Citations

ABSTRACTIntroductionThe diagnosis of antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) requires input from several transplant professionals. Bringing clinical and laboratory experts together may help standardize care. Yet, little is known about current global practices of multidisciplinary meetings for AMR management.MethodsThe Banff Antibody‐Mediated Injury Working Group approached professional societies worldwide to distribute a survey on the availability, content, participants, perceived value, and barriers to the implementation of multidisciplinary meetings.ResultsFour hundred two transplant professionals from six continents caring for kidney (90.55%), liver (21.14%), pancreas (20.65%), heart (15.17%), and lung (14.18%) transplant recipients participated in the survey, and 302 (75.12%) reported attending multidisciplinary meetings. Multidisciplinary meetings were more prevalent in academic centers, in high‐ versus low‐to‐middle‐income regions (81.03% and 65.99%, respectively; p < 0.001), and in mid‐to‐large size transplant programs compared to smaller programs. Perceived value included continued professional development (97.68%) and trainee education (95.70%). AMR was reported to be discussed at these meetings by 217 respondents with case presentations reviewing patient characteristics, histology, and HLA antibody data. A third of the respondents reviewed non‐HLA/pathogenic autoantibodies and/or molecular diagnostics, with the latter being more frequently applied in high‐ versus low‐to‐middle‐income regions (46.71% and 12.31%, respectively; p < 0.001). AMR case presentations allowed diagnosis revision, actionable management plans and were perceived as improving care. The primary barrier to the implementation of multidisciplinary meetings (63.27%) was the unavailability of transplant professionals (e.g., transplant immunologists).ConclusionFacilitating multidisciplinary meetings through the remote participation of pertinent experts and incentivizing participation through remuneration, protected time, or continued medical education may help standardize AMR diagnosis and harmonize its management.

Introduction: The ICD Sports Registry demonstrated that many athletes with ICDs can participate in competitive sports without death, failure to defibrillate, or physical injury. However, sudden cardiac arrest is more prevalent and has worse outcomes in Black compared to White individuals in the general population and among athletes. Outcomes of sports participation for Black athletes with ICDs have not been described. Aim: To describe the risk of arrhythmia and efficacy of ICDs in Black athletes. Methods: This is a post-hoc subgroup analysis of the ICD Sports Registry, which enrolled athletes with ICDs age 10 to 60, participating in organized, competitive sports, and followed them prospectively for four years. The endpoints and methods are reported previously. Results: Among the 440 athletes, 15 were Black and 410 white. Among the Black athletes, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was the most common diagnosis (40%) and 87% were implanted for secondary prevention or syncope (vs 69% in White athletes). Most common sports were basketball (8), softball (4), and running (3), with 7 Black athletes competing on varsity/junior varsity/traveling teams. Among the Black athletes, there were no appropriate shocks during sports, among white athletes, 7% received an appropriate shock during sports. Among Black athletes, there was one appropriate shock event for ventricular tachycardia (7%), a VT storm in an athlete with idiopathic VF, non-sports-related. Among white athletes, 10% received appropriate shocks during non-sports activities. Two Black athletes (13%) received an inappropriate shock, one competition-related (sinus tachycardia) and the other for T wave oversensing at rest, vs 12% of white athletes. There were no sports-related deaths, arrests, or arrhythmia-related injuries in either group. Conclusions: Black athletes represented a small subset of the ICD Sports Registry. Reasons for this are unknown, but may include disparities in ICD implantation and/or in research recruitment/ participation. These Black athletes experienced both appropriate and inappropriate shocks as did white athletes. These data do not suggest a signal for harm for competitive sports participation for Black athletes with ICDs but larger studies are needed.

Validated nonbiopsy methods to assure duodenal mucosal healing in celiac disease are lacking, yet ongoing mucosal injury is associated with anemia, osteoporosis, and lymphoma. Most providers utilize clinical data as surrogates of mucosal status to avoid additional esophagogastroduodenoscopy. The reliability of such surrogates to predict mucosal recovery has been incompletely evaluated. The aim of this study was to rigorously assess patterns of histologic mucosal recovery at follow-up in celiac disease and to correlate findings with clinical data. Gastrointestinal pathologists from 13 centers evaluated initial and follow-up duodenal biopsies from 181 celiac disease patients. Marsh scores and intraepithelial lymphocytes (IELs)/100 enterocytes were assessed blindly. Histology at follow-up was correlated with symptoms, immunoglobulin A anti–tissue transglutaminase titers and gluten-free diet adherence. Fifty-six/181 (31%) patients had persistent villous blunting and 46/181 (25%) patients had just persistently elevated IELs at follow-up, with only 79/181 (44%) patients having complete histologic remission. IEL normalization (82/181; 45%) lagged villous recovery (125/181;69%). In a minority of patients, villous blunting was limited to proximal duodenal biopsies. No correlation was found between Marsh scores and symptoms, normalization of immunoglobulin A anti–tissue transglutaminase serology, or diet adherence. Children showed greater recovery of Marsh score (P<0.001) and IELs (P<0.01) than adults. Persistent mucosal injury is common in celiac disease, with discordant villous/IEL normalization. Pathologist awareness of expected findings in celiac disease follow-up biopsies, including their frequent lack of correlation with clinical data, is important for patient management, and has implications for eligibility criteria for therapeutics currently in development.