THE RELATIONSHIP OF QUILTY EFFECT TO ACUTE REJECTION OF THE TRANSPLANTED HEART
https://doi.org/10.15825/1995-1191-2015-4-17-23
Abstract
Introduction. The Quilty Effect (lymphoid-cellular infiltration of the endocardium) is a frequent finding in biopsies of the transplanted heart. The role of this phenomenon in the rejection of the transplanted heart remains unclear. Aim. Retrospective analysis of endomyocardial biopsies of the transplanted heart and assessment of the relationship between acute cellular rejection and Quilty Effect. Methods and results. 112 endomyocardial biopsies with Quilty Effect were identified out of 883 studied biopsies during the period from January 2010 to June 2014. The frequency of Quilty damage occurrence in acute cellular rejection is significantly higher than in its absence (17.7% and 5.6%; р < 0.001). The combination of acute cellular rejection with acute antibodymediated rejection significantly increases the frequency of Quilty damage (р = 0.039). Isolated acute antibodymediated rejection of the transplanted heart does not affect the frequency of Quilty Effect occurrence and is not a direct etiologic and pathogenetic factor of this phenomenon. In the absence of acute cellular rejection, Quilty Effect is a predictor of its later development. Mild acute cellular rejection in conjunction with the Quilty Effect causes the risk of more severe degree of rejection. Quilty Effect type B occurs much less frequently than type A (1.9% and 10.8%; р = 0.001) and is observed primarily in acute cellular rejection of grade G2R (р = 0.001); the frequency of these morphological types at various periods after heart transplant was not significantly different (р > 0.05). Conclusion. The Quilty Effect is a kind of manifestation of acute cellular rejection of the transplanted heart when immunosuppressive therapy with calcineurin inhibitors is used.
About the Authors
I. M. IljinskyRussian Federation
L. S. Alexeeva
Russian Federation
V. A. Zajdenov
Russian Federation
N. P. Mozhejko
Russian Federation
A. O. Shevchenko
Russian Federation
R. Sh. Saitgareev
Russian Federation
V. N. Poptcov
Russian Federation
References
1. Очерки клинической трансплантологии / Под ред. С.В. Готье. М.–Тверь: Триада, 2009: 360. Ocherki klinicheskoj transplantologii / Pod red. S.V. Got’e. M.– Tver’: Triada, 2009: 360.
2. Отторжение трансплантированного сердца. М.: Реафарм, 2005: 240. Ottorzhenie transplantirovannogo serdca. M.: Reafarm, 2005: 240.
3. Kottke-Marchant K, Ratliff NB. Endomyocardial lymphocytic infiltrates in cardiac transplant recipients. Incidence and characterization. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1989 Jun; 113 (6): 690–698.
4. Gajjar NA, Kobashigawa JA, Laks H, Espejo-Vassilakis M, Fishbein MC. FK506 vs. cyclosporin. Pathologic findings in 1067 endomyocardial biopsies. Cardiovasc Pathol. 2003 Mar-Apr; 12 (2): 73–76.
5. Zakliczynski M, Nozynski J, Konecka-Mrowka D, Pyka L, Trybunia D, Swierad M et al. Quilty effect correlates with biopsy-proven acute cellular rejection but does not predict transplanted heart coronary artery vasculopathy. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2009 Mar; 28 (3): 255–259.
6. Hiemann NE, Knosalla C, Wellnhofer E, Lehmkuhl HB, Hetzer R, Meyer R. Quilty in biopsy is associated with poor prognosis after heart transplantation. Transpl Immunol. 2008 Jul; 19 (3–4): 209–214.
7. Joshi A, Masek MA, Brown BW Jr, Weiss LM, Billingham ME. «Quilty» revisited: a 10-year perspective. Hum Pathol. 1995 May; 26 (5): 547–557.
8. Chu KE, Ho EK, de la Torre L, Vasilescu ER, Marboe CC. The relationship of nodular endocardial infiltrates (Quilty lesions) to survival, patient age, anti-HLA antibodies, and coronary artery disease following heart transplantation. Cardiovasc Pathol. 2005 Jul-Aug; 14 (4): 219–224.
9. Cunningham KS, Veinot JP, Butany J. An approach to endomyocardial biopsy interpretation. J Clin Pathol. 2006 Feb; 59 (2): 121–129.
10. Cipullo R, Finger MA, Neto JMR, Contreras CM, Nádia Van Geen Poltronieri, de Moura Barros Zamorano M et al. Vasculitis and Eosinophils in Emdomyocardial Biopsies as Rejection Predictors in Heart Transplantation. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2011; 97 (2): 163–170.
11. Stewart S, Winters GL, Fishbein MC, Tazelaar HD, Kobashigawa J, Abrams J et al. Revision of the 1990 working formulation for the standardization of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart rejection. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2005 Nov; 24 (11): 1710–1720.
12. Hunt S, Burch M, Geetha B, Canter C, Chinnock R, Crespo-Leiro M. The international society of heart and lung transplantation guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients, task force 3: long-term care of heart transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2010: 914–956.
13. Pardo-Mindán FJ1, Lozano MD. «Quilty effect» in heart transplantation: is it related to acute rejection? J Heart Lung Transplant. 1991 Nov-Dec; 10 (6): 937–941.
14. Costanzo-Nordin MR, Winters GL, Fisher SG, O’Sullivan J, Heroux AL, Kao W et al. Endocardial infiltrates in the transplanted heart: clinical significance emerging from the analysis of 5026 endomyocardial biopsy specimens. J Heart Lung Transplant. 1993 Sep-Oct; 12 (5): 741–747.
15. Yamani MH, Ratliff NB, Starling RC, Tuzcu EM, Yu Y, Cook DJ et al. Quilty lesions are associated with increased expression of vitronectin receptor (alphavbeta3) and subsequent development of coronary vasculopathy. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2003 Jun; 22 (6): 687–690.
16. Di Carlo E, D’Antuono T, Contento S, Di Nicola M, Ballone E, Sorrentino C. Quilty effect has the features of lymphoid neogenesis and shares CXCL13-CXCR5 pathway with recurrent acute cardiac rejections. Am J Transplant. 2007 Jan; 7 (1): 201–210.
17. Smith RN, Chang Y, Houser S, Dec GW, Grazette L. Higher frequency of high-grade rejections in cardiac allograft patients after Quilty B lesions or grade 2/4 rejections. Transplantation. 2002 Jun 27; 73 (12): 1928–1932.
Review
For citations:
Iljinsky I.M., Alexeeva L.S., Zajdenov V.A., Mozhejko N.P., Shevchenko A.O., Saitgareev R.Sh., Poptcov V.N. THE RELATIONSHIP OF QUILTY EFFECT TO ACUTE REJECTION OF THE TRANSPLANTED HEART. Russian Journal of Transplantology and Artificial Organs. 2015;17(4):17-23. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15825/1995-1191-2015-4-17-23