Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Gareth Parry
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc. PURPOSE: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection following heart transplant is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the impact of CMV status on long term survival at all UK centres, employing different approaches to managing CMV. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing heart transplantation and surviving >30 days between March 1987 and August 2018 included. Data obtained from NHS Blood and Transplant included CMV donor (D) and recipient (R) status, age, sex, centre, treated rejection episodes and survival. Patients grouped by CMV status: D-ve R-ve (DN), D+ve R-ve (PM), D+ve R+ve (DP), D-ve R+ve (RM). 5 year survival, adjusted for age, sex and centre, was compared between all CMV groups, with individual comparisons between DN patients and other statuses. Survival between centres, adjusted for age and sex also compared. Survival data compared using Cox-proportional hazards. Rates of treated rejection between CMV groups compared using Chi2 test. RESULTS: 2675 patients included from 6 UK transplant centres; 2 use a pre-emptive strategy, 4 use valganciclovir in PM patients and high risk R+ve patients for 3-6 months. Five year survival per group CMV DN 629/750 (83.9%), PM 440/563 (78.1%) RM 655/773 (84.7%) DP 467/592 (78.8%). Compared to DN, both PM (HR 1.43 p=0.005) and DP (HR 1.34 p=0.025) were associated with significantly higher mortality. There was no survival difference between centres, p= 0.127, and no difference between centres for PM (p=0.69) or DP (0.23) groups. Rates of treated rejection at 12 months were higher in PM and DP patients, difference between groups p=0.0033. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first multicentre evaluation of the impact of CMV status on longer term survival following heart transplant. CMV mismatch and double positive statuses were associated with higher rates of rejection and reduced survival, irrespective of the CMV prevention strategy used. This should be considered when counselling patients, and in adjusted survival analyses.
Author(s): Callan PD, Yonan N, Santhanakrishnan K, Shaw SM, Karimi E, Williams S, Lim S, Dar O, Pettit SJ, Parry G, Dalzell JR, Venkateswaran R
Publication type: Conference Proceedings (inc. Abstract)
Publication status: Published
Conference Name: ISHLT 40th Anniversary Meeting and Scientific Sessions
Year of Conference: 2020
Pages: S204-S204
Online publication date: 01/04/2020
Acceptance date: 02/04/2018
ISSN: 1053-2498
Publisher: Elsevier
URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2020.01.817
DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2020.01.817
PubMed id: 32465065
Series Title: The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation
