It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
Herpes- and polyomaviruses are major opportunistic pathogens after renal transplantation. Despite established guidelines, there is limited data on transplant centers’ prophylaxis and monitoring strategies and centers’ adherence to these guidelines and their impact on infection rates and patient outcomes.
Methods
This multicenter cohort study, conducted by the German Center for Infection Research, included 1035 kidney transplant recipients from five centers (01/2014–02/2021), focusing on herpes- and polyomavirus viremia within the first year and adherence to prophylaxis strategies.
Results
Among 1035 recipients, 26.6% developed herpes- or polyomavirus viremia, predominantly Cytomegalovirus (CMV, 14.3%) and BK-virus (BKV, 13.2%). BKV monitoring frequency was below guideline recommendations. Deviations from guidelines were most common in CMV D-/R- (34.6% with prophylaxis) and D−/R + groups (37.3% without prophylaxis), doubling CMV-incidence in D−/R+ (28.9% vs. 12.5%, p < 0.01). In D+/R − group, six-month-prophylaxis reduced CMV-incidence compared to three months (22.5% vs. 38.4%, p < 0.01). Breakthrough-viremia was most commonly observed in D+/R − recipients who received a six-month-prophylaxis. Overall, viremia was associated with higher incidence of acute rejection (31.9% vs. 17.6%, p < 0.01), with most CMV-viremias occurring after rejection. CMV-viremia was associated with a higher risk of bacterial infection (HR = 1.77, [1.03;3.02]). Other herpesviruses were associated with a quadrupled risk for fungal infection (HR = 4.34, [1.03;18.30]) and the non-administration of CMV-prophylaxis (HR = 0.22, [0.11;0.47]). Graft survival and mortality were unaffected within the first year.
Conclusion
Clinical variability in guideline implementation drives high herpes- and polyomavirus infection rates with suboptimal outcomes. Future guidelines should focus on differentiated risk stratification to address breakthrough, post-prophylaxis, and post-rejection CMV, and include protocols for the early detection of secondary infections.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer