The number of people with immunosuppression is increasing considerably due to their greater survival and the use of new immunosuppressive treatments for various chronic diseases. This is a heterogeneous group of patients in whom vaccination as a preventive measure is one of the basic pillars of their wellbeing, given their increased risk of contracting infections. This consensus, developed jointly by the Sociedad Española de Infectología Pediátrica (Spanish Society of Pediatric Infectious Diseases) and the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Asociación Española de Pediatría (Spanish Association of Paediatrics), provides guidelines for the development of a personalised vaccination schedule for patients in special situations, including general recommendations and specific recommendations for vaccination of bone marrow and solid organ transplant recipients, children with inborn errors of immunity, oncologic patients, patients with chronic or systemic diseases and immunosuppressed travellers.

Solid organ transplant recipients have an increased risk of tuberculosis (TB). Due to the use of immunosuppressants, the incidence of TB among solid organ transplant recipients has been consistently reported to be higher than that among the general population. TB frequently develops within the first year after transplantation when a high level of immunosuppression is maintained. Extrapulmonary TB and disseminated TB account for a substantial proportion of TB among solid organ transplant recipients. Treatment of TB among recipients is complicated by the drug-drug interactions between anti-TB drugs and immunosuppressants. TB is associated with an increased risk of graft rejection, graft failure and mortality. Detection and management of latent TB infection among solid organ transplant candidates and recipients have been recommended. However, strategy to mitigate the risk of TB among solid organ transplant recipients has not yet been established in Taiwan. To address the challenges of TB among solid organ transplant recipients, a working group of the Transplantation Society of Taiwan was established. The working group searched literatures on TB among solid organ transplant recipients as well as guidelines and recommendations, and proposed interventions to strengthen TB prevention and care among solid organ transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND:

This new clinical practice guideline concerns the psychosocial diagnosis and treatment of patients before and after organ transplantation. Its objective is to establish standards and to issue evidence-based recommendations that will help to optimize decision making in psychosocial diagnosis and treatment.

METHODS:

For each key question, the literature was systematically searched in at least two databases (Medline, Ovid, Cochrane Library, and CENTRAL). The end date of each search was between August 2018 and November 2019, depending on the question. The literature search was also updated to capture recent publications, by using a selective approach.

RESULTS:

Lack of adherence to immunosuppressant drugs can be expected in 25-30% of patients and increases the odds of organ loss after kidney transplantation (odds ratio 7.1). Psychosocial interventions can significantly improve adherence. Metaanalyses have shown that adherence was achieved 10-20% more frequently in the intervention group than in the control group. 13-40% of patients suffer from depression after transplantation; mortality in this group is 65% higher. The guideline group therefore recommends that experts in psychosomatic medicine, psychiatry, and psychology (mental health professionals) should be involved in patient care throughout the transplantation process.

CONCLUSION:

The care of patients before and after organ transplantation should be multidisciplinary. Nonadherence rates and comorbid mental disorders are common and associated with poorer outcomes after transplantation. Interventions to improve adherence are effective, although the pertinent studies display marked heterogeneity and a high risk of bias.

BACKGROUND:

Surgical site occurrences pose a threat to patient health, potentially resulting in significant increases in health care spending caused by using additional resources. The objective of this study was to reach a consensus among a group of experts in incisional negative pressure wound therapy to determine the indications for using this type of treatment prophylactically and to analyze the associated risk factors of surgical site occurrences in abdominal surgery.

METHODS:

A group of experts in incisional negative pressure wound therapy from Spain and Portugal was formed among general surgery specialists who frequently perform colorectal, esophagogastric, or abdominal wall surgery. The Coordinating Committee performed a bibliographic search to identify the most relevant publications and to create a summary table to serve as a decision-making protocol regarding the use of prophylactic incisional negative pressure wound therapy based on factors related to the patient and type of procedure.

RESULTS:

The patient risk factors associated with surgical site occurrence development such as age, immunosuppression, anticoagulation, hypoalbuminemia, smoking, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, diabetes, obesity, and malnutrition were analyzed. For surgical procedure factors, surgical time, repeated surgeries, organ transplantation, need for blood transfusion, complex abdominal wall reconstruction, surgery at a contaminated site, open abdomen closure, emergency surgery, and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy were analyzed.

