19-68) years at the time of the transplant. The median follow-up time was 8.9 (range, 0.2-16.7) years. During the follow-up, 6 transplants were lost with 2 patients retransplanted. There were 10 patients who died, 2 of whom had lost a transplant. The 5- and 10-year survival of the transplants was 85% (SD, 5%) and 74% (SD, 7%), respectively. The sequential number of the transplant in the world was a significant predictor of survival (hazard ratio, 95; 95% CI, 90-100; P < 05). The median number of acute rejection episodes per year was 1.2 (range, 0-5.3) for the transplants that were lost and 0.7 (range, 0-4.6) for the transplants that survived. No correlation with patient and transplant variables was detected for either the transplant survival or the number of rejection episodes. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, the overall survival of the face transplants is encouraging. These data suggest that the acceptable long-term survival of face transplants makes them a reconstructive option for extensive facial defects.

Abstract In the past decade, vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) has become clinical reality for reconstruction after face and hand trauma. It offers patients the unique opportunity to regain form and function in a way that had only been achieved with traditional reconstruction or with the use of prostheses. On the other hand, prostheses for facial and hand reconstruction have continued to evolve over the years and, in many cases, represent the primary option for patients after hand and face trauma. We compared the cost, associated complications, and long-term outcomes of VCA with prostheses for reconstruction of the face and hand/upper extremity. Ultimately, VCA and prostheses represent 2 different reconstructive options with distinct benefit profiles and associated limitations and should ideally not be perceived as competing choices. Our work adds a valuable component to the general framework guiding the decision to offer VCA or prostheses for reconstruction after face and upper extremity trauma.

Objectives: This report summarizes a collaborative effort between the American Society of Reconstructive Transplantation and the International Society of Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation to establish what is known about chronic rejection in recipients of vascularized composite allografts, with an emphasis on upper extremity and face transplants. As a picture of chronic rejection in hand and face vascularized composite allografts emerges, the results will be applied to other types of vascularized composite allografts, such as uterine transplantation. Methods: The overall goal is to develop a definition of chronic rejection in vascularized composite allografts so that we can establish longitudinal correlates of factors such as acute rejection, immunosuppressive therapy, de novo donor-specific antibody and trauma/infection and other external factors on the development of chronic rejection. As Dr Kanitakis eloquently stated at the 2017 International Society of Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation meeting in Salzburg, “Before we can correlate causative factors of chronic rejection, we have to define what chronic rejection in VCA is.” Results: The first meeting report was presented at the sixth Biennial meeting of the American Society of Reconstructive Transplantation in November 2018. Based on collaborative efforts and descriptions of clinical cases of chronic rejection in vascularized composite allograft recipients, a working definition of chronic rejection in vascularized composite allografts with respect to overt functional decline, subclinical functional decline, histologic evidence without functional decline, and normal allograft function in the absence of histologic evidence of chronic rejection is proposed. Conclusions: It is the intent of this collaborative working group that these working definitions will help to focus ongoing research to define the incidence, risk factors and treatment regimens that will identify mechanisms of chronic rejection in vascularized composite allografts. As with all good research, our initial efforts have generated more questions than answers. We hope that this is the first of many updates.