PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Johannes M Frank

Publications and source records attributed to Johannes M Frank.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Investigation of risk acceptance in facial transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The surgical techniques necessary to transplant a human face are well established, and the early success of human hand transplants suggests that the immunological hurdles of transplanting human facial tissues have largely been overcome. Therefore, it is the ethical barriers that pose the greatest challenge to performing facial transplantation. At the center of the ethical debate is the question, "Do the risks posed by the life-long immunosuppression that a recipient would have to take justify the benefits of receiving a face transplant?" In this study, the authors answer this question by assessing the degree of risk individuals would be willing to accept to receive a face transplant. METHODS: To quantitatively assess risks versus benefits in facial transplantation, the authors developed the Louisville Instrument for Transplantation, or LIFT, which contains 237 standardized questions. Respondents in three study populations (healthy individuals, n = 150; organ transplant recipients, n = 42; and individuals with facial disfigurement, n = 34) were questioned about the extent to which they would trade off specific numbers of life-years, or sustain other costs, in exchange for receiving seven different transplant procedures. RESULTS: The authors found that the three populations would accept differing degrees of risk for the seven transplant procedures. Organ transplant recipients were the most risk-tolerant group, while facially disfigured individuals were the least risk tolerant. All groups questioned would accept the highest degree of risk to receive a face transplant compared with the six other procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents an empirical basis for assessing risk versus benefit in facial transplantation. In doing so, it provides a more solid foundation upon which to introduce this exciting new reconstructive modality into the clinical arena.

Decision Making↗

Composite tissue allotransplantation of the hand and face: a new frontier in transplant and reconstructive surgery.

Each year an estimated 7-million people in the USA need composite tissue reconstruction because of surgical excision of tumors, accidents and congenital malformations. Limb amputees alone comprise over 1.2 million of these. This figure is more than double the number of solid organs needed for transplantation. Composite tissue allotransplantation in the form of hand and facial tissue transplantation are now a clinical reality. The discovery, in the late 1990s, that the same immunotherapy used routinely in kidney transplantation was also effective in preventing skin rejection made this possible. While these new treatments seem like major advancements most of the surgical, immunological and ethical methods used are not new at all and have been around and routinely used in clinical practice for some time. In this review of composite tissue allotransplantation, we: (i) outline the limitations of conventional reconstructive methods for treating severe facial disfigurement, (ii) review the history of composite tissue allotransplantation, (iii) discuss the chronological scientific advances that have made it possible, (iv) focus on the two unique clinical scenarios of hand and face transplantation, and (v) reflect on the critical issues that must be addressed as we move this new frontier toward becoming a treatment in mainstream medicine.

Face↗

Bone quality in swine composite tissue allografts: effects of combination immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Tacrolimus (FK506)/mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)/prednisone combination immunosuppression therapy has been found to effectively prevent composite tissue allograft (CTA) rejection with minimal toxicity in a preclinical porcine model. These findings have been reproduced in 24 human hands transplanted in 18 patients. In CTAs containing bone, adequate bone quality and healing are essential for long-term functional success. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect FK506/MMF/prednisone immunotherapy has on bone quality and healing. METHODS: Forelimb CTA-flaps were transplanted in nine pigs. Recipient animals received FK506/MMF/prednisone therapy for 3 months. Bone quality was studied pre- and posttransplant by measuring acoustic velocity and density and by calculating elastic coefficients. Additional bone quality analyses were performed on unoperated limbs, and in bone grafts from two pigs that had autograft procedures performed. Bone healing was assessed using radiographic analysis. RESULTS: Three animals were lost to immunosuppression-related complications before the endpoint of the study. The bone component of all six CTA-flaps showed normal healing. Although results of the bone density measurements were not significantly different when comparing pre- to posttransplant values, acoustic velocity and elastic coefficient measurements showed a significant decrease posttransplant indicating a decrease in bone quality. CONCLUSIONS: FK506/MMF/prednisone combination therapy prevented rejection, did not adversely affect bone quality, and showed normal bone healing. The transplant procedure itself decreased bone quality more than the immunosuppression regimen did over the observation period in this study. Based on these findings, we conclude to prevent CTA failure it is important to monitor bone quality posttransplant.

Animals↗