CONCLUSION:

In our experience, this consensus has been achieved on a tailored set of recommendations on patient and surgical aspects that should be considered to reduce the risk of surgical site occurrences with the use of prophylactic incisional negative pressure wound therapy, particularly in areas where the evidence base is controversial or lacking.

Pneumonia imposes a significant clinical burden on people with immunocompromising conditions. Millions of individuals live with compromised immunity because of cytotoxic cancer treatments, biological therapies, organ transplants, inherited and acquired immunodeficiencies, and other immune disorders. Despite broad awareness among clinicians that these patients are at increased risk for developing infectious pneumonia, immunocompromised people are often excluded from pneumonia clinical guidelines and treatment trials. The absence of a widely accepted definition for immunocompromised host pneumonia is a significant knowledge gap that hampers consistent clinical care and research for infectious pneumonia in these vulnerable populations. To address this gap, the American Thoracic Society convened a workshop whose participants had expertise in pulmonary disease, infectious diseases, immunology, genetics, and laboratory medicine, with the goal of defining the entity of immunocompromised host pneumonia and its diagnostic criteria.

BACKGROUND:

Although generic ciclosporin-A (CsA) and tacrolimus (TAC) have been used for the prophylaxis of organ rejection in transplant patients for decades, evidence in their safety profile compared to reference listed drugs (RLDs) in real-world transplant patients remains limited.

OBJECTIVES:

To compare safety outcomes of generic CsA and TAC with the reference-listed drugs in solid organ transplant patients.

METHODS:

We systematically searched MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception until March 15, 2022, to select randomized and observational studies comparing safety profiles of generic versus brand CsA and TAC in de novo and/or stable solid organ transplant patients. Primary safety outcomes were changes in serum creatinine (Scr) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Secondary outcomes included incidences of infection, hypertension, diabetes, other serious adverse events (AEs), hospitalization, and death. Mean difference (MD) and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS:

Of 2612 publications identified, 32 studies met inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies had a moderate risk of bias. Scr was statistically significantly lower in patients using generic CsA compared to brand at 1 month (MD = -0.07; 95% CI: -0.11, -0.04), while there were no statistically significant differences at 4 months, 6 months, and 12 months. No differences were detected in Scr (MD = -0.04; 95% CI: -0.13, 0.04) and estimated GFR (MD = -2.06; 95% CI: -8.89, 4.77) between patients using generic and brand TAC at 6 months. No statistically significant differences between generic CsA and TAC with their RLDs were observed for secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION:

Findings support similarity in safety outcomes between generic and brand CsA and TAC in real-world solid organ transplant patients.

Paediatric Intestinal Transplantation (IT) presents the highest mortality on the waiting-list due to anatomical disproportion. Living-Donor IT (LDIT) offers the best advantages and when performed among identical monozygotic twins, it also benefits from unique immunology. According to MEDLINE/Pubmed, twin-to-twin LDIT has been performed in seven cases (6:7 males, median age of 32 years). None of the patients received immunosuppression postoperatively. Only one paediatric twinto- twin LDIT was carried out with a 160-cm mid-ileum tract: an interposed 4/5-cm arterial graft was required to ensure a tensionfree anastomosis to the anterior wall of the infra-renal abdominal aorta. In contrast, venous anastomosis was done directly to the inferior cava vein. We present a case for debate of a 13- month-old SBS patient where a twin-LDIT was discussed with parents, who decided to wait after careful analysis and ethical considerations.

BACKGROUND:

Solid organ transplantation has seen improvements in both surgical techniques and immunosuppression, achieving prolonged survival. Essential to graft acceptance and post-transplant recovery, immunosuppressive medications are often accompanied by a high prevalence of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and side effects. Apart from GI side effects, long-term exposure to immunosuppressive medications has seen an increase in drug-related morbidities such as diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidaemia, hypertension, and malignancy. Non-adherence to immunosuppression can lead to an increased risk of graft failure. Recent research has indicated that any microbial imbalances (otherwise known as gut dysbiosis or leaky gut) may be associated with cardiometabolic diseases in the long term. Current evidence suggests a link between the gut microbiome and the production of putative uraemic toxins, increased gut permeability, and transmural movement of bacteria and endotoxins and inflammation. Early observational and intervention studies have been investigating food-intake patterns, various synbiotic interventions (antibiotics, prebiotics, or probiotics), and faecal transplants to measure their effects on microbiota in treating cardiometabolic diseases. It is believed high doses of synbiotics, prebiotics and probiotics are able to modify and improve dysbiosis of gut micro-organisms by altering the population of the micro-organisms. With the right balance in the gut flora, a primary benefit is believed to be the suppression of pathogens through immunostimulation and gut barrier enhancement (less permeability of the gut).

