NHP肝同种异体移植和异种肝移植的系统评价和比较结果分析。

IF 4.1 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Kasra Shirini, Raphael P H Meier
{"title":"NHP肝同种异体移植和异种肝移植的系统评价和比较结果分析。","authors":"Kasra Shirini, Raphael P H Meier","doi":"10.1111/xen.70017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patients with fulminant liver failure ineligible for transplantation have a high mortality rate. With recent progress in genetic modifications and clinical achievements, using pig livers as a bridge-to-transplant has regained popularity. Preclinical testing has been done in small cohorts of nonhuman primates (NHP), and maximum survival is limited to 1-month. We conducted a systematic review and comparative outcomes analysis of NHP-liver xenotransplantation and gathered 203 pig-to-NHP and NHP-to-NHP transplants reported in 23 studies. Overall, NHP survival after pig-liver xenotransplantation was limited (1, 3, 4 weeks: 18.0%, 5.6%, 1.1%), compared to NHPs after allotransplantation (1, 3, 4 weeks: 60.6%, 47.4%, 45.4%). A focus on pigs with genetic modifications evidenced some short-term survival benefits (1, 3, 4 weeks: 29.1%, 9.1%, 1.8%). The use of the auxiliary transplant technique was also associated with better short-term results (1, 3, 4 weeks: 40.9%, 9.1%, 4.5%). Causes of graft and animal loss were mostly rejection and liver failure in allotransplants, while bleeding, liver, and respiratory failure predominated in xenotransplants. Notably, the 1-month survival rate for NHP-allotransplants was significantly lower than the national > 98% rate for human liver transplants. This data confirms the short-term improvements brought by genetic modifications and auxiliary implantation in the NHP model, which remains imperfect.</p>","PeriodicalId":23866,"journal":{"name":"Xenotransplantation","volume":"32 1","pages":"e70017"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11832012/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematic Review and Comparative Outcomes Analysis of NHP Liver Allotransplants and Xenotransplants.\",\"authors\":\"Kasra Shirini, Raphael P H Meier\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/xen.70017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Patients with fulminant liver failure ineligible for transplantation have a high mortality rate. With recent progress in genetic modifications and clinical achievements, using pig livers as a bridge-to-transplant has regained popularity. Preclinical testing has been done in small cohorts of nonhuman primates (NHP), and maximum survival is limited to 1-month. We conducted a systematic review and comparative outcomes analysis of NHP-liver xenotransplantation and gathered 203 pig-to-NHP and NHP-to-NHP transplants reported in 23 studies. Overall, NHP survival after pig-liver xenotransplantation was limited (1, 3, 4 weeks: 18.0%, 5.6%, 1.1%), compared to NHPs after allotransplantation (1, 3, 4 weeks: 60.6%, 47.4%, 45.4%). A focus on pigs with genetic modifications evidenced some short-term survival benefits (1, 3, 4 weeks: 29.1%, 9.1%, 1.8%). The use of the auxiliary transplant technique was also associated with better short-term results (1, 3, 4 weeks: 40.9%, 9.1%, 4.5%). Causes of graft and animal loss were mostly rejection and liver failure in allotransplants, while bleeding, liver, and respiratory failure predominated in xenotransplants. Notably, the 1-month survival rate for NHP-allotransplants was significantly lower than the national > 98% rate for human liver transplants. This data confirms the short-term improvements brought by genetic modifications and auxiliary implantation in the NHP model, which remains imperfect.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23866,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Xenotransplantation\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"e70017\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11832012/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Xenotransplantation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/xen.70017\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Xenotransplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/xen.70017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

不适合移植的暴发性肝衰竭患者死亡率高。随着基因修饰和临床成就的最新进展,使用猪肝作为移植的桥梁重新受到欢迎。临床前试验已在非人类灵长类动物(NHP)的小队列中进行,最大生存期限制为1个月。我们对nhp -肝脏异种移植进行了系统回顾和比较结果分析,并收集了23项研究中报道的203例猪- nhp和nhp - nhp移植。总体而言,与同种异体移植后的NHPs(1,3,4周:60.6%,47.4%,45.4%)相比,异种猪肝移植后的NHP存活率有限(1,3,4周:18.0%,5.6%,1.1%)。对转基因猪的关注证明了一些短期生存效益(1、3、4周:29.1%、9.1%、1.8%)。辅助移植技术的使用也与较好的短期结果相关(1,3,4周:40.9%,9.1%,4.5%)。同种异体移植的主要原因是排斥反应和肝功能衰竭,而异种移植的主要原因是出血、肝功能衰竭和呼吸衰竭。值得注意的是,nhp异体移植的1个月存活率明显低于国家标准的人肝移植的98%存活率。这一数据证实了基因修饰和辅助植入在NHP模型中带来的短期改善,该模型仍不完善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Systematic Review and Comparative Outcomes Analysis of NHP Liver Allotransplants and Xenotransplants.

Systematic Review and Comparative Outcomes Analysis of NHP Liver Allotransplants and Xenotransplants.

Systematic Review and Comparative Outcomes Analysis of NHP Liver Allotransplants and Xenotransplants.

Systematic Review and Comparative Outcomes Analysis of NHP Liver Allotransplants and Xenotransplants.

Patients with fulminant liver failure ineligible for transplantation have a high mortality rate. With recent progress in genetic modifications and clinical achievements, using pig livers as a bridge-to-transplant has regained popularity. Preclinical testing has been done in small cohorts of nonhuman primates (NHP), and maximum survival is limited to 1-month. We conducted a systematic review and comparative outcomes analysis of NHP-liver xenotransplantation and gathered 203 pig-to-NHP and NHP-to-NHP transplants reported in 23 studies. Overall, NHP survival after pig-liver xenotransplantation was limited (1, 3, 4 weeks: 18.0%, 5.6%, 1.1%), compared to NHPs after allotransplantation (1, 3, 4 weeks: 60.6%, 47.4%, 45.4%). A focus on pigs with genetic modifications evidenced some short-term survival benefits (1, 3, 4 weeks: 29.1%, 9.1%, 1.8%). The use of the auxiliary transplant technique was also associated with better short-term results (1, 3, 4 weeks: 40.9%, 9.1%, 4.5%). Causes of graft and animal loss were mostly rejection and liver failure in allotransplants, while bleeding, liver, and respiratory failure predominated in xenotransplants. Notably, the 1-month survival rate for NHP-allotransplants was significantly lower than the national > 98% rate for human liver transplants. This data confirms the short-term improvements brought by genetic modifications and auxiliary implantation in the NHP model, which remains imperfect.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Xenotransplantation
Xenotransplantation 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
15.40%
发文量
58
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Xenotransplantation provides its readership with rapid communication of new findings in the field of organ and tissue transplantation across species barriers.The journal is not only of interest to those whose primary area is xenotransplantation, but also to veterinarians, microbiologists and geneticists. It also investigates and reports on the controversial theological, ethical, legal and psychological implications of xenotransplantation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信