Coccidioidomycosis in Liver Transplant Recipients in an Endemic Area

Coccidioidomycosis is an infection caused by Coccidioides species, which are endemic for the Southwestern United States and parts of Central America and South America. Most infected individuals are asymptomatic or have mild‐to‐moderate respiratory illness. Coccidioidomycosis is more severe in patients with depressed cellular immunity, such as organ transplant recipients. We retrospectively reviewed charts of 391 liver transplant recipients (mean follow‐up, 38.7 months; range, 2–105 months). Before transplantation, 12 patients had a history of coccidioidomycosis and 13 patients had asymptomatic seropositivity. Of these 25 patients, 23 had no active coccidioidomycosis posttransplantation and 2 had reactivated infection. One of 5 patients with indeterminate serology before transplantation died of disseminated coccidioidomycosis shortly after transplantation. De novo coccidioidomycosis developed in 12 patients (3%) who had no evidence of coccidioidomycosis pretransplantation. Of 15 total episodes of posttransplantation coccidioidomycosis, 10 (66%) occurred during the first year. Dissemination was noted in 33% of active coccidioidomycosis after transplantation; two patients (13%) died of coccidioidomycosis. Because most coccidioidal infections occurred in the first posttransplantation year despite targeted antifungal prophylaxis, we recommend a new strategy of universal antifungal prophylaxis for 6–12 months for liver transplant recipients who reside in the endemic area.     

The prevention of recrudescent coccidioidomycosis after solid organ transplantation

BACKGROUND: Coccidioidomycosis is an endemic fungal infection of the southwestern United States that causes considerable morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients, often as the result of reactivated infection. METHODS: A retrospective review of the medical records of 47 patients with prior coccidioidomycosis who underwent solid organ transplantation (18 liver, 24 kidney, 3 pancreas, and 2 combined organ) at our tertiary care academic medical center. RESULTS: Of 47 transplant recipients with a history of coccidioidomycosis, 44 had quiescent infection at transplantation. Of the three with active coccidioidomycosis at transplantation, two were taking azole prophylaxis and had no further coccidioidal infection after transplantation. One of the three had positive serologic findings identified only on the day of transplantation, and prophylaxis was initiated a few hours after surgery along with immunosuppression; nevertheless, the treatment course was complicated by disseminated coccidioidomycosis. Seven patients did not initiate or self-discontinued prophylaxis; one patient who discontinued prophylaxis experienced recurrent pulmonary infection. CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing transplantation in an area endemic for coccidioidomycosis, we recommend routine evaluation for evidence of prior infection and initiation of azole prophylaxis. For our patients with quiescent infection, azoles suppressed any recrudescent coccidioidomycosis after transplantation. The selection of patients who would benefit from prophylaxis and the optimal dose and duration of such prophylaxis should be studied further.     

Preemptive prophylaxis with a lipid preparation of amphotericin B for invasive fungal infections in liver transplant recipients requiring renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND: Posttransplant renal replacement therapy has been shown to be an independently significant risk factor for invasive fungal infections after liver transplantation. We assessed the efficacy of a lipid preparation of amphotericin B as prophylaxis for invasive fungal infections, directed toward liver transplant recipients requiring renal replacement therapy. METHODS: A total of 148 patients transplanted between 1990 and 1997 received no antifungal prophylaxis. Since 1997, 38 patients underwent liver transplantation; antifungal prophylaxis with a lipid preparation of amphotericin B was used in patients requiring renal replacement therapy. RESULTS: Fifteen percent (22 of 148) of the patients transplanted before 1997 required renal replacement therapy. In this cohort, the incidence of invasive fungal infections (36% vs. 7%, P=0.0007) and invasive aspergillosis (14% vs. 2%, P=0.02) was significantly higher in patients who required renal replacement therapy compared with those who did not. Since 1997, 29% (11 of 38) of the patients required renal replacement therapy and received antifungal prophylaxis. Invasive fungal infections occurred in 36% (8 of 22) of the patients who received no prophylaxis (patients before 1997), and 0% (0 of 11, P=0.03) in those who received antifungal prophylaxis (since 1997). Antifungal prophylaxis was independently associated with protection from fungal infection (P=0.017). No reduction in mortality with antifungal prophylaxis was documented. CONCLUSION: Prophylaxis with a lipid preparation of amphotericin B was associated with a significant reduction in invasive fungal infections in high-risk liver transplant recipients, i.e., those requiring renal replacement therapy. However, no beneficial effect on survival could be documented.     

Coccidioidomycosis and renal transplantation.

Two cases of coccidioidomycosis detected in a group of more than 750 renal transplants are presented. The first patient died from unsuspected disseminated coccidioidomycosis 4 1/2 years after primary transplantation and 6 days after retransplantation. In the second patient pulmonary coccidioidomycosis was recognized and treated by lobectomy and amphotericin B before transplantation; subsequent transplantation has provided good renal function without recurrence of infection for 5 years. Experience with six other reported cases of coccidioidomycosis illustrates the high risk of exacerbation and dissemination of preexisting coccidioidal infection in immuno-suppressed transplanted recipients. Nevertheless, this risk can be made acceptable if active coccidioidomycosis is treated vigorously before immunosuppression is started and if the possibility of exacerbation of infection after transplantation is carefully monitored.     

Acyclovir plus CMV immunoglobulin prophylaxis and early therapy with ganciclovir are effective and safe in CMV high-risk renal transplant pediatric recipients

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is still a major cause of morbidity in high-risk renal transplant recipients. In the present report, we have reviewed our records of renal transplant pediatric recipients (RTPR; mean age 14.1 ± 4.9 years) since 1991, when we started a policy of CMV prophylaxis constituting high-dose oral acyclovir plus CMV hyperimmune immunoglobulins (Hlg) followed by early i. v. ganciclovir therapy in high-risk patients (i. e., CMV donor + / recipient ?). Four patients received a kidney from a living relative (LR), 2 patients had one previous transplant, and 1 had a combined liver – kidney transplant. Thirty-three patients who were negative for CMV antibodies (ab) before transplantation received a kidney from CMV ab positive donors. The immunosuppressive regimen included cyclosporine A and steroids, with the addition of azathioprine in the 4 patients who received an LR kidney. Serial assessments for CMV antigenemia (pp 65) were routinely performed for 6 months after transplantation to define CMV infection. Among the 33 CMV seronegative recipients (R ?) who received the graft from a CMV seropositive donor (D +), 18 (54.5 %) experienced CMV infection, whereas among the 28 CMV R +, who received a graft from a CMV D +, 11 (39.3 %) experienced CMV infection. With regard to CMV ? related symptoms, only 2 patients suffered from a CMV syndrome (fever and leukopenia in 1 patient, fever and arthralgia in the other). In no case did the spectrum of CMV disease occur; only minor symptoms were present in 7 of the remaining CMV-infected patients (fever in 6 and leukopenia in 1). Rejection episodes and renal function did not differ between CMV-infected and non-CMV-infected patients. Our experiences support the use of prophylactic acyclovir plus CMV HIg followed by early therapy with i. v. ganciclovir to combat the risk of increased morbidity in high risk RTPR.     

Acyclovir plus CMV immunoglobulin prophylaxis and early therapy with ganciclovir are effective and safe in CMV high-risk renal transplant pediatric recipients

