Juan C. Alejos

Bio: Juan C. Alejos is an academic researcher from University of California, Los Angeles. The author has contributed to research in topics: Transplantation & Heart transplantation. The author has an hindex of 25, co-authored 70 publications receiving 1881 citations. Previous affiliations of Juan C. Alejos include University of Southern California & Children's Hospital Los Angeles.

Humoral rejection in cardiac transplantation: risk factors, hemodynamic consequences and relationship to transplant coronary artery disease.

Abstract: Background Acute cellular rejection is the mechanism of most immune-related injury in cardiac transplant recipients. However, antibody-mediated humoral rejection (HR) has also been implicated as an important clinical entity following orthotopic heart transplantation. Humoral rejection has been reported to play a role in graft dysfunction in the early post-transplant period, and to be a risk factor for the development of transplant coronary artery disease. Some involved in transplantation pathology doubt the existence of clinically significant humoral rejection in cardiac allografts. Those who recognize its existence disagree on its possible role in graft dysfunction or graft coronary artery disease. In this study, we report clinical features of patients with the pathologic diagnosis of HR at our institution since July 1997, when we began systematic surveillance for humoral rejection. Methods We reviewed medical records of patients with the pathologic diagnosis of HR without concurrent cellular rejection between July 1997 and January 2001. Diagnosis was based on routine histology (“swollen cells” distending capillaries, interstitial edema and hemorrhage) and immunofluorescence (capillary deposition of immunoglobulin and complement with HLA-DR positivity), or immunoperoxidase staining of paraffin-embedded tissue (numerous CD68-positive macrophages and fewer swollen endothelial cells distending capillaries). Results A total of 44 patients (4 to 74 years old) showed evidence of HR without concurrent cellular rejection at autopsy or on one or more biopsies. Although females comprised only 26% of our transplant population, 23 patients (52%) with HR were female. A positive peri-operative flow cytometry T-cell crossmatch was observed in 32% of HR patients compared with 12% of controls ( p = 0.02). Hemodynamic compromise consisting of shock, hypotension, decreased cardiac output/index and/or a rise in capillary wedge or pulmonary artery pressure was observed in 47% of patients at the time of diagnosis of HR. Six patients (5 females) died (14% mortality) with evidence of HR at or just before autopsy, 6 days to 16 months after transplantation. The incidence of transplant coronary artery disease was 10% greater at 1 year, and 36% greater at 5 years, in patients with HR when compared with non-HR patients. Conclusion Humoral rejection was associated with acute hemodynamic compromise in 47% of patients, and was the direct cause of death in 6 patients (13%). Humoral rejection is a clinicopathologic entity with a high incidence in women and is associated with acute hemodynamic compromise, accelerated transplant coronary artery disease and death.

Factors influencing survival in patients undergoing the bidirectional Glenn anastomosis

Abstract: The bidirectional Glenn anastomosis (BGA) has long been used as a surgical intervention for patients with single ventricle physiology. Initially, this procedure was the final stage in palliation and was performed in older children. Eventually, as the Fontan procedure came to be used as a method to separate circulations, the Glenn procedure was performed as an intermediate step. Over time, the BGA was performed as an alternative for patients who were considered to be at high risk with the Fontan procedure. Between January 1, 1988, and January 1, 1994, 129 patients underwent BGA at the University of California-Los Angeles. These patients were reviewed retrospectively, including clinic visits, catheterization, and echocardiographic information. The overall survival rate was 87% (112 of 129 patients). The average length of follow-up was 27 months. This information was then analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis. Several factors were related to failure in patients who underwent BGA including pulmonary artery pressure, systemic right ventricle, and presence of anomolous pulmonary venous drainage and heterotaxy syndrome.

Use of assist devices and ECMO to bridge pediatric patients with cardiomyopathy to transplantation.

Abstract: Background: Pulsatile ventricular assist devices (VADs) are used to bridge adults with end-stage heart disease to transplantation. A combination of external implantable pulsatile and continuous-flow external mechanical support now can be used to bridge pediatric patients with end-stage cardiomyopathy to orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). Methods: We reviewed consecutive pediatric patients with cardiomyopathy ( n = 28) who required mechanical cardiac support from July 1995 to February 2001. All were OHT candidates with severe hemodynamic compromise despite maximal medical support. We excluded from this series patients who had undergone cardiotomy. Results: Nineteen patients received support from external continuous-flow devices, either with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or with centrifugal VADs, and 9 patients received pulsatile support. Nineteen of 28 (68%) patients were successfully bridged to transplant (17) or weaned (2) from their devices after recovery. Of the patients successfully bridged to transplant or recovery, 89% are alive to date. Univariate analysis revealed that a lower bilirubin concentration after 2 days of support was associated with a favorable outcome ( p = 0.006). As expected, the patients with pulsatile VADs had significantly higher rates of extubation and oral feeding. Conclusion: Pulsatile and continuous-flow devices can complement each other to significantly extend the lives of a wide range of pediatric patients with severe cardiomyopathies.

Diverse morphologic manifestations of cardiac allograft vasculopathy: a pathologic study of 64 allograft hearts.

Abstract: Background Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) is a major limitation to the long-term success of cardiac transplantation. Although there are published descriptions of the lesions, there have been no studies delineating the pathology of CAV in a large series of patients who underwent retransplantation for CAV. Methods We reviewed archival records and microscopic sections of surgically explanted hearts from 64 patients who underwent cardiac retransplantation: 54 adults (18 to 70 years old) and 10 children (3 to 15 years old). Vascular lesions were categorized as showing intimal fibromuscular hyperplasia, atherosclerosis and/or inflammation. The degree of luminal narrowing was estimated from gross descriptions and microscopic sections. Results In total, 75% of hearts had evidence of acute cellular rejection, mostly mild. Intramyocardial arteries showed primarily intimal fibromuscular hyperplasia and inflammation with no atheromas present. Large and branch epicardial coronary arteries were narrowed in at least one artery of all hearts. Lesions in the epicardial coronary arteries were composed of intimal fibromuscular hyperplasia, atherosclerosis and/or inflammation affecting one or more vascular layers (intima, media and adventitia). Severe CAV with >75% luminal narrowing was seen in the LAD in 17% of hearts, the LCx in 17% and the RCA in 22% of hearts. Two hearts had severe narrowing of the left main coronary artery. Nineteen arteries had luminal thrombi. All hearts had narrowing of smaller epicardial branch coronary arteries that was often severe. Atheromas were present in arteries of adults and children; thus, not all atheromas could be considered pre-existing prior to transplantation. Both arteries and veins showed intimal hyperplasia and inflammation. Conclusions CAV is a pathologically multifaceted disorder that affects large and small epicardial coronary arteries of adults and children, with different types of lesions: intimal fibromuscular hyperplasia; atherosclerosis; and/or inflammation (vasculitis). Therapies to address this disease must take into account the protean nature of the vascular lesions.

Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury

Abstract: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex disorder for which currently there is no accepted definition. Having a uniform standard for diagnosing and classifying AKI would enhance our ability to manage these patients. Future clinical and translational research in AKI will require collaborative networks of investigators drawn from various disciplines, dissemination of information via multidisciplinary joint conferences and publications, and improved translation of knowledge from pre-clinical research. We describe an initiative to develop uniform standards for defining and classifying AKI and to establish a forum for multidisciplinary interaction to improve care for patients with or at risk for AKI. Members representing key societies in critical care and nephrology along with additional experts in adult and pediatric AKI participated in a two day conference in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in September 2005 and were assigned to one of three workgroups. Each group's discussions formed the basis for draft recommendations that were later refined and improved during discussion with the larger group. Dissenting opinions were also noted. The final draft recommendations were circulated to all participants and subsequently agreed upon as the consensus recommendations for this report. Participating societies endorsed the recommendations and agreed to help disseminate the results. The term AKI is proposed to represent the entire spectrum of acute renal failure. Diagnostic criteria for AKI are proposed based on acute alterations in serum creatinine or urine output. A staging system for AKI which reflects quantitative changes in serum creatinine and urine output has been developed. We describe the formation of a multidisciplinary collaborative network focused on AKI. We have proposed uniform standards for diagnosing and classifying AKI which will need to be validated in future studies. The Acute Kidney Injury Network offers a mechanism for proceeding with efforts to improve patient outcomes.

Revision of the 1990 Working Formulation for the Standardization of Nomenclature in the Diagnosis of Heart Rejection

Abstract: In 1990, an international grading scheme for the grading of pulmonary allograft rejection was adopted by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) and was modified in 1995 by an expanded group of pathologists. The original and revised classifications have served the lung transplant community well, facilitating communication between transplant centers with regard to both patient management and research. In 2006, under the direction of the ISHLT, a multi-disciplinary review of the biopsy grading system was undertaken to update the scheme, address inconsistencies of use, and consider the current knowledge of antibody-mediated rejection in the lung. This article summarizes the revised consensus classification of lung allograft rejection. In brief, acute rejection is based on perivascular and interstitial mononuclear infiltrates, Grade A0 (none), Grade A1 (minimal), Grade A2 (mild), Grade A3 (moderate) and Grade A4 (severe), as previously. The revised (R) categories of small airways inflammation, lymphocytic bronchiolitis, are as follows: Grade B0 (none), Grade B1R (low grade, 1996, B1 and B2), Grade B2R (high grade, 1996, B3 and B4) and BX (ungradeable). Chronic rejection, obliterative bronchiolitis (Grade C), is described as present (C1) or absent (C0), without reference to presence of inflammatory activity. Chronic vascular rejection is unchanged as Grade D. Recommendations are made for the evaluation of antibody-mediated rejection, recognizing that this is a controversial entity in the lung, less well developed and understood than in other solid-organ grafts, and with no consensus reached on diagnostic features. Differential diagnoses of acute rejection, airway inflammation and chronic rejection are described and technical considerations revisited. This consensus revision of the working formulation was approved by the ISHLT board of directors in April 2007.

2011 ACCF/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

Abstract: Writing committee me tions to which their s ply; see Appendix ACCF/AHATask Fo Surgeons Representa tative Heart Rhythm ography and Int Echocardiography Re ciety of America Rep resentative kkACCF/ Task Force member d This document was app Board of Trustees and ordinating Committee gery, American Soc Cardiology, Heart Fa for Cardiovascular A geons approved the d The American Associat as follows: Gersh BJ Naidu SS, Nishimura Bernard J Gersh, MB, ChB, DPhil, FACC, FAHA, Co-Chair* Barry J Maron, MD, FACC, CoChair* Robert O Bonow, MD, MACC, FAHA, Joseph A Dearani, MD, FACC,§,k Michael A Fifer, MD, FACC, FAHA,* Mark S Link, MD, FACC, FHRS,* Srihari S Naidu, MD, FACC, FSCAI,* Rick A Nishimura, MD, FACC, FAHA, Steve R Ommen, MD, FACC, FAHA, Harry Rakowski, MD, FACC, FASE,** Christine E Seidman, MD, FAHA, Jeffrey A Towbin, MD, FACC, FAHA, James E Udelson, MD, FACC, FASNC, and Clyde W Yancy, MD, FACC, FAHAkk

The Third International Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Cytomegalovirus in Solid-organ Transplantation

Abstract: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains one of the most common infections after solid organ transplantation, resulting in significant morbidity, graft loss, and occasional mortality. Management of CMV varies considerably among transplant centers. A panel of experts on CMV and solid organ transplant was convened by The Infectious Diseases Section of The Transplantation Society to develop evidence and expert opinion-based consensus guidelines on CMV management including diagnostics, immunology, prevention, treatment, drug resistance, and pediatric issues.

The International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients

Abstract: Institutional Affiliations Chair Costanzo MR: Midwest Heart Foundation, Lombard Illinois, USA Task Force 1 Dipchand A: Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto Ontario, Canada; Starling R: Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Anderson A: University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Chan M: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Desai S: Inova Fairfax Hospital, Fairfax, Virginia, USA; Fedson S: University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Fisher P: Ochsner Clinic, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; Gonzales-Stawinski G: Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Martinelli L: Ospedale Niguarda, Milano, Italy; McGiffin D: University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama, USA; Parisi F: Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesu, Rome, Italy; Smith J: Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Task Force 2 Taylor D: Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Meiser B: University of Munich/Grosshaden, Munich, Germany; Baran D: Newark Beth Israel Medical Center, Newark, New Jersey, USA; Carboni M: Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA; Dengler T: University of Hidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Feldman D: Minneapolis Heart Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; Frigerio M: Ospedale Niguarda, Milano, Italy; Kfoury A: Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, Utah, USA; Kim D: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Kobashigawa J: Cedar-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA; Shullo M: University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; Stehlik J: University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA; Teuteberg J: University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; Uber P: University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Zuckermann A: University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. Task Force 3 Hunt S: Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, USA; Burch M: Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK; Bhat G: Advocate Christ Medical Center, Oak Lawn, Illinois, USA; Canter C: St. Louis Children Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, USA; Chinnock R: Loma Linda University Children's Hospital, Loma Linda, California, USA; Crespo-Leiro M: Hospital Universitario A Coruna, La Coruna, Spain; Delgado R: Texas Heart Institute, Houston, Texas, USA; Dobbels F: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Grady K: Northwestern University, Chicago, Illlinois, USA; Kao W: University of Wisconsin, Madison Wisconsin, USA; Lamour J: Montefiore Medical Center, New York, New York, USA; Parry G: Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Patel J: Cedar-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA; Pini D: Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Rozzano, Italy; Pinney S: Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York, USA; Towbin J: Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA; Wolfel G: University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA Independent Reviewers Delgado D: University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Eisen H: Drexler University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Goldberg L: University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Hosenpud J: Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA; Johnson M: University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA; Keogh A: St Vincent Hospital, Sidney, New South Wales, Australia; Lewis C: Papworth Hospital Cambridge, UK; O'Connell J: St. Joseph Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia, USA; Rogers J: Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA; Ross H: University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Russell S: Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Vanhaecke J: University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium.