Obesity-related insulin resistance is driven by low-grade chronic inflammation of metabolic tissues. In the liver, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is associated with hepatic insulin resistance and systemic glucose dysregulation. However, the immunological factors supporting these processes are poorly understood. We found that the liver accumulates pathogenic CD8+ T cell subsets which control hepatic insulin sensitivity and gluconeogenesis during diet-induced obesity in mice. In a cohort of human patients, CD8+ T cells represent a dominant intrahepatic immune cell population which links to glucose dysregulation. Accumulation and activation of these cells are largely supported by type I interferon (IFN-I) responses in the liver. Livers from obese mice upregulate critical interferon regulatory factors (IRFs), interferon stimulatory genes (ISGs), and IFNα protein, while IFNαR1−/− mice, or CD8-specific IFNαR1−/− chimeric mice are protected from disease. IFNαR1 inhibitors improve metabolic parameters in mice, while CD8+ T cells and IFN-I responses correlate with NAFLD activity in human patients. Thus, IFN-I responses represent a central immunological axis that governs intrahepatic T cell pathogenicity during metabolic disease.
A program was established within our regional procurement organization to permit evaluation of altruistic living donors (LD) interested in nondirected kidney or liver segment donation prior to transplant center referral.During the initial 30 months of program operations, 731 donor inquiries were received of which 131 individuals called back after review of mailed information materials. Forty-seven candidates initiated and 19 completed the evaluation process. Seven underwent donation to include six kidneys and one liver segment, five are actively pending donation, five were excluded from donation following transplant center evaluation and two took no further action after their intended liver recipients received deceased donor (DD) transplants. Psychological evaluation of these 19 candidates found them to be free of psychopathology, highly cooperative and self-directed. They did not exhibit attentionseeking or religious motivations for their actions. All seven donors and recipients continue to do well postoperatively. This evaluation program has made possible largescale screening and education of prospective altruistic LD within the general population and also provides a unique opportunity to further our understanding of those individuals interested in living-nondirected donation.
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic is a rapidly changing circumstance with dramatic policy changes and universal efforts to deal with the initial crisis and minimize its consequences. To identify changes to organ donation and transplantation during this time, an anonymous web‐based survey was distributed to 19 select organ procurement organizations (OPOs) throughout the United States comparing 90‐day activity during March‐May 2020 and March‐May 2019. Seventeen OPOs responded to the survey (response rate of 89.5%). Organ authorization decreased by 11% during the current pandemic (n = 1379 vs n = 1552, P = .0001). Organ recovery for transplantation fell by 17% (P = .0001) with a further 18% decrease in the number of organs transplanted (P = .0001). Donor cause of death demonstrated a 4.5% decline in trauma but a 35% increase in substance abuse cases during the COVID‐19 period. All OPOs reported significant modifications in response to the pandemic, limiting the onsite presence of staff and transitioning to telephonic approaches for donor family correspondence. Organ donation during the current climate has seen significant changes and the long‐term implications of such shifts remain unclear. These trends during the COVID‐19 era warrant further investigation to address unmet needs, plan for a proportionate response to the virus and mitigate the collateral impact.
The use of procurement biopsies in deceased donor kidney acceptance is controversial. We analyzed Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data (n = 59 328 allografts, 2014-2018) to describe biopsy practices across US organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and examine relationships with discards, using hierarchical modeling to account for OPO and donor factors. Median odds ratios (MORs) provide the median of the odds that allografts with identical reported traits would be biopsied or discarded from 2 randomly drawn OPOs. Biopsies were obtained for 52.7% of kidneys. Biopsy use rose in a graded manner with kidney donor profile index (KDPI).Biopsy rates differed significantly among OPOs (22.8% to 77.5%), even after adjustment for KDPI and other donor factors. Discard rates also varied from 6.6% to 32.1% across OPOs. After adjustment for donor factors and OPO, biopsy was associated with more than 3 times the likelihood of discard (adjusted odds ratio [ 95%LCL aOR 95%UCL ], 3.29 3.51 3.76 ). This association was most pronounced for low-risk (KDPI <20) kidneys (aOR, 5.45 6.47 7.69 ), with minimal impact at KDPI >85 (aOR, 0.88 1.15 1.51 ). Adjusted MORs for kidney discard and biopsy were greatest for low-risk kidneys. Reducing the rate of unnecessary biopsy and improving the accuracy of histologic assessments in higher KDPI organs may help reduce graft discard rates. K E Y W O R D Sbiopsy, clinical research/practice, donors and donation: deceased, health services and outcomes research, kidney transplantation/nephrology, organ procurement, organ procurement and allocation, Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients (SRTR)
Organ allocation for transplantation aims to balance the principles of justice and medical utility to optimally utilize a scarce resource. To address practical considerations, the United States is divided into 58 donor service areas (DSA), each constituting the first unit of allocation. In November 2017, in response to a lawsuit in New York, an emergency action change to lung allocation policy replaced the DSA level of allocation for donor lungs with a 250 nautical mile circle around the donor hospital. Similar policy changes are being implemented for other organs including heart and liver. Findings from a recent US Department of Health and Human Services report, supplemented with data from our institution, suggest that the emergency policy has not resulted in a change in the type of patients undergoing lung transplantation (LT) or early postoperative outcomes. However, there has been a significant decline in local LT, where donor and recipient are in the same DSA. With procurement teams having to travel greater distances, organ ischemic time has increased and median organ cost has more than doubled. We propose potential solutions for consideration at this critical juncture in the field of transplantation. Policymakers should choose equitable and sustainable access for this lifesaving discipline.
Transplant surgeons have historically traveled to donor hospitals, performing complex, time-sensitive procedures with unfamiliar personnel. This often involves air travel, significant delays, and frequently occurs overnight. In 2001, we established the nation's first organ recovery center. The goal was to increase efficiency, reduce costs and reduce surgeon travel. Liver donors and recipients, donor costs, surgeon hours and travel time, from April 1, 2001 through December 31, 2011 were analyzed. Nine hundred and fifteen liver transplants performed at our center were analyzed based on procurement location (living donors and donation after cardiac death donors were excluded). In year 1, 36% (9/ 25) of donor procurements occurred at the organ procurement organization (OPO) facility, rising to 93% (56/60) in the last year of analysis. Travel time was reduced from 8 to 2.7 h (p < 0.0001), with a reduction of surgeon fly outs by 93% (14/15) in 2011. Liver organ donor charges generated by the donor were reduced by 37% overall for donors recovered at the OPO facility versus acute care hospital. Organs recovered in this novel facility resulted in significantly reduced surgeon hours, air travel and cost. This practice has major implications for cost containment and OPO national policy and could become the standard of care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.