Clinical characteristics and outcomes in CMV infection in intestinal transplant recipients: A single-center experience.

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.

Such a fun-guy! Is this Candida or Histoplasma?

Histoplasmosis is a neglected mycosis with high mortality in immunocompromised individuals. The diagnosis can be delayed due to nonspecific clinical manifestations and similar morphology with other organisms. A high index of suspicion is required.

Difference between SARS-CoV-2, seasonal coronavirus, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus infection in solid organ transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has been raging since the end of 2019 and has shown worse outcomes in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. The clinical differences as well as outcomes between respiratory viruses have not been well defined in this population. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of adult SOT recipients with nasopharyngeal swab or bronchoalveolar lavage PCR positive for either SARS-CoV-2, seasonal coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or influenza virus from January 2017 to October 2020. The follow up period was 3 months. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 377 recipients including 157 SARS-CoV-2, 70 seasonal coronavirus, 50 RSV and 100 influenza infections were identified. The most common transplanted organ was kidney 224/377 (59.4%). Lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) was found in 210/377 (55.7%) and the risk factors identified with multivariable analysis were SARS-CoV-2 infection, steroid use, and older age. Co- and secondary infections were seen in 77/377 (20.4%) recipients with bacterial pathogens as dominant. Hospital admission was seen in 266/377 (67.7%) recipients without significant statistical difference among viruses, however, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation and mortality were higher with SARS-CoV-2 infection. In the multivariable model, the risk factors for mortality were SARS-CoV-2 infection and older age. CONCLUSIONS: We found higher incidence of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and mortality among SARS-CoV-2 infected recipients. Older age was found to be the risk factor for lower respiratory tract infection and mortality for SARS-CoV-2, coronaviruses, RSV and influenza virus groups.

Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 in solid-organ transplant recipients: Incidence density and convalescent immunity prior to reinfection.

BACKGROUND: Long-term protective immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains poorly characterized, particularly in solid organ transplant (SOT) patients. METHOD: We determined the incidence density of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in a cohort of adult SOT recipients initially infected between March 1st, 2020 and March 30th, 2021 and included those with initial infection before or after transplantation. Incidence density was the total cases divided by total days after initial diagnosis with active graft. RESULTS: Of 210 infected recipients, five (2.4%) developed reinfection, including two who had received full mRNA vaccination, but none developed hypoxia. The incidence density for reinfection was 9.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-22.6) and for primary infection the density was 9.1 (95% CI 7.9-10.5) cases/100,000 patient days. Two recipients had immunity evaluated in the weeks prior to reinfection, by measuring immunoglobulin-G (IgG) antibody titer to the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain and virus-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell reactivity following stimulation with SARS-CoV-2 peptide pools. Both mounted virus specific CD4 T-cell responses prior to reinfection (1.19% and 0.28% of total CD4 T cells) and both had reactive IgG testing (1.30 and 4.99 signal/cut off ratio). CONCLUSIONS: This suggests that SOT recipients infected with SARS-CoV-2 remain at high risk for reinfection even after generating cellular and humoral immune responses.

COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature.

Severe acute respiratory virus syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to a worldwide pandemic. Early studies in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients suggested a wide variety of presentations, however, there remains a paucity of robust data in this population. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of SOT recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from January 1st t October 9th, 2020. Pooled incidence of symptoms, treatments and outcomes were assessed. Two hundred and fifteen studies were included for systematic review and 60 for meta-analysis. We identified 2,772 unique SOT recipients including 1,500 kidney, 505 liver, 141 heart and 97 lung. Most common presenting symptoms were fever and cough in 70.2% and 63.8% respectively. Majority (81%) required hospital admission. Immunosuppressive medications, especially antimetabolites, were decreased in 76.2%. Hydroxychloroquine and interleukin six antagonists were administered in59.5% and 14.9% respectively, while only few patients received remdesivir and convalescent plasma. Intensive care unit admission was 29% from amongst hospitalized patients. Only few studies reported secondary infections. Overall mortality was 18.6%. Our analysis shows a high incidence of hospital admission in SOT recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. As management of SARS-CoV-2 continues to evolve, long-term outcomes among SOT recipients should be assessed in future studies.

Development of a Standardized Data Collection Tool for Evaluation and Management of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 ) is responsible for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a disease that had not been previously described and for which clinicians need to rapidly adapt their daily practice. The novelty of SARS-CoV-2 produced significant gaps in harmonization of definitions, data collection, and outcome reporting to identify patients who would benefit from potential interventions. METHODS: We describe a multicenter collaboration to develop a comprehensive data collection tool for the evaluation and management of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. The proposed tool was developed by a multidisciplinary working group of infectious disease physicians, intensivists, and infectious diseases/antimicrobial stewardship pharmacists. The working group regularly reviewed literature to select important patient characteristics, diagnostics, and outcomes for inclusion. The data collection tool consisted of spreadsheets developed to collect data from the electronic medical record and track the clinical course after treatments. RESULTS: Data collection focused on demographics and exposure epidemiology, prior medical history and medications, signs and symptoms, diagnostic test results, interventions, clinical outcomes, and complications. During the pilot validation phase, there was <10% missing data for most domains and components. Team members noted improved efficiency and decision making by using the tool during interdisciplinary rounds. CONCLUSIONS: We present the development of a COVID-19 data collection tool and propose its use to effectively assemble harmonized data of hospitalized individuals with COVID-19. This tool can be used by clinicians, researchers, and quality improvement healthcare teams. It has the potential to facilitate interdisciplinary rounds, provide comparisons across different hospitalized populations, and adapt to emerging challenges posed by the pandemic.

Videoconferences of Infectious Diseases: An educational tool that transcends borders. A useful tool also for the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Not available.