Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Reproducibility of Rejection Grading in Uterus Transplantation: A Multicenter Study

V. Broecker, M. Brännström, H. Bösmüller, E. Sticová, J. Malušková, A. Chiesa-Vottero, J. Mölne

. 2023 ; 9 (10) : e1535. [pub] 20230920

Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc23015220

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of rejection after uterus transplantation is based on histopathological examination of ectocervical biopsies. Inflammation at the stromal-epithelial interface is the backbone of the histopathological classification proposed by our group in 2017. However, the reproducibility of this grading scheme has not been tested, and it is unclear whether it covers the full morphological spectrum of rejection. METHODS: We present a multicenter study in which 5 pathologists from 4 uterus transplantation centers performed 2 rounds of grading on 145 and 48 cervical biopsies, respectively. Three of the centers provided biopsies. Additionally, the presence of perivascular stromal inflammation was recorded. During discussions after the first round, further histological lesions (venous endothelial inflammation and apoptosis) were identified for closer evaluation and added to the panel of lesions to score in the second round. All participants completed a questionnaire to explore current practices in handling and reporting uterus transplant biopsies. RESULTS: Cervical biopsies were commonly performed in all centers to monitor rejection. Intraobserver reproducibility of rejection grading (performed by 1 rater) was excellent, whereas interobserver reproducibility was moderate and did not improve in the second round. Reproducibility of perivascular stromal inflammation was moderate but unsatisfactory for venous endothelial inflammation and apoptosis. All lesions were more frequent in, but not restricted to, biopsies with rejection patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Grading of rejection in cervical biopsies is reproducible and applicable to biopsies from different centers. Diagnosis of rejection may be improved by adding further histological lesions to the grading system; however, lesions require rigorous consensus definition.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc23015220
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20231020093557.0
007      
ta
008      
231010s2023 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1097/TXD.0000000000001535 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)37745947
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Broecker, Verena $u Department of Clinical Pathology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Region Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden $1 https://orcid.org/0000000329804558
245    10
$a Reproducibility of Rejection Grading in Uterus Transplantation: A Multicenter Study / $c V. Broecker, M. Brännström, H. Bösmüller, E. Sticová, J. Malušková, A. Chiesa-Vottero, J. Mölne
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of rejection after uterus transplantation is based on histopathological examination of ectocervical biopsies. Inflammation at the stromal-epithelial interface is the backbone of the histopathological classification proposed by our group in 2017. However, the reproducibility of this grading scheme has not been tested, and it is unclear whether it covers the full morphological spectrum of rejection. METHODS: We present a multicenter study in which 5 pathologists from 4 uterus transplantation centers performed 2 rounds of grading on 145 and 48 cervical biopsies, respectively. Three of the centers provided biopsies. Additionally, the presence of perivascular stromal inflammation was recorded. During discussions after the first round, further histological lesions (venous endothelial inflammation and apoptosis) were identified for closer evaluation and added to the panel of lesions to score in the second round. All participants completed a questionnaire to explore current practices in handling and reporting uterus transplant biopsies. RESULTS: Cervical biopsies were commonly performed in all centers to monitor rejection. Intraobserver reproducibility of rejection grading (performed by 1 rater) was excellent, whereas interobserver reproducibility was moderate and did not improve in the second round. Reproducibility of perivascular stromal inflammation was moderate but unsatisfactory for venous endothelial inflammation and apoptosis. All lesions were more frequent in, but not restricted to, biopsies with rejection patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Grading of rejection in cervical biopsies is reproducible and applicable to biopsies from different centers. Diagnosis of rejection may be improved by adding further histological lesions to the grading system; however, lesions require rigorous consensus definition.
590    __
$a NEINDEXOVÁNO
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Brännström, Mats $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
700    1_
$a Bösmüller, Hans $u Institute of Pathology and Neuropathology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
700    1_
$a Sticová, Eva $u Clinical and Transplant Pathology Department, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Malušková, Jana $u Clinical and Transplant Pathology Department, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Chiesa-Vottero, Andres $u Department of Anatomic Pathology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
700    1_
$a Mölne, Johan $u Department of Clinical Pathology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Region Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden $u Department of Laboratory Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
773    0_
$w MED00195744 $t Transplantation direct $x 2373-8731 $g Roč. 9, č. 10 (2023), s. e1535
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37745947 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20231010 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20231020093551 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1997049 $s 1201582
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2023 $b 9 $c 10 $d e1535 $e 20230920 $i 2373-8731 $m Transplantation direct $n Transplant Direct $x MED00195744
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20231010

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...