OBJECTIVES:

To assess the benefits and harms of synbiotics, prebiotics, and probiotics for recipients of solid organ transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS:

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register up to 9 March 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA:

We included randomised controlled trials measuring and reporting the effects of synbiotics, prebiotics, or probiotics, in any combination and any formulation given to solid organ transplant recipients (any age and setting). Two authors independently assessed the retrieved titles and abstracts and, where necessary, the full text to determine which satisfied the inclusion criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:

Data extraction was independently carried out by two authors using a standard data extraction form. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data entry was carried out by one author and cross-checked by another. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS:

Five studies (250 participants) were included in this review. Study participants were adults with a kidney (one study) or liver (four studies) transplant. One study compared a synbiotic to placebo, two studies compared a probiotic to placebo, and two studies compared a synbiotic to a prebiotic. Overall, the quality of the evidence is poor. Most studies were judged to have unclear (or high) risk of bias across most domains. Of the available evidence, meta-analyses undertaken were of limited data from small studies. Across all comparisons, GRADE evaluations for all outcomes were judged to be very low certainty evidence. Very low certainty evidence implies that we are very uncertain about results (not estimable due to lack of data or poor quality). Synbiotics had uncertain effects on the change in microbiota composition (total plasma p-cresol), faecal characteristics, adverse events, kidney function or albumin concentration (1 study, 34 participants) compared to placebo. Probiotics had uncertain effects on GI side effects, infection rates immediately post-transplant, liver function, blood pressure, change in fatty liver, and lipids (1 study, 30 participants) compared to placebo. Synbiotics had uncertain effects on graft health (acute liver rejection) (2 studies, 129 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.25; 2 studies, 129 participants; I² = 0%), the use of immunosuppression, infection (2 studies, 129 participants: RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.17; I² = 66%), GI function (time to first bowel movement), adverse events (2 studies, 129 participants: RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.59; I² = 20%), serious adverse events (2 studies, 129 participants: RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.42 to 5.36; I² = 81%), death (2 studies, 129 participants), and organ function measures (2 studies; 129 participants) compared to prebiotics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:

This review highlights the severe lack of high-quality RCTs testing the efficacy of synbiotics, prebiotics or probiotics in solid organ transplant recipients. We have identified significant gaps in the evidence. Despite GI symptoms and postoperative infection being the most common reasons for high antibiotic use in this patient population, along with increased morbidity and the growing antimicrobial resistance, we found very few studies that adequately tested these as alternative treatments. There is currently no evidence to support or refute the use of synbiotics, prebiotics, or probiotics in solid organ transplant recipients, and findings should be viewed with caution. We have identified an area of significant uncertainty about the efficacy of synbiotics, prebiotics, or probiotics in solid organ transplant recipients. Future research in this field requires adequately powered RCTs comparing synbiotics, prebiotics, and probiotics separately and with placebo measuring a standard set of core transplant outcomes. Six studies are currently ongoing (822 proposed participants); therefore, it is possible that findings may change with their inclusion in future updates.

BACKGROUND:

Patients with a history of solid organ transplantation (SOT) or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) are at an increased risk of developing post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD). The gastrointestinal (GI) tract is commonly affected as it has an abundance of B and T cells.

AIM:

To determine typical GI-manifestations, risk factors for developing PTLD, and management.

METHODS:

Major databases were searched until November 2021.

RESULTS:

Non-case report studies that described GI manifestations of PTLD, risk factors for developing PTLD, and management of PTLD were included. Nine articles written within the last 20 years were included in the review. All articles found that patients with a history of SOT, regardless of transplanted organ, have a propensity to develop GI-PTLD.

CONCLUSION:

GI tract manifestations may be nonspecific; therefore, consideration of risk factors is crucial for identifying GI-PTLD. Like other lymphoma variants, PTLD is very aggressive making early diagnosis key to prognosis. Initial treatment is reduction of immunosuppression which is effective in more than 50% of cases; however, additional therapy including rituximab, chemotherapy, and surgery may also be required.