Nefrologia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola Nefrologia · 2013
Cytomegalovirus and paediatric renal transplants: is this a current issue?
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fijo-López-Viota Julia, Espinosa-Román Laura, Herrero-Hernando Carlos, Sanahuja-Ibáñez M José, Vila-Santandreu Anna, Praena-Fernández Juan M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: An observational retrospective multicentre study of kidney transplants in paediatric patients was performed to evaluate the current situation of cytomegalovirus (CMV) in this population, before our participation in an international clinical trial of prophylaxis for 6 months.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: Our study included 239 patients aged <19 years, from 5 Spanish centres between 2005-2009, with 1 year of follow-up.
RESULTS: Pretransplant CMV serology was negative in 54% of recipients and 34.7% of donors. Sixty patients (25.1%) were considered at high risk (D+/R-) for CMV infection. Prophylaxis was used in 80.8% of recipients, including all high-risk patients, for an average time of 65.5 days. CMV viraemia occurred in 24.26% (58 cases among 239 patients), and disease in 6.7%. CMV infection was associated with serological status (D/R) (P<.001), positive serology of the donor (P<.001) and duration of prophylaxis <20 days (P<.05). There were no cases of patient or graft loss secondary to infection, nor resistance to treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: The main preventative strategy against CMV in paediatric renal transplantation in our country is chemical prophylaxis (81%), with an incidence of infection and disease of 24% and 6.7%, respectively. There were no serious direct or indirect effects in the first year post-transplant. The incidence is mainly linked with serological D/R and positive donor status.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: Our study included 239 patients aged <19 years, from 5 Spanish centres between 2005-2009, with 1 year of follow-up.
RESULTS: Pretransplant CMV serology was negative in 54% of recipients and 34.7% of donors. Sixty patients (25.1%) were considered at high risk (D+/R-) for CMV infection. Prophylaxis was used in 80.8% of recipients, including all high-risk patients, for an average time of 65.5 days. CMV viraemia occurred in 24.26% (58 cases among 239 patients), and disease in 6.7%. CMV infection was associated with serological status (D/R) (P<.001), positive serology of the donor (P<.001) and duration of prophylaxis <20 days (P<.05). There were no cases of patient or graft loss secondary to infection, nor resistance to treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: The main preventative strategy against CMV in paediatric renal transplantation in our country is chemical prophylaxis (81%), with an incidence of infection and disease of 24% and 6.7%, respectively. There were no serious direct or indirect effects in the first year post-transplant. The incidence is mainly linked with serological D/R and positive donor status.