Transplant Infectious Disease最新文献

Among patients with hematopoietic stem cell transplants, infections, particularly multidrug-resistant infections, pose a grave threat. In this setting, penicillin allergy labels are both common and harmful. Though the majority of patients who report penicillin allergy can actually tolerate penicillin, penicillin allergy labels are associated with use of alternative antibiotics, which are often more broad spectrum, less effective, and more toxic. In turn, they are associated with more severe infections, multidrug-resistant infections, Clostridium difficile, and increased mortality. Evaluating penicillin allergy labels can immediately expand access to preferred therapeutic options, which are critical to care in patients with recent hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Point-of-care assessment and clinical decision tools now exist to aid the nonallergist in assessment of penicillin allergy. This can aid in expanding use of other beta-lactam antibiotics and assist in risk-stratifying patients to determine a testing strategy. In patients with low-risk reaction histories, direct oral challenges can be employed to efficiently delabel patients across clinical care settings. We advocate for multidisciplinary efforts to evaluate patients with penicillin allergy labels prior to transplantation.

Background: Five organs (heart, right lung, liver, right, and left kidneys) from a deceased patient were transplanted into five recipients in four US states; the deceased patient was identified as part of a healthcare-associated fungal meningitis outbreak among patients who underwent epidural anesthesia in Matamoros, Mexico.

Methods: After transplant surgeries occurred, Fusarium solani species complex, a fungal pathogen with a high case-mortality rate, was identified in cerebrospinal fluid from the organ donor by metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and fungal-specific polymerase chain reaction and in plasma by mNGS.

Results: Four of five transplant recipients received recommended voriconazole prophylaxis; four were monitored weekly by serum (1-3)-β-d-glucan testing. All five were monitored for signs of infection for at least 3 months following transplantation. The liver recipient had graft failure, which was attributed to an etiology unrelated to fungal infection. No fungal DNA was identified in sections of the explanted liver, suggesting that F. solani species complex did not contribute to graft failure. The remaining recipients experienced no signs or symptoms suggestive of fusariosis.

Conclusion: Antifungal prophylaxis may be useful in preventing donor-derived infections in recipients of organs from donors that are found to have Fusarium meningitis.

Background: Lung transplant recipients (LTRs) are at risk for Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) infections, in part due to the presence of structural lung disease pre-transplant and relatively higher levels of immunosuppression post-transplant. There is a lack of data regarding outcomes of LTR with MAC infections pre-transplant.

Methods: This is a single-center retrospective analysis of patients who received lung transplants (LTs) from 2013 to 2020 with 1) evidence of MAC on culture or polymerase chain reaction before or at the time of transplant or 2) granulomas on explant pathology and positive acid-fast bacillus stains with no other mycobacteria identified. Patients were deemed to have MAC pulmonary disease (MAC-PD) if they met the American Thoracic Society/Infectious Disease Society of America criteria.

Results: Fourteen patients (14/882, 2%) met inclusion criteria. Seven patients (7/14, 50%) had pre-transplant MAC-PD, four of whom had cavitary disease. None of the 14 patients had smear-positive cultures at the time of transplant. Two patients in our cohort received treatment for MAC before transplant. Thirteen patients were bilateral LTR (13/14, 93%). One single LTR was the sole patient to receive MAC treatment post-transplant. No patients developed MAC-PD after transplant.

Conclusion: The bilateral LTR in our cohort did not develop MAC-PD despite not receiving MAC treatment post-transplant. It is possible source control was achieved with native lung explantation. Our observations suggest patients may not uniformly require pre- or post-transplant MAC treatment if they are smear-negative and undergo bilateral LT.

Background: While a penicillin allergy label has been linked to various negative clinical outcomes, limited studies have specifically characterized the implication of sulfonamide allergy labels (SAL) on clinical outcomes. We examined the impact of SAL on clinical outcomes of solid organ transplant recipients.

Methods: In this retrospective matched cohort study, we utilized the TriNetX US collaborative Network, a multicenter de-identified US database, and identified solid organ transplant recipients with and without SAL. The 1-year probability of developing Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP), toxoplasmosis, and nocardiosis was estimated and contrasted between the two study groups. The hazard ratio (HR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) quantified the strength and direction of the association between SAL and these outcomes.

Results: When comparing 1571 solid organ transplant recipients with SAL to an equal number of matched controls, patients with SAL had a higher probability of developing nocardiosis (HR 3.85; 95% CI, 1.44-10.30; p = .004; corrected p = .04), and toxoplasmosis (HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.10-3.17; p = .019; corrected p = .19), but no difference in the risk of developing PJP (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.68-3.95; p = .27). There was no mortality difference (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.99-1.75; p = .061; corrected p = .6). SAL influenced antibiotic prescription with overutilization of dapsone, atovaquone, and pentamidine and underutilization of trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole.

Conclusion: SAL is associated with an increased risk of opportunistic infections following solid organ transplantation. Measures to evaluate and de-label sulfonamide allergy prior to transplantation or desensitizing shortly after transplantation are advisable.

Background: The effect of belatacept on BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) control remains largely unknown.

Methods: This is a propensity matched retrospective cohort study in adult kidney transplant recipients (KTR) transplanted between 2016-2020 who received a belatacept- versus tacrolimus-based immunosuppression regimen. A continuous time multi-state Markov model was used to evaluate BKPyV replication dynamics (BKPyV-dyn). Three BKPyV-dyn states were defined: BKPyV-dyn1 (viral load <3 log₁₀), BKPyV-dyn2 (viral load ≥ 3 log₁₀ and ≤4 log₁₀), and BKPyV-dyn3 (viral load >4 log₁₀).

Results: Two hundred eighty KTR on belatacept- and 280 KTR on tacrolimus-based regimens were compared. The probability of transitioning between BKPyV-dyn states and time spent in each state in both groups was comparable. Total duration in BKPyV-dyn-1 was 632.1 days (95% CI 612.1, 648.5) for belatacept versus 615.2 days (95% CI 592.5, 635.8) for tacrolimus, BKPyV-dyn-2 was 49.2 days (95% CI 41.3, 58.4) for belatacept versus 55.6 days (95% CI 46.5, 66.8) for tacrolimus, and BKPyV-dyn-3 was 48.7 days (95% CI 37.1, 363.1) for belatacept versus 59.2 days (95% CI 45.8, 73.5) for tacrolimus. BKPyV associated nephropathy (PyVAN) occurred in 3.9% in belatacept- and 3.9% tacrolimus-treated KRT (P > .9).

Conclusions: Compared with tacrolimus-based immunosuppression, belatacept based immunosuppression was not associated with increased risk of BKPyV-DNAemia or nephropathy.

Background: The purpose of this study was to understand how transplant infectious disease (TID) physicians assess a potential donor with known or suspected infection and describe posttransplant management.

Methods: We designed a survey of 10 organ offer scenarios and asked questions pertaining to organ acceptability for transplantation and management posttransplant. The survey was distributed to TID clinicians via transplant society listservs and email. Responses were recorded in REDCap, and descriptive statistics were employed.

Results: One hundred thirteen infectious disease physicians responded to the survey, of whom 85 completed all cases. Respondents were generally in agreement regarding organ acceptability, although some divergence was seen when evaluating lungs from donors with influenza, tuberculosis, or multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter infection. Posttransplant management showed more variation. Areas of optimization were identified: (1) Further understanding of where risk-mitigation strategies within the donor offer process may improve donor acceptability and therefore organ utilization; (2) importance of recipient considerations in assessing degree of infectious risk; and (3) gaps in evidenced-based data regarding optimal posttransplant management of recipients.

Conclusion: Evaluation of donor offers by TID clinicians is a complex process. Although the survey does not itself serve to make recommendations regarding best practices, it highlights areas where generation of data to inform acceptance and management practices may allow for improved organ utilization and recipient management.

Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) can cause tissue-invasive disease and indirect effects after lung transplantation (LTx) such as acute rejection episodes and chronic lung allograft dysfunction. Monitoring CMV-specific cell immune recovery (CMV-CIR) after LTx can individualize CMV risks and establish better antiviral approach. This study evaluated the dynamics of CMV-CIR, using QuantiFERON-CMV assay (Qiagen Group), in the first year after LTx.

Methods: Prospective observational cohort study included lung transplant recipients from December/2015 to December/2016. Universal antiviral prophylaxis with intravenous ganciclovir 5 mg/kg/day 3 days/week for 3 months was given for CMV-seropositive recipients (R+) and only CMV-seropositive donor and negative recipient (D+/R-) received a 6-month-prophylaxis with ganciclovir and valganciclovir, on alternate days, in the first 3 months and then, 3 more months of valganciclovir. QuantiFERON-CMV was measured at the same time points of surveillance bronchoscopies. CMV infection was defined as any DNAemia detected and CMV disease with proven biopsy or antigenemia pp65 above 10 cells/300.000 neutrophils.

Results: Thirty-eight patients were included. On days 45, 90, and 365 days post-LTx, 60%, 72%, and 81% QuantiFERON-CMV were reactive, respectively. Eleven patients (28.9%) presented CMV-disease and 27 DNAemia/CMV infections. Reactive tests were able to predict CMV disease only at 90 days after LTx (p = .027) but failed on DNAemia/CMV infection (p = .148). Daily prophylaxis, for D+/R- patients (13.2%), remained as an independently associated factor for not achieving reactive QuantiFERON-CMV (adjusted OR .27, 95%CI .12-.60, p = .02).

Conclusion: QuantiFERON-CMV may be another diagnostic tool to help stratify CMV-disease risk and individualized antiviral prophylaxis after LTx.