4.2 Article

Late cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections after kidney transplantation under the preemptive strategy: Risk factors and clinical aspects

Journal

TRANSPLANT INFECTIOUS DISEASE
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tid.13035

Keywords

cytomegalovirus; kidney transplant; late cytomegalovirus infection (LCMV)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Late cytomegalovirus infections (LCMV) after the cessation of prophylaxis are well described. We aimed to assess clinical and epidemiological data on late-occurring cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections in the absence of CMV prophylaxis in a cohort of kidney transplant patients. Methods In a cohort of kidney transplant recipients not employing CMV-specific prophylaxis, patients with CMV infections occurring after 6 months of transplantation were compared to patients with CMV infections diagnosed within the first 6 months (early infections). The main objectives were to compare clinical outcomes and evaluate risk factors for late CMV infection. Results A total of 556 patients were evaluated. Forty-three patients with LCMV infections were compared to 513 patients with early CMV infections. LCMV infections occurred after a median of 473 days of transplantation and had a more severe course, with a statistically significant higher rate of invasive disease and graft loss (60.5% vs 21.6% and 11.6% vs 3.1% respectively). Thirty-day mortality was twice as high for patients with LCMV, but did not reach statistical significance (9.3% vs 4.3%). By multivariate analysis, employment of antilymphocyte therapy early after transplantation and tacrolimus as initial immunosuppressive therapy were significantly protective for the occurrence of LCMV infections. Conclusion Late CMV infections in the absence of specific prophylaxis after kidney transplantation have a more severe outcome when compared to early infections and occur in patients less immunosuppressed early after transplantation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available