Premium
Retrospective review of the incidence of cytomegalovirus infection and disease after liver transplantation in pediatric patients: Comparison of prophylactic oral ganciclovir and oral valganciclovir
Author(s) -
Bedel Ashley N.,
Hemmelgarn Trina S.,
Kohli Rohit
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
liver transplantation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.814
H-Index - 150
eISSN - 1527-6473
pISSN - 1527-6465
DOI - 10.1002/lt.22471
Subject(s) - valganciclovir , ganciclovir , medicine , liver transplantation , transplantation , cytomegalovirus , incidence (geometry) , retrospective cohort study , adverse effect , chemoprophylaxis , gastroenterology , human cytomegalovirus , surgery , immunology , herpesviridae , viral disease , virus , physics , optics
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most common viral infection after solid organ transplantation (SOT). Safe and effective prophylactic regimens that decrease its incidence after SOT are essential for long‐term graft survival. Although valganciclovir is not Food and Drug Administration–approved for CMV prophylaxis in liver transplant recipients, postmarketing studies have shown valganciclovir to be as effective as ganciclovir in high‐risk adult patients undergoing SOT. Currently, data are lacking for pediatric liver transplantation. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of valganciclovir and ganciclovir for CMV infection prophylaxis in pediatric liver transplant recipients. This was a retrospective study of 56 pediatric liver transplant recipients who were prescribed either oral ganciclovir (n = 37) or valganciclovir (n = 19). Patients were followed until 200 days after transplantation or death. The primary outcome measure compared the rates of early‐onset CMV infection and CMV disease in the 2 medication groups. Secondary outcome measures identified patient‐specific factors that contributed to CMV acquisition and the incidence of late‐onset CMV infection or disease. The rates of adverse drug effects and discontinuation were also evaluated. Early‐onset CMV disease was documented in 0% of valganciclovir patients and in 5.4% of ganciclovir patients ( P = 0.54). There were no statistically significant differences in the secondary outcomes. An increased incidence of late‐onset CMV disease was seen in the valganciclovir group versus the ganciclovir group (22.2% versus 8.1%, P = 0.23). No differences in adverse events were reported. In conclusion, no statistically significant differences were found in the incidence of CMV infection or disease between patients receiving oral valganciclovir and patients receiving oral ganciclovir. Liver Transpl 18:347–354, 2012. © 2012 AASLD.