Download PDF
J Reconstr Microsurg 2019; 35(02): 097-107
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1667298
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

A Hyperbaric Warm Perfusion System Preserves Tissue Composites Ex vivo and Delays the Onset of Acute Rejection

Charles Anton Fries
1   Department of Reconstructive Surgery, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, United States
2   Academic Department of Military Surgery and Trauma, Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, ICT Centre, Birmingham, United Kingdom
,
Carole Yasay Villamaria
1   Department of Reconstructive Surgery, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, United States
3   Department of Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States
,
Jerry Richard Spencer
1   Department of Reconstructive Surgery, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, United States
4   59 MDW/Science and Technology, Joint Base San Antonio, Texas
,
Shari Lawson
1   Department of Reconstructive Surgery, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, United States
,
Lin Wang
1   Department of Reconstructive Surgery, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, United States
,
Thomas Raj
5   Department of Pathology, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, Texas, United States
,
E. George Wolf
6   Hyperbaric Oxygen Organ Preservation Systems, San Antonio, Texas
,
Bijaya Kumar Parida
1   Department of Reconstructive Surgery, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, United States
4   59 MDW/Science and Technology, Joint Base San Antonio, Texas
,
Vijay Saradhi Gorantla
1   Department of Reconstructive Surgery, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, United States
,
Rory Frederick Rickard
2   Academic Department of Military Surgery and Trauma, Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, ICT Centre, Birmingham, United Kingdom
,
Michael Robert Davis
1   Department of Reconstructive Surgery, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, United States
4   59 MDW/Science and Technology, Joint Base San Antonio, Texas
› Author Affiliations Funding This work was funded by the 59 MDW Office of Science and Technology of the U.S. Air Force and by the UK Ministry of Defense.
Further Information

Publication History

01 March 2018

18 June 2018

Publication Date:
12 August 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Ischemia–reperfusion injury (IRI) precipitates acute rejection of vascularized composite allografts (VCA). Hyperbaric preservation of tissues ex vivo, between harvest and revascularization, may reduce IRI and mitigate acute rejection of VCA.

Methods A porcine heterotopic musculocutaneous gracilis flap model was used. In phase 1, control autografts (n = 5) were infused with University of Wisconsin Solution (UWS) and stored at 4°C for 3 hours. Intervention autografts (n = 5) were placed in a hyperbaric oxygen organ preservation system for 5 hours and infused with hyperoxygenated UWS at 20°C and 3 atm. Grafts were replanted into the animals' necks. In phase 2, similarly treated control (n = 8) and intervention grafts (n = 8) were allotransplanted into the necks of animals separated by a typed and standardized genetic mismatch. No systemic immunosuppression was given. Systemic markers of IRI, and clinical and histopathological assessments of necrosis and rejection were performed.

Results Autotransplanted tissue composites preserved in the hyperbaric chamber showed histopathological evidence of less muscle necrosis at 3 hours (p = 0.05). Despite a longer period of ischemia, no evidence was found of a difference in systemic markers of IRI following revascularization in these groups. Allotransplanted tissues supported ex vivo within the hyperbaric perfusion device experienced acute rejection significantly later than corresponding controls.

Conclusion Hyperbaric warm perfusion preserves musculocutaneous tissue composites ex vivo for longer than standard cold preservation in this model. This translates into a delay in acute rejection of allotransplanted tissue composites.

Keywords

vascularized composite allografts - ischemia–reperfusion injury - acute rejection

Disclosure

The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of Departments of the Air Force, the Army, the U.S. Department of Defense, or the UK Ministry of Defense.


This study was conducted under a protocol reviewed and approved by the Air Force Medical Service (AFMS), Wilford Hall Ambulatory Surgical Center (WHASC), Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), and the IACUC of the Tri-Service Research Laboratory, Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX.


This study was conducted in the performance of Cooperative Research and Development Agreement number 10-333-WHMC-CRADA2 between Wilford Hall Ambulatory Surgical Center and Hyperbaric Oxygen Organ Preservation Systems.


 

  • References

  • 1 Shores JT, Brandacher G, Lee WP. Hand and upper extremity transplantation: an update of outcomes in the worldwide experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 135 (02) 351e-360e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Siemionow M, Gharb BB, Rampazzo A. Successes and lessons learned after more than a decade of upper extremity and face transplantation. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2013; 18 (06) 633-639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hollenbeck ST, Erdmann D, Levin LS. Current indications for hand and face allotransplantation. Transplant Proc 2009; 41 (02) 495-498
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Weissenbacher A, Hautz T, Pratschke J, Schneeberger S. Vascularized composite allografts and solid organ transplants: similarities and differences. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2013; 18 (06) 640-644
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Giele H, Bendon C, Reddy S. , et al. Remote revascularization of abdominal wall transplants using the forearm. Am J Transplant 2014; 14 (06) 1410-1416
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Khalil AA, Aziz FA, Hall JC. Reperfusion injury. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 117 (03) 1024-1033
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Lee WP, Yaremchuk MJ, Pan YC, Randolph MA, Tan CM, Weiland AJ. Relative antigenicity of components of a vascularized limb allograft. Plast Reconstr Surg 1991; 87 (03) 401-411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wolf EG. . Hyperbaric oxygen organ preservation system. US Patent: us 6794182; 2004
    PubMed
  • 9 Boerema I, Meyne NG, Brummelkamp WK. , et al. [ Life without blood]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1960; 104: 949-954
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Good surgical practices. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?CFRPart=58&showFR=1 . Accessed September, 2012
    PubMed
  • 11 National Research Council. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 8th ed. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Villamaria CY, Rasmussen TE, Spencer JR, Patel S, Davis MR. Microvascular porcine model for the optimization of vascularized composite tissue transplantation. J Surg Res 2012; 178 (01) 452-459
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hammers DW, Matheny Jr RW, Sell C. , et al. Impairment of IGF-I expression and anabolic signaling following ischemia/reperfusion in skeletal muscle of old mice. Exp Gerontol 2011; 46 (04) 265-272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Zdichavsky M, Jones JW, Ustuner ET. , et al. Scoring of skin rejection in a swine composite tissue allograft model. J Surg Res 1999; 85 (01) 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Cendales LC, Kanitakis J, Schneeberger S. , et al. The Banff 2007 Working Classification of Skin-Containing Composite Tissue Allograft Pathology. Am J Transplant 2008; 8 (07) 1396-1400
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Villamaria CY, Fries CA, Spencer JR, Roth M, Davis MR. Hydrogen sulfide mitigates reperfusion injury in a porcine model of vascularized composite autotransplantation. Ann Plast Surg 2014; 72 (05) 594-598
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kirk AD. Crossing the bridge: large animal models in translational transplantation research. Immunol Rev 2003; 196: 176-196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Leto Barone AA, Leonard DA, Torabi R. , et al. The gracilis myocutaneous free flap in swine: an advantageous preclinical model for vascularized composite allograft transplantation research. Microsurgery 2013; 33 (01) 51-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Bonastre J, Landin L, Diez J, Casado-Sanchez C, Casado-Perez C. Factors influencing acute rejection of human hand allografts: a systematic review. Ann Plast Surg 2012; 68 (06) 624-629
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Pradka SP, Ong YS, Zhang Y. , et al. Increased signs of acute rejection with ischemic time in a rat musculocutaneous allotransplant model. Transplant Proc 2009; 41 (02) 531-536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Tullius SG, Reutzel-Selke A, Egermann F. , et al. Contribution of prolonged ischemia and donor age to chronic renal allograft dysfunction. J Am Soc Nephrol 2000; 11 (07) 1317-1324
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Xiao B, Xia W, Zhang J, Liu B, Guo S. Prolonged cold ischemic time results in increased acute rejection in a rat allotransplantation model. J Surg Res 2010; 164 (02) e299-e304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Shimizu F, Okamoto O, Katagiri K, Fujiwara S, Wei F-C. Prolonged ischemia increases severity of rejection in skin flap allotransplantation in rats. Microsurgery 2010; 30 (02) 132-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Caterson EJ, Lopez J, Medina M, Pomahac B, Tullius SG. Ischemia-reperfusion injury in vascularized composite allotransplantation. J Craniofac Surg 2013; 24 (01) 51-56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Halloran PF, Homik J, Goes N. , et al. The “injury response”: a concept linking nonspecific injury, acute rejection, and long-term transplant outcomes. Transplant Proc 1997; 29 (1–2): 79-81
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Yuan X, Theruvath AJ, Ge X. , et al. Machine perfusion or cold storage in organ transplantation: indication, mechanisms, and future perspectives. Transpl Int 2010; 23 (06) 561-570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Bathini V, McGregor T, McAlister VC, Luke PPW, Sener A. Renal perfusion pump vs cold storage for donation after cardiac death kidneys: a systematic review. J Urol 2013; 189 (06) 2214-2220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ardehali A, Esmailian F, Deng M. , et al; PROCEED II trial investigators. Ex-vivo perfusion of donor hearts for human heart transplantation (PROCEED II): a prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2015; 385 (9987): 2577-2584
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Dhital KK, Iyer A, Connellan M. , et al. Adult heart transplantation with distant procurement and ex-vivo preservation of donor hearts after circulatory death: a case series. Lancet 2015; 385 (9987): 2585-2591
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Constantinescu MA, Knall E, Xu X. , et al. Preservation of amputated extremities by extracorporeal blood perfusion; a feasibility study in a porcine model. J Surg Res 2011; 171 (01) 291-299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Salgado CJ, Jamali AA, Ortiz JA. , et al. Effects of hyperbaric oxygen on the replanted extremity subjected to prolonged warm ischaemia. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010; 63 (03) 532-537
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Edwards RJ, Im MJ, Hoopes JE. Effects of hyperbaric oxygen preservation on rat limb replantation: a preliminary report. Ann Plast Surg 1991; 27 (01) 31-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Lebranchu Y, Baan C, Biancone L. , et al. Pretransplant identification of acute rejection risk following kidney transplantation. Transpl Int 2014; 27 (02) 129-138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Shaheen MF, Shaheen FA, Attar B, Elamin K, Al Hayyan H, Al Sayyari A. Impact of recipient and donor nonimmunologic factors on the outcome of deceased donor kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc 2010; 42 (01) 273-276
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar