4.6 Article

The International Registry on Hand and Composite Tissue Transplantation

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION
卷 90, 期 12, 页码 1590-1594

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181ff1472

关键词

Composite tissue allotransplantation; Hand allotransplantation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. The International Registry on Hand and Composite Tissue Transplantation was founded in May 2002, and the analysis of all cases with follow-up information up to July 2010 is presented here. Methods. From September 1998 to July 2010, 49 hands (17 unilateral and 16 bilateral hand transplantations, including 1 case of bilateral arm transplantation) have been reported, for a total of 33 patients. They were 31 men and 2 women (median age 32 years). Time since hand loss ranged from 2 months to 34 years, and in 46% of cases, the level of amputation was at wrist. Immunosuppressive therapy included tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, sirolimus, and steroids; polyclonal or monoclonal antibodies were used for induction. Topical immunosuppression was also used in several cases. Follow-up ranges from 1 month to 11 years. Results. One patient died on day 65. Three patients transplanted in the Western countries have lost their graft, whereas until September 2009, seven hand grafts were removed for noncompliance to the immunosuppressive therapy in China. Eighty-five percent of recipients experienced at least one episode of acute rejection within the first year, and they were reversible when promptly treated. Side effects included opportunistic infections, metabolic complications, and malignancies. All patients developed protective sensibility, 90% of them developed tactile sensibility, and 82.3% also developed a discriminative sensibility. Motor recovery enabled patients to perform most daily activities. Conclusions. Hand transplantation is a complex procedure, and its success is based on patient's compliance and his or her careful evaluation before and after transplantation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据