Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 Sep;2(3):118-26.
doi: 10.1034/j.1399-3062.2000.020304.x.

Preemptive treatment approach to cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant patients: relationship between compliance with the guidelines and prevention of CMV morbidity

Affiliations

Preemptive treatment approach to cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant patients: relationship between compliance with the guidelines and prevention of CMV morbidity

N Künzle et al. Transpl Infect Dis. 2000 Sep.

Abstract

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains a major cause of morbidity in solid organ transplant patients. In order to reduce CMV morbidity, we designed a program of routine virological monitoring that included throat and urine CMV shell vial culture, along with peripheral blood leukocyte (PBL) shell vial quantitative culture for 12 weeks post-transplantation, as well as 8 weeks after treatment for acute rejection. The program also included preemptive ganciclovir treatment for those patients with the highest risk of developing CMV disease, i.e., with either high-level viremia (>10 infectious units [IU]/106 PBL) or low-level viremia (<10 IU/106 PBL) and either D+/R- CMV serostatus or treatment for graft rejection. During 1995-96, 90 solid organ transplant recipients (39 kidneys, 28 livers, and 23 hearts) were followed up. A total of 60 CMV infection episodes occurred in 45 patients. Seventeen episodes were symptomatic. Of 26 episodes managed according to the program, only 4 presented with CMV disease and none died. No patient treated preemptively for asymptomatic infection developed disease. In contrast, among 21 episodes managed in non-compliance with the program (i.e., the monitoring was not performed or preemptive treatment was not initiated despite a high risk of developing CMV disease), 12 episodes turned into symptomatic infection (P=0.0048 compared to patients treated preemptively), and 2 deaths possibly related to CMV were recorded. This difference could not be explained by an increased proportion of D+/R- patients or an increased incidence of rejection among patients with episodes treated in non-compliance with the program. Our data identify compliance with guidelines as an important factor in effectively reducing CMV morbidity through preemptive treatment, and suggest that the complexity of the preemptive approach may represent an important obstacle to the successful prevention of CMV morbidity by this approach in the regular healthcare setting.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms