z-logo
Premium
Comparing cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in renal transplantation: single center experience
Author(s) -
Varga M.,
Remport Á.,
Hídvégi M.,
Péter A.,
Kóbori L.,
Telkes G.,
Fazakas J.,
Gerlei Z.,
Sárváry E.,
Sulyok B.,
Járay J.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
transplant infectious disease
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.69
H-Index - 67
eISSN - 1399-3062
pISSN - 1398-2273
DOI - 10.1111/j.1399-3062.2005.00094.x
Subject(s) - medicine , ganciclovir , cytomegalovirus , betaherpesvirinae , single center , gastroenterology , transplantation , cytomegalovirus infection , gamma globulin , human cytomegalovirus , surgery , herpesviridae , immunology , virus , viral disease , antibody
Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) presents a serious threat to CMV‐seronegative recipients (R−), who have received an organ from a seropositive donor (D+). Objectives: We compared the effectiveness of three different prophylactic protocols in CMV D+/R− patients and reviewed data on patients who received no prophylaxis. Patients and methods: We reviewed 1137 kidney transplantations from 1995 to 2004. Of these, 147 recipients were CMV negative (D+/R−); 125 patients received CMV prophylaxis. Group I received CMV hyperimmune gammaglobulin only, group II received CMV hyperimmune gammaglobulin plus oral ganciclovir, and group III received prophylaxis with oral ganciclovir only. Results: In group I, CMV infection was observed in 31 of 53 patients (59%), and CMV disease was diagnosed in 9 (17%) during the prophylaxis. In the first year post transplant, a total of 41 of 53 patients (77.5%) had primary CMV infection. In group II, CMV infection occurred in 7 of 30 patients (23%), and CMV disease was diagnosed in only 2 (7%) during prophylaxis. In the first year post transplant, a total of 9 of 30 patients (30%) had primary CMV infection. In group III, 9 of 42 patients (21%) developed CMV infection during prophylaxis, and CMV disease was not observed. In the first year post transplant, a total of 13 of 42 patients (30%) had primary CMV infection. In contrast, all 22 CMV D+/R− patients without prophylaxis developed CMV infection (100%); CMV disease was diagnosed in 10 (45%), and 1 patient died. Conclusions: Prophylaxis with hyperimmune gammaglobulin and/or oral ganciclovir significantly reduces CMV infection and disease. Prophylaxis with ganciclovir was significantly more effective than hyperimmune gammaglobulin monoprophylaxis, and more cost effective than combined prophylaxis.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here