Donor-derived Cell-free DNA Evaluation in Pediatric Heart Transplant Recipients: A Single-center 12-mo Experience
Transplantation Direct, ISSN: 2373-8731, Vol: 10, Issue: 10, Page: e1689-null
2024
- 1Citations
- 1Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Background. Endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) is considered the gold-standard method to diagnose rejection after heart transplantation. However, the many disadvantages and potential complications of this test restrict its routine application, particularly in pediatric patients. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), released by the transplanted heart as result of cellular injury, is emerging as a biomarker of tissue damage involved in ischemia/reperfusion injury and posttransplant rejection. In the present study, we systematically evaluated dd-cfDNA levels in pediatric heart transplant patients coming for follow-up visits to our clinic for 12 mo, with the aim of determining whether dd-cfDNA monitoring could be efficiently applied and integrated into the posttransplant management of rejection in pediatric recipients. Methods. Twenty-nine patients were enrolled, and cfDNA was obtained from 158 blood samples collected during posttransplant follow-up. dd-cfDNA% was determined with a droplet-digital polymerase chain reaction assay. EMB scores, donor-specific antibody measurements, and distress marker quantification were correlated with dd-cfDNA, together with echocardiogram information. Results. The percentage of dd-cfDNA increased when EMBs scored positive for rejection (P = 0.0002) and donor-specific antibodies were present (P = 0.0010). N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and high-sensitive troponin I elevation were significantly associated with dd-cfDNA release (P = 0.02 and P < 0.0001, respectively), as were reduced isovolumetric relaxation time (P = 0.0031), signs of heart failure (P = 0.0018), and treatment for rejection (P = 0.0017). By determining a positive threshold for rejection at 0.55%, the test had a negative predictive value maximized at 100%. Conclusions. Collectively, results indicate that dd-cfDNA monitoring has a high negative prognostic value, suggesting that in heart transplanted children with dd-cfDNA levels of <0.55% threshold, protocol EMBs may be postponed.
Bibliographic Details
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know