4.7 Review

Is the renal subcapsular space the preferred site for clinical porcine islet xenotransplantation? Review article

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 69, 期 -, 页码 100-107

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.07.032

关键词

Islet transplantation; Intraportal; Renal subcapsular space; Pancreatic islets; Xenotransplantation

类别

资金

  1. American Society of Transplant Surgeons
  2. NIH [U19 AI090959/08]
  3. United Therapeutics, Silver Spring, MD, USA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It can reasonably be anticipated that, within 5-10 years, islet allotransplantation or pig islet xenotransplantation may be the preferred options for beta-cell replacement therapy. The portal vein/liver is currently the preferred clinical site for free islet transplantation, constituting 90% of clinical islet transplants. Despite being the site of choice for rodent and some large animal studies, the renal subcapsular space is rarely used clinically, even though the introduction of islets intraportally is not entirely satisfactory (particularly for pig islet xenotransplantation). We questioned why this might be so. Is it perhaps based on prior clinical evidence, or from experience in nonhuman primates? When we have questioned experts in the field, no definitive answers have been forthcoming. We have therefore reviewed the relevant literature, and still cannot find a convincing reason why the renal subcapsular space has been so relatively abandoned as a site for clinical islet transplantation. Owing to its sequestered environment, subcapsular transplantation might avoid some of the remaining challenges of intraportal transplantation. This may be particularly true when using pig islets for xenotransplantation, which are exceptionally pure in comparison to human islets used in auto-or allo-transplantation. With evidence from the literature, we question the notion that the subcapsular space is inhospitable to islet transplantation and suggest that, when porcine islet transplantation is introduced, this site should perhaps be reconsidered.

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

4.7
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