4.6 Article

Treatment of parvovirus B-19 (PV B-19) infection allows for successful kidney transplantation without disease recurrence

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
卷 2, 期 5, 页码 425-428

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-6143.2002.20505.x

关键词

glomerulonephritis; IVIG; kidney transplant; parvovirus; parvovirus-PCR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Parvovirus B 19 (PV-1319) has emerged as a cause of glomerulopathy in native and transplanted kidneys. Disease recurrence is less well described. The clinical and pathological spectrum of PV-1319 infection can be quite variable and therefore easily missed. There are no data regarding the safety of transplantation in PV-B19-infected patients. We diagnosed a kidney transplant patient with recurrent PV-B19 infection and collapsing glomerulopathy (CG) on renal biopsy. Retrospective analysis of stored serum showed that PV-B19 DNA was present prior to the transplant. The patient was treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and eventually the virus was successfully eradicate after allograft loss and discontinuation of immunosuppressive medications. The patient subsequently received her fourth kidney transplant. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for PV-B19 DNA was negative on multiple occasions for approximately 1 year prior to her transplant. The patient is now 22 months post transplantation, quarterly serum PCRs continue to be negative for PV-B19 DNA despite reinstitution of immunosuppressive therapy. The patient's renal function remains stable with a serum creatinine of 0.9 mg/dL and a serum albumin of 4.2 g/dL. Successful diagnosis and treatment of PV-B19 viremia appears to allow for successful transplantation without evidence of disease recurrence. Since PV-B19 can cause significant morbidity post transplant, it is important to screen potential transplant candidates at risk for PV-B19 infection pre transplant. Careful surveillance post transplantation is necessary to identify disease recurrence so that early treatment can be initiated.

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