Transplantation · 2005
Role of the thymus and kidney graft in the maintenance of tolerance to heart grafts in miniature swine.
Историческая статьяСтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mezrich Joshua D, Benjamin Louis C, Sachs Jessica A, Houser Stuart L, Vagefi Parsia A, Sachs David H, Madsen Joren C, Yamada Kazuhiko
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The authors have examined the mechanism whereby co-transplantation of a kidney and heart from the same donor induces and maintains tolerance to both organs in miniature swine.
METHODS: Transplants were performed across a major histocompatibility complex class I mismatch, and recipients received cyclosporine for 12 days. Group 1 animals received heart transplants alone (n=5), and all other groups received both heart and kidney allografts. Group 2 animals received no further intervention (n=2). Group 3 animals underwent transplant nephrectomy 8 days after heart and kidney co-transplantation (n=2). Group 4 animals underwent transplant nephrectomy 100 days after co-transplantation (n=2). Skin grafts were placed on group 4 animals, on one group 3 animal, and on two animals from group 2. Group 5 animals underwent thymectomy 100 days after co-transplantation (n=4).
RESULTS: Group 1 animals developed cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) and rejection. Group 2 animals never developed CAV and demonstrated in vitro donor-specific unresponsiveness. Group 3 animals suffered CAV and rejection. Group 4 animals developed CAV without concomitant donor-specific cell-mediated lympholysis reactivity, interstitial rejection, or cessation of graft function. Skin grafts on group 3 and group 4 animals led to fulminant rejection of heart and skin grafts, in contrast to grafts on group 2 animals that had no in vivo effect. Group 5 animals developed CAV but no significant increase in interstitial infiltrates.
CONCLUSIONS: Both the kidney and thymus were necessary for maintenance of tolerance to heart allografts.
METHODS: Transplants were performed across a major histocompatibility complex class I mismatch, and recipients received cyclosporine for 12 days. Group 1 animals received heart transplants alone (n=5), and all other groups received both heart and kidney allografts. Group 2 animals received no further intervention (n=2). Group 3 animals underwent transplant nephrectomy 8 days after heart and kidney co-transplantation (n=2). Group 4 animals underwent transplant nephrectomy 100 days after co-transplantation (n=2). Skin grafts were placed on group 4 animals, on one group 3 animal, and on two animals from group 2. Group 5 animals underwent thymectomy 100 days after co-transplantation (n=4).
RESULTS: Group 1 animals developed cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) and rejection. Group 2 animals never developed CAV and demonstrated in vitro donor-specific unresponsiveness. Group 3 animals suffered CAV and rejection. Group 4 animals developed CAV without concomitant donor-specific cell-mediated lympholysis reactivity, interstitial rejection, or cessation of graft function. Skin grafts on group 3 and group 4 animals led to fulminant rejection of heart and skin grafts, in contrast to grafts on group 2 animals that had no in vivo effect. Group 5 animals developed CAV but no significant increase in interstitial infiltrates.
CONCLUSIONS: Both the kidney and thymus were necessary for maintenance of tolerance to heart allografts.