Profilaxis primaria estándar versus prolongada de la infección por citomegalovirus en el trasplante de órgano sólido / Standard versus extended primary cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in solid organ transplantation

Antecedentes y objetivo:Se han comparado la eficacia y seguridad de la profilaxis primaria estándar o prolongada de la infección por citomegalovirus (CMV) en el trasplante de órgano sólido.Materiales y métodos:Estudio retrospectivo de los receptores CMV seronegativos de donante seropositivo (D+/R−) que recibieron profilaxis frente a CMV tras un trasplante de órgano sólido (2007-2017). Se comparó la frecuencia de infección por CMV en los 2 primeros años postrasplante en los receptores que recibieron profilaxis durante más o menos de 100 días. Se evaluó asimismo la mielotoxicidad durante la profilaxis.Resultados:Se analizaron 66 pacientes. De ellos el 43,9% (n=29) presentaron infección por CMV. El 68,2% (n=45) recibieron profilaxis prolongada, sin asociarse su uso con una menor tasa de infección (42,2 vs. 47,6%, p=0,44) ni de enfermedad posprofilaxis (15,6 vs. 19%, p=0,72). La profilaxis prolongada se asoció con una mayor frecuencia de mielotoxicidad (68,9 vs. 42,9%, p<0,05).Conclusiones:La prolongación de la profilaxis primaria más de 100 días no aumenta su efectividad pero sí la toxicidad hematológica. (AU)

Background and objective:We compared the efficacy and safety of standard vs. extended primary cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in solid organ transplantation.Materials and methods:Retrospective cohort study of CMV seronegative recipients who received CMV prophylaxis after solid organ transplantation from seropositive donor (D+/R−) (2007–2017). CMV infection in the first two years after transplantation in recipients with prophylaxis longer or shorter than 100 days were compared.Results:CMV infection occurred in 29 of 66 patients (43.9%) with prophylaxis. Forty-five patients (68.2%) received extended prophylaxis. CMV infection and disease rates were not different between patients with extended and standard prophylaxis. However, extended prophylaxis was associated with a higher rate of myelotoxicity (68.9% vs. 42.9%, p<0.05).Conclusions:Extending primary CMV prophylaxis over 100 days did not prevent late-onset infection but it was associated with hematological toxicity. (AU)

[Standard versus extended primary cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in solid organ transplantation]. / Profilaxis primaria estándar versus prolongada de la infección por citomegalovirus en el trasplante de órgano sólido.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We compared the efficacy and safety of standard vs. extended primary cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in solid organ transplantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of CMV seronegative recipients who received CMV prophylaxis after solid organ transplantation from seropositive donor (D+/R-) (2007-2017). CMV infection in the first two years after transplantation in recipients with prophylaxis longer or shorter than 100 days were compared. RESULTS: CMV infection occurred in 29 of 66 patients (43.9%) with prophylaxis. Forty-five patients (68.2%) received extended prophylaxis. CMV infection and disease rates were not different between patients with extended and standard prophylaxis. However, extended prophylaxis was associated with a higher rate of myelotoxicity (68.9% vs. 42.9%, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Extending primary CMV prophylaxis over 100 days did not prevent late-onset infection but it was associated with hematological toxicity.

Necrosis avascular de cadera asociada a everolimus / No disponible

No disponible