<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
    <rss version="2.0">
      <channel xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
        <title>Transplant International | New and Recent Articles</title>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/journals/transplant-international</link>
        <description>RSS Feed for Transplant International | New and Recent Articles</description>
        <language>en-us</language>
        <generator>Frontiers Feed Generator,version:1</generator>
        <pubDate>2026-05-30T08:17:51.316+00:00</pubDate>
        <ttl>60</ttl>
        <item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16689</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16689</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Transplantation of older DCD livers in the machine perfusion era: a U.S. cohort study]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-29T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Emmanouil Giorgakis</author><author>Ioannis A. Ziogas</author><author>Dimitrios Moris</author><author>Dimitrios N. Varvoglis</author><author>Charalampos Theocharopoulos</author><author>Dor Yoeli</author><author>Megan A. Adams</author><author>Andrew S. Barbas</author><author>Martin I. Montenovo</author><author>Melissa Chen</author><author>Sorabh Kapoor</author><author>Esteban Calderon</author><author>Andrew M. Moon</author><author>Sasha Deutch-Link</author><author>Hersh Shroff</author><author>Neil D. Shah</author><author>Oren K. Fix</author><author>A. Sidney Barritt</author><author>Amit K. Mathur</author><author>Trevor Nydam</author><author>Chirag S. Desai</author><author>Paulo N. Martins</author><author>Andrea Schegel</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Donation after circulatory death (DCD) livers increasingly use machine perfusion (MP). This study evaluates MP’s impact on older DCD livers based on data from the United Network for Data Sharing, covering all first adult DCD liver transplants (2016–2025). The cohort, divided into pre-MP and MP eras (separated by the FDA approval of the first normothermic MP platform in 2021), showed accelerated growth in DCD liver transplants during the MP era. Donors ≥60 rose 7.8-fold, including donors ≥70 (a USA first). By 2025, DCD livers accounted for 43.2%, with 61.35% from donors ≥50. Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) (3.0%–16.5%), NMP (2.1%–38.9%), and sequential NRP-NMP (0.1%–10.7%) increased significantly (p < 0.001). The MP era was associated with a decrease in median waitlist time from 112 to 62 days (p < 0.001). Early graft survival was similar across ages. For ages 50–59, 1- and 3-year survivals were 87.9%/78.4% pre-MP and 90.1%/78.8% in the MP era. For 60–69, survival was 85.0%/80.6% pre-MP and 90.0%/71.3% in the MP era. DCD LTs for ≥70 were limited to the MP era with 87.8% 1-year survival. Multivariable Cox regression showed that static cold storage (HR = 1.29), donor age 50–69 versus 18–49, and recipient age (HR = 1.01) increased the risk of graft loss after adjustment. MP is associated with an increased number of older DCD liver transplants and acceptable early graft survival.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16293</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16293</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Blood vessels as primary site of rejection in murine lung transplantation]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-29T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Janne Kaes</author><author>Charlotte Hooft</author><author>Xin Jin</author><author>Tobias Heigl</author><author>Hengshuo Liu</author><author>Emilie Pollenus</author><author>Fran Prenen</author><author>Hanne Beeckmans</author><author>Pieterjan Kerckhof</author><author>Arno Vanstapel</author><author>Jan Van Slambrouck</author><author>Martina Mercurio</author><author>Marta Zapata-Ortega</author><author>Gitte Aerts</author><author>Vincent Geudens</author><author>Astrid Vermaut</author><author>Lise Vanvuchelen</author><author>Anse Somers</author><author>Lara Verbeylen</author><author>Cedric Vanluyten</author><author>Annalisa Barbarossa</author><author>Yousry Mohamady</author><author>Balin Özsoy</author><author>Andrea Zajacova</author><author>Birger Tielemans</author><author>Ali Onder Yildirim</author><author>Saskia Bos</author><author>Laurens De Sadeleer</author><author>Laurent Godinas</author><author>Joselyn Rojas Quintero</author><author>Francesca Polverino</author><author>Philippe E. Van den Steen</author><author>Laurens J. Ceulemans</author><author>Robin Vos</author><author>Bart M. Vanaudenaerde</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Survival after lung transplantation lags that of other solid organ transplants. Long-term survival is hampered primarily due to chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) development. It remains elusive how (chronic) rejection is organized within the lung graft over time post-transplant. Using a model of orthotopic left lung transplantation in major mismatched mouse strains with daily immunosuppression, we aimed to study the spatiotemporal dynamics of (chronic) rejection, using micro-computed tomography imaging, flow cytometric analyses and spatial proteomics. Endothelial cells demonstrated early activation and destruction (day 7 post-transplant). The accompanying early inflammation at the vascular compartment, progressed towards aberrant tissue repair resulting in irreversible bronchovascular fibrosis and chronic graft dysfunction. We provide new insights in the spatiotemporal dynamics of (chronic) rejection with a vascular-oriented onset that may have future implications for diagnosis and treatment in clinical lung transplantation.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16280</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16280</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Seeking global agreement on controlled donation after circulatory determination of death: methodology and definitions of the Bucharest international European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT) consensus]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-28T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Consensus Report</category>
        <author>Dominique E. Martin</author><author>Umberto Cillo</author><author>Marius Berman</author><author>Alexandra K. Glazier</author><author>Eduardo Miñambres</author><author>Helen Opdam</author><author>Alicia Pérez-Blanco</author><author>Francesco Procaccio</author><author>Marion Siebelink</author><author>Matthew J. Weiss</author><author>Beatriz Domínguez-Gil</author><author>Gabriel C. Oniscu</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Controlled donation after circulatory determination of death (cDCDD) is now a major contributor to transplant activity worldwide. However, its expansion has been complicated by inconsistent terminology, diverse clinical protocols, and ethical uncertainties. To address these challenges, the European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT) convened a global consensus forum involving multidisciplinary experts from various geographic regions. Four steering committees were established to address adult and pediatric donation pathways, normothermic regional perfusion, and the determination of death. Using a structured methodology, expert panels participated in two waves of surveys, complemented by an in-person consensus meeting to develop recommendations on key clinical and ethical aspects of cDCDD. This article presents the project methodology and consensus results regarding standardized terminology and definitions that are essential for successfully harmonizing international practice. Consensus was achieved on fundamental terms, including the recommended nomenclature of “donation after circulatory determination of death,” definitions of clinical categories such as possible and potential donors, and key time points in donation protocols. The establishment of shared terminology provides a foundation for comparing outcomes across programs, facilitating international research collaboration, and supporting evidence-based improvements in clinical practice. This consensus represents an important step toward global convergence of donation practices while maintaining core ethical values and supporting continued technological and societal progress in the field.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16189</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16189</link>
        <title><![CDATA[A discrete time simulation model for kidney allocation in Germany]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-28T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Nassim Kakavand</author><author>Maarten Coemans</author><author>Hans C. de Ferrante</author><author>Benedikt Kolbrink</author><author>Malte Ziemann</author><author>David I. Radke</author><author>Matthias Lindner</author><author>Maarten Naesens</author><author>Roland Schmitt</author><author>Kevin Schulte</author><author>Friedrich A. von Samson-Himmelstjerna</author>
        <description><![CDATA[The ongoing shortage of kidney donations increases pressure to optimize utility and equity in kidney allocation; simulation models allow evaluation of policy changes before implementation. Using data from the German national transplant registry (19,517 kidney transplants), human leukocyte antigen (HLA) information from the German bone marrow donor registry, and the Eurotransplant database, we developed a discrete time simulation model that reconstructs the current German kidney allocation process. To validate the model, we simulated the period from 2006 to 2017 and compared simulated and historical outputs. Waiting list size, numbers of removals and transplants, age distributions, HLA mismatch counts, and predicted long-term survival were highly similar to historic data, indicating solid calibration. As an exemplary application for the allocation model, we explored the effects of omitting the European Senior Program (ESP) from Eurotransplant kidney allocation. This alleviated disparities in waiting time for younger adults and slightly improved overall transplant survival rates, but it worsened access to transplantation for older patients. In conclusion, this discrete time simulation model provides a tool for assessing policy trade-offs on a variety of outcomes before clinical implementation. Further work is needed to generalize the model to the full Eurotransplant area.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16059</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16059</link>
        <title><![CDATA[ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation: impact of apheresis on graft and patient survival in recipients with low isoagglutinin titer]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-26T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Marion Mangin</author><author>Juliette Lucas</author><author>Benjamin Taton</author><author>Dany Anglicheau</author><author>Gilles Blancho</author><author>Dominique Bertrand</author><author>Juliette Leon</author><author>Marie-Joëlle Apithy</author><author>Ilies Benotmane</author><author>Lionel Couzi</author><author>Sophie Caillard</author>
        <description><![CDATA[ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation carries a high risk of acute antibody-mediated rejection due to the presence of isoagglutinins. To mitigate this risk, current protocols recommend performing apheresis before transplantation. Our objective was to evaluate outcomes in ABOi recipients with low isoagglutinin titers, comparing those who did and did not undergo pre-transplant apheresis. We conducted a multicenter study including recipients of ABOi kidney transplants between 2012 and 2022. A total of 78 patients with baseline isoagglutinin titers ≤1:8 were included; 41 received pre-transplant apheresis, 37 did not. Patients who did not undergo apheresis had more rejection episodes (p = 0.01), and a trend toward higher rates of delayed graft function and antibody mediated rejection, which adversely impacted patient and graft survival. At 3 years, event-free survival (death or graft loss) was 90% in the apheresis versus 79% in the no-apheresis group (p = 0.02). In multivariable analysis, factors associated with improved event-free survival included pre-transplant apheresis (HR = 0.31, p = 0.049) while ABMR within the first month was associated with poorer outcome (HR = 5.18, p = 0.0007). No differences emerged regarding the occurrence of overall infections. These findings suggest that apheresis should be systematically performed prior to ABOi transplantation, regardless of baseline isoagglutinin titer.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16075</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16075</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Burden of infectious diseases in children during the first year after solid organ transplantation]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-22T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Nathalie M. Rock</author><author>Jaromil Frossard</author><author>Christian Vandelden</author><author>Giuseppina Sparta</author><author>Stefano DiBernardo</author><author>Ines Mack</author><author>Paloma Parvex</author><author>Christian Balmer</author><author>Daniela Marx Berger</author><author>Christoph Berger</author><author>Hassib Chehade</author><author>Macé Schuurmans</author><author>Sibylle Tschumi</author><author>Nicolas J. Mueller</author><author>Valérie A. McLin</author><author>Arnaud G. L’Huillier</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Infections are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients (SOT). Comprehensive data in this population is limited. We included pediatric SOT from the Swiss national cohort aged 0–18 years prospectively from 2008 to 2022. Using standardized definitions, all clinically relevant infections during the first year after transplant were analyzed. Associations with age, organ type, and rejection episodes were assessed. A total of 285 pediatric SOT were included, with kidney (41%) and liver (37%) transplants being the most common. During the first-year post-transplant, 53% (151/285) of patients experienced at least one infection, totaling 360. The overall incidence was 1.36 infection/person/year. Viral infections predominated (53%), followed by bacterial (41%) and fungal infections (6%). Patients receiving liver and lung transplants had higher infection rates (1.91 and 2.53 per person-year, respectively). In multivariate analysis type of transplant and male sex remained associated with increased risk of infection. Viral infections were overrepresented in younger recipients, while bacterial infections were most frequent in the first 3 months post-transplant. Pediatric SOT recipients face a substantial burden of infection. This underscores the need for specific prevention, early recognition, and coordinated management strategies to reduce infection-related morbidity.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16028</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16028</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in donation after brain death donors aged ≥65 years: impact on outcomes after kidney transplantation – a multi-center study]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-22T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Can C. Süsal</author><author>Quirin Bachmann</author><author>Florian Kälble</author><author>Christoph F. Mahler</author><author>Matthias Ott</author><author>Johannes Heymer</author><author>Matthias Braunisch</author><author>Volker Assfalg</author><author>Jürgen Dippon</author><author>Uwe Heemann</author><author>Lutz Renders</author><author>Vedat Schwenger</author><author>Fabian Echterdiek</author>
        <description><![CDATA[A history of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is common in donation after brain death (DBD) donors. While good outcomes have been demonstrated for kidney transplantation (KT) from younger CPR donors (aged typically 18–50 years), it is unclear whether this is true for the growing cohort of ≥65-year-old KT donors. To this end, all KTs from ≥65-year-old DBD donors performed at three German transplant centers from January 2006 to December 2023 (n = 680) were retrospectively analyzed and outcomes of KTs from donors with and without a history of CPR were compared (n = 81 and n = 599, respectively). No significant differences were observed regarding the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) as well as regarding 1- and 5-year graft function between the CPR and no-CPR groups (DGF: 27.2% vs. 33.1%, p = 0.40; 1-year eGFR (mL/min): 33.3 vs. 35.0, p = 0.75; 5-year eGFR: 35.8 vs. 37.3, p = 0.75, respectively). Death-censored graft survival (73.8% vs. 66.0%, p = 0.24) and patient survival (78.7% vs. 73.5% p = 0.61) were comparable after 5 years between the CPR and no-CPR groups. The results were confirmed by multivariable Cox regression analysis. In conclusion, our results indicate that ≥65-year-old DBD donors with a history of CPR are potentially suitable for KT without impairing allograft outcomes.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15722</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15722</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Identical versus compatible blood typing: investigating best practices in lung transplantation]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-22T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Helena Bugacov</author><author>Cristina Cusmai</author><author>Kenneth Li</author><author>Anne Michelle Montal</author><author>Gbalekan Dawodu</author><author>Tian Sun</author><author>Stephanie Tuminello</author><author>Shubham Gulati</author><author>Kuo-Chang Tseng</author><author>Joshua Taylor Bernstein</author><author>Daniel Laskey</author><author>Harish Seethamraju</author><author>Scott Scheinin</author>
        <description><![CDATA[This study investigated acute rejection in ABO-compatible versus ABO-identical lung transplants from 2005–2023, with a secondary objective of comparing 5-year survival. Lung transplantation improves quality of life and survival; however, organ scarcity remains a major challenge. While ABO-identical matching has traditionally been preferred, evolving allocation policies and research have increased the use of ABO-compatible transplants to expand the donor pool. A retrospective cohort study using the UNOS database included adult recipients (n = 32,761). Comparisons were made between ABO-identical (n = 30,347) and ABO-compatible (n = 2,414) groups. Logistic regression assessed acute rejection, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models evaluated 5-year survival. There was no significant difference in acute rejection (p = 0.99; OR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.86–1.21). ABO-identical transplants showed improved 5-year survival (p = 0.019; HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.85–0.98), with benefits limited to recipients with obstructive lung disease (p = 0.043) and those in the highest LAS quartile (p = 0.014). The differential benefit of this modest association between ABO-identical matching and survival in this subpopulation remains unclear. Overall, ABO-compatible transplantation safely expands donor availability without increasing rejection risk.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16711</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16711</link>
        <title><![CDATA[4th workshop purification therapies, from research to clinics “the end of the beginning”: executive summary]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-20T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Executive Summary</category>
        <author>Mauro Atti</author><author>Giuseppe Remuzzi</author><author>Giuseppe Feltrin</author><author>Gabriel C. Oniscu</author><author>Robert J. Porte</author><author>Marco Ranieri</author><author>Mauro Rinaldi</author><author>Jean Louis Vincent</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Over recent decades, advances in medicine have transformed the management of systemic diseases, severe inflammatory syndromes, and end-stage organ failure, expanding therapeutic possibilities in intensive care and transplantation. The fourth Workshop on Purification Therapies (WPT25), entitled “From Research to Clinic: The End of the Beginning”, marked an important moment in the maturation of extracorporeal blood purification therapies (EBPTs) and organ perfusion technologies. The first day focused on dysregulated inflammatory diseases and EBPTs, highlighting the role of inflammatory mediators as cytokines, pointed out the potentiality in their clinical applications in septic and cardiogenic shock. The discussion was focused on patient selection, timing, dosing, and drug–device interactions. The second day addressed organ preservation and regeneration, emphasizing in situ and ex situ perfusion strategies to expand donor eligibility—including DCD and extended criteria donors—while mitigating the iatrogenic effects as the ischemia–reperfusion injury. Discussions explored temperature management, inflammatory modulation during procurement and treatment, and future perspectives such as personalized perfusion protocols and xenotransplantation. With 550 participants, 26 oral presentations, practical workshops, and 161 scientific contributions published in one special issue of Transplant International, the meeting consolidated evidence and try to define priorities for integrating purification and perfusion therapies into clinical practice. Abstracts from the meeting are published in Transplant International: “Abstract Book of the 4th Workshop Purification Therapies From Research to Clinics “The End of the Beginning”, September 19th-20th, 2025.” at https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/research-topics/197/aferetica---wpt-2025-meeting-abstract.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16295</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16295</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Post–lung transplant surveillance in 2026: current practice, variability, and the need for standardization]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-13T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Review</category>
        <author>Berta Saez-Gimenez</author><author>Jesper M. Magnusson</author><author>Andrea Zajacova</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Post–lung transplant surveillance remains highly heterogeneous, with no universally accepted standard guiding organisation of care or the use of physiological testing, imaging, bronchoscopy, laboratory monitoring, and emerging biomarkers. This narrative review synthesises current surveillance practices across these domains and addresses key limitations, sources of inter-centre variability, and evidence gaps that hinder timely detection of allograft dysfunction. We summarize established and evolving approaches to organisation of care, lung function monitoring, radiological assessment, invasive diagnostics, and laboratory parameters, along with novel biomarkers, highlighting where evidence supports routine use and where tools remain investigational. Fragmentation of follow-up strategies, inconsistent interpretation of longitudinal data, and limited integration of novel diagnostics contribute to delayed recognition of graft injury and variable outcomes. Advancing post-transplant care will require consensus-driven definition of minimum surveillance standards, trajectory-based interpretation frameworks, and rational incorporation of validated biomarkers and digital technologies into harmonised follow-up pathways.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16595</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16595</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Living Life to the Fullest After Organ Transplantation]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-12T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Editorial</category>
        <author>Andrea Zajacova</author><author>Coby Annema</author><author>Nina Pilat</author><author>Thierry Berney</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16591</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16591</link>
        <title><![CDATA[What Is Possible for Patients After Lung Transplantation? The Highest Reported Altitude Achieved by a Lung Transplant Recipient Without Supplemental Oxygen - Climbing Mount Aconcagua (6.961m)]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-12T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Letter to the Editor</category>
        <author>Jakob Mühlbacher</author><author>Alexis Slama</author><author>Konrad Hoetzenecker</author><author>Christina Jelly</author><author>Holger Flick</author><author>Fedja Dzubur</author><author>Matthias P. Hilty</author><author>Paul Fellinger</author><author>Rodrigo Duplessis</author><author>Lukas Furtenbach</author><author>Ida Valerie Wedenig</author><author>Wilfried Wisser</author><author>Clemens Aigner</author><author>Peter Jaksch</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16006</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16006</link>
        <title><![CDATA[The obese transplant organ recipient: experimental and clinical evidence for tailored immunosuppression]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-11T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Review</category>
        <author>A. Della Penna</author><author>S. Beer-Hammer</author><author>S. Nadalin</author><author>I. Capobianco</author><author>P. Felgendreff</author><author>M. Schmelzle</author><author>M. Quante</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Obesity has become a major determinant of outcomes across solid organ transplantation. Beyond its well-recognized metabolic and cardiovascular burden, obesity profoundly affects both immune regulation and the pharmacology of immunosuppressive therapy. Experimental evidence has established adipose tissue as an active immune organ that promotes low-grade inflammation through leptin, TNF-α, and IL-6, thereby altering alloimmune responses and impairing graft tolerance. Clinically, obesity is associated with increased surgical complications, delayed graft function, and reduced survival after kidney, liver, and thoracic organ transplantation. In parallel, obesity modifies drug disposition at every pharmacokinetic step, expanding the distribution volume for lipophilic agents such as calcineurin and mTOR inhibitors, altering CYP3A metabolism, and increasing interindividual variability in exposure. Consequently, both underexposure and toxicity remain frequent, underscoring the need for individualized therapeutic strategies. Current evidence supports the integration of therapeutic drug monitoring, pharmacogenomics, and biomarker-based approaches to refine immunosuppression intensity. This review summarizes experimental and clinical data linking obesity-induced inflammation with altered immunosuppressive pharmacology and proposes a framework for precision immunosuppression that balances efficacy, nephroprotection, and metabolic safety. Tailoring therapy to the specific immunometabolic profile of obese recipients may thus transform a major clinical challenge into an opportunity for precision transplant medicine.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15605</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15605</link>
        <title><![CDATA[The Critical Role of Mental Health Specialists in Organ Transplantation Teams: An ELPAT Position Statement]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-08T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Point of View</category>
        <author>Inês Mega</author><author>Manuela Almeida</author><author>Angela Buchholz</author><author>Rosie Heape</author><author>Martin Kumnig</author><author>Emma K. Massey</author><author>Mariel Nöhre</author><author>Anne Skorzewski</author><author>Hannah Maple</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Transplant patients face complex medical and psychosocial challenges that require multidisciplinary protocols and care plans. Despite this, mental health support remains varied across centers and countries, leading to unmet mental health needs. The psychological impact of transplantation is evident before and after transplantation. Transplant patients at any stage face several challenges. Non-adherence to medications is common and can be a result of the psychological burden. A transplant mental health service could address these problems and, consequently, help improve quality of life and adherence, reduce complications, and prolong graft survival. We believe this might be beneficial from an economic perspective as well, even though further research is needed. We propose a comprehensive approach based on the biopsychosocial care model for integrating specialized mental health professionals into transplant teams across all phases of care. We call upon transplant centers, medical societies, insurance providers, and policymakers to recognize the importance of mental health expertise in transplantation.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15711</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15711</link>
        <title><![CDATA[The Sex of Donor and Recipients in Solid Organ Transplantation: An in Depth Analysis Across the Council of Europe Member States]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-07T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Emanuele Cozzi</author><author>Claudia Carella</author><author>Francesca Puoti</author><author>Lucia Masiero</author><author>John Forsythe</author><author>Derek Manas</author><author>Naomi Nathan</author><author>Artur Kaminski</author><author>Marina Álvarez</author><author>Mar Carmona</author><author>Beatriz Mahíllo</author><author>Corinne Antoine</author><author>Marta López-Fraga</author><author>Giuseppe Feltrin</author><author>Beatriz Domínguez-Gil</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Sex equity in organ donation and access to transplantation represents a key priority of the European Committee on Organ Transplantation of the Council of Europe (CD-P-TO). To increase our knowledge on sex-related differences in transplantation in the Council of Europe Member States, a specifically designed questionnaire was distributed to the CD-P-TO countries. Results confirm that, irrespective of the organ, males represent the majority of patients on the transplant waiting list. For all organs except for heart the time spent on the waiting list was shorter for men compared to women. Women represent the majority of living kidney donors (58%), whilst males are the major source of livers from living donation (54%). Across all organ types, men received 64% of deceased donor organs and 58% of living donor organs. We have found sex-related differences in transplantation activities conducted in the Council of Europe Member States. However, these may be the consequence of the higher incidence of some diseases in men, organ size mismatch, or the greater difficulty in finding immunologically compatible donors in women. At this stage, the CD-P-TO will continue its monitoring activity on this highly relevant topic and possibly extend its commitment beyond sex to include gender related aspects.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15786</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15786</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Present and future of liver transplantation for cholangiocellular carcinoma: moving toward personalized multiparametric transplantability patterns]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-07T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Review</category>
        <author>Umberto Cillo</author><author>Alessandro Furlanetto</author><author>Jacopo Lanari</author><author>Eleonora Nieddu</author><author>Eugenia Rosso</author><author>Francesco Enrico D’Amico</author><author>Domenico Bassi</author><author>Enrico Gringeri</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Liver transplantation for cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) shifted from a contraindication to a promising therapeutic option for selected patients. Advances in neoadjuvant therapy and refined selection criteria resulted in long-term outcomes comparable to other accepted oncologic indications, particularly in perihilar CCA managed with standardized protocols and in intrahepatic CCA with favorable tumor biology. The future challenge is to develop a multiparametric biological selection, blending clinical, functional, histopathologic, molecular, and radiologic parameters to identify candidates with indolent disease behavior, thus maximizing oncologic benefit while ensuring appropriate use of limited graft resources.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16365</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16365</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Human leukocyte antigen-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation after desensitization: experience from a major transplant centre in Mexico]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-07T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Letter to the Editor</category>
        <author>Hugo Leonardo Reynoso de la Torre</author><author>Enrique Rojas-Campos</author><author>José I. Cerrillos-Gutiérrez</author><author>Luis A. Evangelista-Carrillo</author><author>Adriana Banda-López</author><author>Moises Cruz-Landino</author><author>Laura E. Aguilar-Fletes</author><author>Luis G. González-Correa</author><author>Edith V. Alatorre-Moreno</author><author>Perla E. Simancas-Ruiz</author><author>Cindy B. Salazar López</author><author>Alejandra G. Miranda-Díaz</author><author>Sylvia Totsuka Sutto</author><author>Ernesto G. Cardona Muñoz</author><author>Mauricio Carvallo-Venegas</author><author>Salvador Mendoza-Cabrera</author><author>Claudia A. Mendoza Cerpa</author><author>Carolina Romo-Álvarez</author><author>Kevin Javier Arellano-Arteaga</author><author>Jorge Andrade-Sierra</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16694</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16694</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Correction: Effect of normothermic machine perfusion on glycocalyx shedding during liver transplantation - a prospective pilot study]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-06T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Correction</category>
        <author>Simon Mathis</author><author>Gabriel Putzer</author><author>Lukas Gasteiger</author><author>Nikolai Staier</author><author>Lisa Schlosser</author><author>Pia Tscholl</author><author>Robert Breitkopf</author><author>Benno Cardini</author><author>Alexander Kofler</author><author>Rupert Oberhuber</author><author>Thomas Resch</author><author>Stefan Schneeberger</author><author>Judith Martini</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16305</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16305</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Predictive biomarkers and preventive strategies for PTLD: a turning point in viro-immunologic precision medicine?]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-04T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Mini Review</category>
        <author>Sophie Caillard</author><author>Morgane Solis</author><author>Ilies Benotmane</author><author>Floriane Gallais</author><author>Samira Fafi Kremer</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD) represent a heterogeneous group of complications with rising complexity, particularly as EBV-negative forms are increasingly recognized in adult recipients. While early EBV-driven PTLD was historically monitored by viral load, this approach fails to detect EBV-negative disease and lacks specificity even in EBV-positive cases. Recent advances in tumor immunology, virology, and liquid biopsy technologies have led to the emergence of novel biomarkers that offer improved diagnostic precision. These include plasma soluble ZEBRA antigen, reflecting lytic EBV activation; EBV DNA methylation status, which may distinguish latent from benign viral replication; and LMP1 sequence variants that influence immune evasion through the NKG2A/HLA-E axis. For EBV-negative PTLD, circulating tumor DNA profiling has shown promise for early, non-invasive detection. These innovations are complemented by preventive strategies such as anti-CD20 therapy in high-risk EBV-seronegative transplant recipients and ongoing trials of EBV-targeted vaccines. However, such approaches remain limited to EBV-naïve patients. Moving forward, integrating viral, immune, and tumor-derived markers—alongside host genetic factors—may enable more personalized surveillance and preemptive interventions. This review outlines the evolving paradigm of PTLD monitoring and highlights key areas where viro-immunologic precision medicine may reshape clinical practice.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15985</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15985</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Venous reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation: lessons learned from a new national program in a resource-limited setting]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-05-04T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>K. Semash</author><author>T. Dzhanbekov</author><author>M. Nasirov</author><author>A. Subanov</author><author>B. Umarov</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Complex venous outflow reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is technically demanding, particularly in resource-limited settings lacking consistent access to synthetic or cryopreserved grafts. We retrospectively analyzed 45 consecutive LDLTs performed during the initiation of a national program. Venous anatomy was evaluated using preoperative CT volumetry and intraoperative findings. Reconstruction strategies included direct anastomosis, unification venoplasty, PTFE grafts, and autologous conduits (falciform ligament, umbilical vein). Outcomes were compared between patients with (n = 17) and without (n = 28) venoplasty. Additional venous reconstruction was required in 37.8% of cases. In 6.7%, anatomically indicated veins could not be reconstructed due to lack of suitable conduits. No early venous thrombosis occurred, and all autologous conduits remained patent during follow-up. Small-for-size physiology developed in 11.1% of recipients, resolved conservatively, and was not associated with unreconstructed major veins. Major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo ≥ IIIb) occurred in 42.2%. The 90-day mortality rate was 11.1%, and 3-year survival was 82.2%, without significant differences between groups. In a newly established program within a resource-limited setting, predominantly autologous venoplasty was feasible and provided satisfactory early and mid-term outcomes.]]></description>
      </item>
      </channel>
    </rss>