{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027984009137635636, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01599086236436322, 'mean_word_length': 5.020618556701031, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Scoring of skin rejection in a swine composite tissue allograft model.

BACKGROUND
For the first time, we define and correlate visual and histologic grading systems of composite tissue allograft (CTA) skin rejection in a large-animal model and determine the utility of these grading systems for early diagnosis and monitoring of rejection.


MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sixteen pairs of outbred swine underwent transplant of a forelimb osteomyocutaneous free flap. Group I (n = 6) did not receive immunosuppressive therapy. Group II (n = 10) received oral cyclosporin A, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone. The flap was visually inspected and protocol skin biopsies were taken at frequent intervals over a 90-day period. Visual Grades 0 (no rejection) to 4 (severe rejection) were assigned based on skin color, bleeding from biopsy site, and blister formation. Histologic Grades 0 to 4 were assigned based on the degree of vasculitis, folliculitis, dermal inflammation, and epidermal degeneration present.


RESULTS
All Group I animals progressively rejected their graft by Day 7. Group II grafts survived from 19 and 90 days; 93% of 115 biopsy specimens were read to be within +/-1 histologic score of their assigned flap visual grade. Visual assessment carried an 8% false positive and 39% false negative rate with regard to biopsy-proven rejection. However, 81% of missed rejection specimens were histologic Grade 1. Biopsy, when visually indicated, would detect all rejection episodes when histologically Grade 1 or 2 and still potentially reversible.


CONCLUSIONS
Visual scoring of CTA skin serves as a useful tool for initially detecting rejection, but repeated histologic evaluation is necessary for monitoring the subsequent course of the graft.