Antiviral medications for preventing cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients
Children's Hospital at Westmead, Centre for Kidney Research, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW, Australia, 2145. Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online)
(Impact Factor: 6.03).
02/2008; 2(2):CD003774. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003774.pub3
Cytomegalovirus (CMV; a herpes virus) is the most common type of virus detected in people who have received solid organ transplants (kidney, heart, liver, lung and pancreas). CMV disease is a major cause of illness and death during the first six to 12 months after transplantation. Two main strategies to prevent CMV disease have been adopted: protection and prevention (prophylaxis) of viral infections for all organ recipients using antiviral drugs, or 'pre-emptive therapy' of organ recipients, who develop evidence of CMV infection during routine screening. We looked at the benefits and harms of antiviral prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease in people who are solid organ transplant recipients. The evidence we found shows that some antiviral drugs (ganciclovir, valaciclovir and aciclovir) reduced the risk of CMV disease, death due to CMV disease, clinical disease caused by herpes simplex and herpes zoster viruses, bacterial infections and protozoal infections. For CMV disease and death, the relative benefits of aciclovir, ganciclovir and valaciclovir appear consistent across recipients of heart, kidney and liver transplants. These benefits occur in both CMV positive transplant recipients and CMV negative transplant recipients of CMV positive donor organs, with or without the inclusion of antilymphocyte antibody therapy, and the benefits were seen at all measured time points. We found that ganciclovir is more effective than aciclovir and as effective as valganciclovir, which is currently the most commonly used antiviral drug to prevent CMV disease in transplant recipients. Extended duration of prophylaxis was found to be more effective than three months of therapy in kidney and lung transplant recipients. More studies are needed to determine the optimum duration and dosage of antiviral drugs for all solid organ transplant recipients.
Figures in this publication
Available from: HoYee Tiong
- "Screening protocol employing the use of plasma nucleic acid testing for early detection of infection and appropriate antiviral agents can help to prevent irreversible kidney damage  . However, the old adage remains, " Prevention is better than cure. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Haematuria has a prevalence of 12% in the postrenal transplant patient population. It heralds potentially dangerous causes which could threaten graft loss. It is important to consider causes in light of the unique, urological, and immunological standpoints of these patients. We review the literature on common causes of haematuria in postrenal transplant patients and suggest the salient approach to the evaluation of this condition. A major cause of haematuria is urinary tract infections. There should be a higher index of suspicion for mycobacterial, fungal, and viral infection in this group of immunosuppressed patients. Measures recommended in the prevention of urinary tract infections include early removal of foreign bodies as well as prophylactic antibiotics during the early transplant phase. Another common cause of haematuria is that of malignancies, in particular, renal cell carcinomas. When surgically managing cancer in the setting of a renal transplant, one has to be mindful of the limited retropubic space and the need to protect the anastomoses. Other causes include graft rejections, recurrences of primary disease, and calculus formation. It is important to perform a comprehensive evaluation with the aid of an experienced multidisciplinary transplant team.
04/2015; 2015:1-8. DOI:10.1155/2015/292034
Available from: Vladisav Stefanovic
- "Based on current data, the optimal preemptive strategy is unknown. Preemptive therapy is well suited for transplant recipients at low or intermediate risk of CMV disease, while prophylaxis may be better suited for those at high risk  . Some studies have concluded that preemptive valganciclovir therapy and valacyclovir prophylaxis are equally effective in the prevention of CMV disease after renal transplantation and there was no difference in overall costs  . "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Viruses are among the most common causes of opportunistic infection after transplantation. The risk for viral infection is a function of the specific virus encountered, the intensity of immune suppression used to prevent graft rejection, and other host factors governing susceptibility. Although cytomegalovirus is the most common opportunistic pathogen seen in transplant recipients, numerous other viruses have also affected outcomes. In some cases, preventive measures such as pretransplant screening, prophylactic antiviral therapy, or posttransplant viral monitoring may limit the impact of these infections. Recent advances in laboratory monitoring and antiviral therapy have improved outcomes. Studies of viral latency, reactivation, and the cellular effects of viral infection will provide clues for future strategies in prevention and treatment of viral infections. This paper will summarize the major viral infections seen following transplant and discuss strategies for prevention and management of these potential pathogens.
The Scientific World Journal 05/2012; 2012:820621. DOI:10.1100/2012/820621 · 1.73 Impact Factor
Available from: Sung Joo Kim
- "Acyclovir has less activity against CMV and is not recommended specifically for prophylaxis. The efficacy of prophylaxis with either CMV immune globulin (CMVIG) or intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) in kidney organ transplant recipients has been investigated in relatively few trials (Hodson et al., 2007), the majority of which have been randomized, but not blinded. Further research is needed to delineate the benefit of adding immune globulin to current CMV prophylaxis regimens. "
After the Kidney Transplant - The Patients and Their Allograft, 08/2011; , ISBN: 978-953-307-807-6
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.