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
. 2020 Dec;20(12):3502-3508.
doi: 10.1111/ajt.15976. Epub 2020 Jun 23.

Cytomegalovirus serologic matching in deceased donor kidney allocation optimizes high- and low-risk (D+R- and D-R-) profiles and does not adversely affect transplant rates

Joe Lockridge  1   2 , Daniel Roberts  1 , Ali Olyaei  3   4 , Brie N Noble  4 , Eric Langewisch  5 , Shehzad Rehman  1   2 , Megan Stack  1 , David Scott  6 , Susan Orloff  6 , Carley Shaut  7 , Brent Gardner  7 , William Bennett  8 , Doug Norman  1   2
Affiliations
Free article

Cytomegalovirus serologic matching in deceased donor kidney allocation optimizes high- and low-risk (D+R- and D-R-) profiles and does not adversely affect transplant rates

Joe Lockridge et al. Am J Transplant. 2020 Dec.
Free article

Abstract

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a major cause of infection-related morbidity and mortality in kidney transplantation. The most significant risk for developing CMV infection after transplant depends upon donor (D) and recipient (R) CMV serostatus. In 2012, our Organ Procurement Organization (OPO) began a novel pretransplant CMV prevention strategy via matching deceased kidney donors and recipients by CMV serostatus. Prior to the matching protocol, our distribution of seropositive and seronegative donors and recipients was similar to the United States at large. After the matching protocol, high-risk D+R- were reduced from 18.5% to 2.9%, whereas low-risk D-R- were increased from 13.5% to 24%. There was no adverse effect on transplant rates and no differential effect on waiting times for R+ vs R- after the protocol was implemented. This protocol could be implemented on a regional or national level to optimize low and high-risk CMV seroprofiles and potentially improve CMV-related outcomes in kidney transplantation.

Keywords: antibiotic prophylaxis; clinical research/practice; health services and outcomes research; infection and infectious agents - viral: Cytomegalovirus (CMV); infectious disease; kidney transplantation/nephrology; organ allocation; organ procurement and allocation; waitlist management.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Freeman RB Jr. The 'indirect' effects of cytomegalovirus infection. Am J Transplant. 2009;9(11):2453-2458.
    1. Kotton CN. CMV: prevention, diagnosis and therapy. Am J Transplant. 2013;13(Suppl 3):24-40; quiz 40.
    1. Humar A, Lebranchu Y, Vincenti F, et al. The efficacy and safety of 200 days valganciclovir cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in high-risk kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. 2010;10(5):1228-1237.
    1. Kotton CN, Kumar D, Caliendo AM, et al. Updated international consensus guidelines on the management of cytomegalovirus in solid-organ transplantation. Transplantation. 2013;96(4):333-360.
    1. De Keyzer K, Van Laecke S, Peeters P, et al. Human cytomegalovirus and kidney transplantation: a clinician's update. Am J Kidney Dis. 2011;58(1):118-126.

Substances