ICVTS Click here to locate an Ethicon representative
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg 2005;4:415-419. doi:10.1510/icvts.2004.105262
© 2005 European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Michel Haddad
Roy G. Masters
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haddad, M.
Right arrow Articles by Masters, R. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Haddad, M.
Right arrow Articles by Masters, R. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Cardiac - pharmacology
Right arrow Transplantation - heart

Work in progress report - Transplantation

Induction immunosuppression after heart transplantation: monoclonal vs. polyclonal antithymoglobulins. Is there a difference?

Michel Haddada,b,*, Fahad S. Alghofailia, Dean A. Fergussonb and Roy G. Mastersa

a Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, 40 Ruskin Street, Ottawa, Ontario, K1Y-4W7, Canada
b Department of Epidemiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, K1Y-4W7, Canada

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 (613) 761-4233; fax: +1 (613) 761-5367.

E-mail address: mhaddad{at}ottawaheart.ca (M. Haddad).

Induction immunosuppression after heart transplantation is believed to reduce the risk of acute graft rejection. While monoclonal and polyclonal antithymoglobulins are considered the optimal induction agents, controversy remains regarding their relative superiority. This article presents a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis in order to assess the relative benefits and side-effects of monoclonal vs. polyclonal antithymoglobulins as induction immunosuppression agents. Pooled analysis demonstrated a small but statistically insignificant difference in the average time to first rejection between the groups (6.7±15.5 days, P=0.39). No statistically significant differences in the proportion of patients who developed rejection or infection episodes at 6 months were observed (Relative Risk 0.97, P=0.82 and Relative Risk 0.85, P=0.14, respectively). In addition, no statistically significant difference in survival was found between the groups at 6 months (Relative Risk 0.98, P=0.58). A greater number of drug related side-effects was observed, however, in the monoclonal group, including episodes of acute pulmonary edema and hypotension. In conclusion, this review revealed no statistically significant differences in rejection, infection, or survival rates between the monoclonal and polyclonal groups. The increased rate of side-effects with monoclonal antibodies might suggest a superiority of polyclonal over monoclonal antibodies.

Key Words: Heart transplantation; Immunosuppression; Monoclonal; Polyclonal; Thymoglobulin







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS
Copyright © 2005 European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery