4.6 Article

COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients: A single-center case series from Spain

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
卷 20, 期 7, 页码 1849-1858

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1111/ajt.15929

关键词

coronavirus; COVID-19; outcome; SARS-CoV-2; solid organ transplantation; treatment

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Proyecto Integrado de Excelencia [PIE]) [13/00045]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, Instituto de Salud Carlos III [CP 18/00073, COV 20/00181]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The clinical characteristics, management, and outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) after solid organ transplant (SOT) remain unknown. We report our preliminary experience with 18 SOT (kidney [44.4%], liver [33.3%], and heart [22.2%]) recipients diagnosed with COVID-19 by March 23, 2020 at a tertiary-care center at Madrid. Median age at diagnosis was 71.0 +/- 12.8 years, and the median interval since transplantation was 9.3 years. Fever (83.3%) and radiographic abnormalities in form of unilateral or bilateral/multifocal consolidations (72.2%) were the most common presentations. Lopinavir/ritonavir (usually associated with hydroxychloroquine) was used in 50.0% of patients and had to be prematurely discontinued in 2 of them. Other antiviral regimens included hydroxychloroquine monotherapy (27.8%) and interferon-beta (16.7%). As of April 4, the case-fatality rate was 27.8% (5/18). After a median follow-up of 18 days from symptom onset, 30.8% (4/13) of survivors developed progressive respiratory failure, 7.7% (1/13) showed stable clinical condition or improvement, and 61.5% (8/13) had been discharged home. C-reactive protein levels at various points were significantly higher among recipients who experienced unfavorable outcome. In conclusion, this frontline report suggests that SARS-CoV-2 infection has a severe course in SOT recipients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据