Key result
Valganciclovir prophylaxis linked to ~93% lower 1-year CMV infection risk after heart transplant.
Why the study?
The frequency and significance of CMV infection in seropositive heart transplant recipients is unclear, with preventative recommendations mostly extrapolated from other groups.
Does valganciclovir prophylaxis reduce CMV infection in seropositive heart transplant recipients?
Cohort (n=155)
No
Does valganciclovir prophylaxis reduce CMV infection in seropositive heart transplant recipients?
Valganciclovir prophylaxis significantly reduces the risk of CMV infection in seropositive heart transplant recipients, supporting its routine use in this high-risk population.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Valganciclovir prophylaxis was associated with reduced CMV infection; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before routine adoption.
BACKGROUND: The frequency and significance of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in seropositive (R+) heart transplant recipients (HTR) is unclear, with preventative recommendations mostly extrapolated from other groups. We evaluated the incidence and severity of CMV infection in R+ HTR, to identify risk factors and describe outcomes. METHODS: R+ HTR from 2010 to 2019 were included. Antiviral prophylaxis was not routinely used, with clinically guided monitoring the local standard of care. The primary outcome was CMV infection within one-year post-transplant; secondary outcomes included other herpesvirus infections and mortality. RESULTS: CMV infection occurred in 27/155 (17%) R+ HTR. Patients with CMV had a longer hospitalization (27 vs. 20 days, unadjusted HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p = .01), higher rate of intensive care readmission (26% vs. 9%, unadjusted HR 3.46, 1.46-8.20, p = .005), and increased mortality (33% vs. 8%, unadjusted HR 10.60, 4.52-24.88, p < .001). The association between CMV and death persisted after adjusting for multiple confounders (HR 24.19, 95% CI 7.47-78.30, p < .001). Valganciclovir prophylaxis was used in 35/155 (23%) and was protective against CMV (infection rate 4% vs. 27%, adjusted HR .07, .01-.72, p = .025), even though those receiving it were more likely to have received thymoglobulin (adjusted OR 10.5, 95% CI 2.01-55.0, p = .005). CONCLUSIONS: CMV infection is common in R+ HTR and is associated with a high burden of disease and increased mortality. Patients who received valganciclovir prophylaxis were less likely to develop CMV infection, despite being at higher risk. These findings support the routine use of antiviral prophylaxis following heart transplantation in all CMV R+ patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gardiner et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Cytomegalovirus seropositive heart transplant recipients (n=155). Valganciclovir prophylaxis vs. No antiviral prophylaxis (clinically guided monitoring) was evaluated on Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection within 1 year post-transplant (HR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.72, p=0.025). Valganciclovir prophylaxis reduced 1-year CMV infection in seropositive heart transplant recipients.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: