AbstractBackgroundThe duration of anticytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis after lung transplantation (LT) varies among transplant centers.MethodsA retrospective review of CMV donor‐seropositive/recipient‐seronegative (D+/R−) and CMV recipient‐seropositive (R+) LT patients between January 2005 and September 2012 was performed. Starting January 2007, valganciclovir prophylaxis was given for at least 12 months (often lifelong) for CMV D+/R− and extended from three to six months for R+ LT patients. Risks of CMV infection and CMV disease, and mortality after LT, were assessed.ResultsA total of 88 LT patients were studied, including 32 CMV D+/R−, and 56 R+ patients. During the follow‐up period, 11 (12.5%) patients had asymptomatic CMV infection, and nine (10.3%) developed CMV disease. CMV disease (HR, 4.189; 95% CI: 1.672–10.495; p = 0.002) and CMV infection and disease (HR, 3.775; 95% CI: 1.729–8.240; p = 0.001) were significant risk factors for mortality. Overall, no significant difference was observed in rates of CMV infection or disease among LT recipients who received shorter vs. extended CMV prophylaxis.ConclusionsDespite extended prophylaxis, LT patients remain at risk of CMV infection and disease. CMV remains associated with increased mortality after transplantation.
Mycobacterium arupense Flexor Tenosynovitis: Case Report and Review of Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiles for 40 Clinical Isolates
Journal of Clinical Microbiology | May 1, 2014 | Volume: 52 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 2706-2708
ABSTRACT We describe a case of chronic tenosynovitis in the hand of a 58-year-old cattle farmer. Surgical biopsy specimens grew Mycobacterium arupense . The patient responded to surgery and antimicrobial therapy based on in vitro susceptibility testing. The antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of the isolate from this patient and 39 additional clinical isolates are presented.
Impact of urinary tract infection on allograft function after kidney transplantation
AbstractObjectivesUrinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common infectious complication after kidney transplantation. We aim to determine its impact on allograft function as indicated by several measures such as iothalamate glomerular filtration rate (iGFR), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and creatinine value.MethodsWe performed a single‐center retrospective cohort study to determine the impact ofUTIon kidney allograft outcome.ResultsThe study population consisted of 301 kidney transplant recipients; 84% were living donor transplants. One hundred and one patients (34%) developed at least one episode ofUTIand the incidence ofUTIduring the first year after transplantation was 25%. At the end of the follow‐up, theiGFRwas lower among patients who had developed at least oneUTI(p = 0.044). However,eGFRand creatinine values were not significantly different betweenUTIand non‐UTIgroups.ConclusionWhen kidney function was measured byeGFRand creatinine, there was no significant difference in allograft function between kidney recipients with or withoutUTI. However, when kidney function was measured by nuclear studies, there was a tendency toward impairment in allograft function among patients who developed atleast oneUTIafter transplantation.
Urinary tract infections in kidney transplant recipients: Role of gender, urologic abnormalities, and antimicrobial prophylaxis
Annals of Transplantation | June 6, 2013 | Volume: 18 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: 195-204