The Pediatric infectious disease journal · 2015
Cidofovir in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients: University of Nebraska experience.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Florescu Diana F, Chambers Heather E, Qiu Fang, Keck Megan A, Mercer David F, Morris Michael C, Florescu Marius C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Clinical experience with cidofovir in pediatric solid organ transplantation is limited. We assessed the effect of cidofovir use on renal function in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients.
METHODS: Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to determine if changes in renal function were significant, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to test the association between changes in glomerular filtration rate and potential confounding factors, and MacNemar tests to compare the proportions of patients at different time points.
RESULTS: We included 25 patients with a mean age of 4.2 years (SD 4.6). More patients were receiving renal replacement therapy while being treated with cidofovir compared with baseline (24% vs. 4%; P = 0.03). For patients not receiving renal replacement therapy, there was no evidence of a significant median change in glomerular filtration rate from baseline to 1 month after cidofovir treatment (P = 0.32) or to the end of cidofovir treatment (P = 0.23) or in creatinine from baseline to the end of cidofovir therapy (P = 0.2). There was a marginal decreased median change in creatinine from baseline to 1 month after cidofovir treatment (P = 0.06). Fewer patients had proteinuria (72.2% vs. 27.8%; P = 0.02) and hematuria (22.2% vs. 0%) after cidofovir treatment.
CONCLUSION: In our pediatric transplant cohort, cidofovir did not significantly change renal function reflected by creatinine, glomerular filtration rate, hematuria or proteinuria, but a significant number of patients required renal replacement therapy because of fluid overload.
METHODS: Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to determine if changes in renal function were significant, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to test the association between changes in glomerular filtration rate and potential confounding factors, and MacNemar tests to compare the proportions of patients at different time points.
RESULTS: We included 25 patients with a mean age of 4.2 years (SD 4.6). More patients were receiving renal replacement therapy while being treated with cidofovir compared with baseline (24% vs. 4%; P = 0.03). For patients not receiving renal replacement therapy, there was no evidence of a significant median change in glomerular filtration rate from baseline to 1 month after cidofovir treatment (P = 0.32) or to the end of cidofovir treatment (P = 0.23) or in creatinine from baseline to the end of cidofovir therapy (P = 0.2). There was a marginal decreased median change in creatinine from baseline to 1 month after cidofovir treatment (P = 0.06). Fewer patients had proteinuria (72.2% vs. 27.8%; P = 0.02) and hematuria (22.2% vs. 0%) after cidofovir treatment.
CONCLUSION: In our pediatric transplant cohort, cidofovir did not significantly change renal function reflected by creatinine, glomerular filtration rate, hematuria or proteinuria, but a significant number of patients required renal replacement therapy because of fluid overload.