1. Infectious Disease Associates of Tampa Bay, Tampa, Florida, USA;2. Miami Transplant Institute, Jackson Health System, Miami, Florida, USA;3. Miami Transplant Institute, Jackson Health System, Miami, Florida, USA
Department of Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA;4. Miami Transplant Institute, Jackson Health System, Miami, Florida, USA
Department of Medicine, Division of Hepatology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA;5. Miami Transplant Institute, Jackson Health System, Miami, Florida, USA
Department of Pharmacy, Jackson Health System, Miami, Florida, USA
Abstract:
Background
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is one of the most common posttransplantation infections and has been associated with increased rejection and mortality. Data in intestinal transplants recipients are limited.
Methods
This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study of all intestinal transplants performed between January 1, 2009, and August 31, 2020. We included recipients of all ages who were at risk of CMV infection. To identify the risk factors, we conducted at first univariate and multivariate analysis. For the multivariate analysis, we developed a logistic regression model based on the result of univariate analysis.
Results
Ninety five patients with a median age of 32 (interquartile range [IQR] 4, 50) were included. CMV donor seropositive/recipient seronegative were 17 (17.9%). Overall, 22.1% of the recipients developed CMV infection at a median time of 155 (IQR 28–254) days from transplant, including 4 CMV syndrome and 6 CMV end-organ disease. Overall, 90.4%, (19/21) developed DNAemia while on prophylaxis. Median peak viral load and time to negativity was 16 000 (IQR 1034–43 892) IU/mL and 56 (IQR 49–109) days, respectively. (Val)ganciclovir and foscarnet were utilized in 17 (80.9%) and 1 (4.76%) recipients, respectively. Recurrences of CMV DNAemia and graft rejection were observed in three and six recipients, respectively. Younger age was identified as a risk factor (p = .032, odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.95–0.99) to develop CMV DNAemia.
Conclusion
A significant proportion of intestinal transplant recipients developed CMV infection while on prophylaxis. Better methods such as CMV cell mediated immunity guided prophylaxis should be used to prevent infections in this population.