Abstract Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is still a major cause of morbidity in high-risk renal transplant recipients. In the present report, we have reviewed our records of renal transplant pediatric recipients (RTPR; mean age 14.1 ± 4.9 years) since 1991, when we started a policy of CMV prophylaxis constituting high-dose oral acyclovir plus CMV hyperimmune immunoglobulins (Hlg) followed by early i.v. ganciclovir therapy in high-risk patients (i.e., CMV donor +/ recipient -). Four patients received a kidney from a living relative (LR), 2 patients had one previous transplant, and 1 had a combined liver -kidney transplant. Thirty-three patients who were negative for CMV antibodies (ab) before transplantation received a kidney from CMV ab positive donors. The immunosuppressive regimen included cyclosporin A and steroids, with the addition of azathioprine in the 4 patients who received an LR kidney. Serial assessments for CMV antigenemia (pp 65) were routinely performed for 6 months after transplantation to define CMV infection. Among the 33 CMV seronegative recipients (R -) who received the graft from a CMV seropositive donor (D +), 18 (54.5 %) experienced CMV infection, whereas among the 28 CMV R +, who received a graft from a CMV D +, 11 (39.3 %) experienced CMV infection. With regard to CMV - related symptoms, only 2 patients suffered from a CMV syndrome (fever and leukopenia in 1 patient, fever and arthralgia in the other). In no case did the spectrum of CMV disease occur; only minor symptoms were present in 7 of the remaining CMV-infected patients (fever in 6 and leukopenia in 1). Rejection episodes and renal function did not differ between CMV-infected and non-CMV-infected patients. Our experiences support the use of prophylactic acyclovir plus CMV HIg followed by early therapy with i.v. ganciclovir to combat the risk of increased morbidity in high risk RTPR.     

De novo coccidioidomycosis among solid organ transplant recipients 1 or more years after transplant

Solid organ transplant recipients who contract coccidioidomycosis are at risk for complicated, protracted, disseminated, and severe disease. To date, no studies have described outcomes for patients who develop coccidioidomycosis only after the first posttransplant year. This study was a joint project of Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona, and the University of Arizona/Banner University Medical Center, Tucson, Arizona. We retrospectively reviewed electronic health records for patients with a history of solid organ transplant between January 1, 1998, and October 11, 2014, who developed coccidioidomycosis after the first transplant year. We identified 91 patients. Of those, 37/91 (40.7%) had pulmonary coccidioidomycosis (29/37 [78.4%] were symptomatic); and 5/91 (5.5%) had extrapulmonary disease (all were symptomatic). One patient (1.1%) died. Coccidioidomycosis was evident in 2/91 (2.2%) patients within 3 months of antirejection treatment. Many of the patients (51/91 [56.0%]) had asymptomatic coccidioidomycosis, 27 (27.9%) of whom were followed up closely but did not receive antifungal medication and had no sequelae. Although solid organ recipients taking low‐level immunosuppression after the first posttransplant year appeared to have less symptomatic, disseminated, or fatal coccidioidal infection than historical cohorts, this remains an important infection with morbidity and mortality even after the first posttransplant year.     

A review of critical periods for opportunistic infection in the new transplantation era

BACKGROUND: The risk of opportunistic infection (OI) is considered to be maximum during the first six months after solid organ transplantation. The aim of this study was to know the incidence and risk factors for OI in the late period (>6 months) compared with the early period (<6 months) after solid organ transplantation. METHODS: We used the online database of the Spanish Network of Infection in Transplantation (RESITRA), which prospectively analyzed 2,702 solid organ transplantation recipients from August 2003 to February 2005. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to calculate the risk factors associated with the development of late OI. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients (6%) developed 176 infectious episodes in the late period. Although the incidence of infection and cytomegalovirus disease (0.4 per 1000 transplant days and 0.05 per 1000 transplant days, respectively) was lower than in the early period (3.5 per 1000 transplant days and 0.8 per 1000 transplant days; P<0.0001), the incidence of other OIs was similar in both periods (0.05 per 1000 transplant days versus 0.03 per 1000 transplant-days, P=0.5). Patients with the higher risk for developing late OI were those receiving early cytomegalovirus prophylaxis, patients who developed two or more episodes of acute rejection during the early period, patients with recurrent bacterial infection during the early period, patients with renal failure requiring dialysis, and patients with chronic graft malfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in some high-risk patients, the critical period of risk for OI must be expanded beyond the first six months after transplant.     

Risk stratification and targeted antifungal prophylaxis for prevention of aspergillosis and other invasive mold infections after liver transplantation.

Antifungal prophylaxis has been proposed for liver transplant recipients at increased risk for invasive mold infection. Risk factors for invasive mold infection after liver transplantation were selected to divide recipients into 3 groups: (1) high risk-transplantation on hemodialysis or delay of hospital discharge beyond day 7 after transplantation because of allograft or renal insufficiency; (2) intermediate risk-retransplantation or transplantation for fulminant hepatic failure; (3) low risk-absence of conditions in groups 1 and 2. During an intervention period (February 1999-April 2001), prophylactic administration of a lipid complex of amphotericin (Abelcet) at 5 mg/kg intravenously every 24 to 48 hours was recommended for high-risk recipients. The frequency of mold infection was compared to that of a preintervention period (February 1998-January 1999) when antifungal prophylaxis was not provided. During the intervention period, invasive mold infection developed in 2 (6%) of 35 high-risk recipients, 0 of 28 intermediate-risk recipients, and 1 (0.5%) of 187 low-risk recipients. Overall, of 58 liver transplant recipients, 3 (5%) developed an invasive mold infection during the preintervention period, compared with 3 (1%) of 250 during the intervention period (P = 0.08). The only death from invasive mold infection occurred during the preintervention period. Rates of pulse corticosteroid treatment of rejection and cytomegalovirus infection were lower during the intervention period. In conclusion, readily identifiable patient characteristics can be used to stratify liver transplant recipients for risk of invasive mold infection. Antifungal prophylaxis given to high-risk recipients may provide cost-effective prevention of these infections.     

The effect of polyimmune gammaglobulin for prophylaxis against reactivation cytomegalovirus infection in kidney and kidney/pancreas transplant recipients.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains the most important infection in the renal transplant recipient. Few data are available that provide guidance for approaches that seek to reduce the reactivation of latent disease after transplantation. To test the efficacy of polyimmune gammaglobulin in kidney and kidney/pancreas transplantation, consenting recipients with serologic evidence of previous CMV disease were randomized to receive i.v. polyimmune gammaglobulin (500 mg/kg) within 3 days of transplant with 250 mg/kg at weeks 1, 2, 4, and 6 or no prophylaxis. Both groups received identical induction and rejection immunosuppressive therapy. Polyimmune gammaglobulin prophylaxis reduced CMV reactivation infections. The incidence of reactivation infections was half in patients receiving Nashville/rabbit antithymocyte serum (N/R-ATS) compared with those receiving monoclonal anti-CD-3 therapy. Patients receiving polyimmune gammaglobulin along with N/R-ATS had an incidence of infection of only 10%. Reactivation infections were twice as common in patients who had primary nonfunction and nearly three times as common in patients with acute rejection. Both risk factors were associated with longer anti-T-cell therapy. Polyimmune gammaglobulin prophylaxis should be considered in transplant patients with previous CMV exposure who will be receiving prolonged anti-T-cell therapy because of acute rejection or primary nonfunction.     

Long-term results of CMV hyperimmune globulin prophylaxis in 377 heart transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) has emerged as the most important pathogen to affect the post-operative course after heart transplantation. We performed a retrospective analysis to evaluate the efficiency of CMV hyperimmune globulin (CMVIG) prophylaxis in preventing CMV disease in aggressively immunosuppressed patients after heart transplantation. METHODS: We studied 377 heart transplant recipients who received quadruple-immunosuppressive therapy and CMVIG as sole CMV prophylaxis. The study population was categorized into 4 groups according to donor and recipient CMV serology at the time of transplantation (D+/R+, D+/R-, D-/R+, D-/R-) and was monitored for CMV immediate early antigen in peripheral blood cells, in urine sediments, and in throat washings; for the presence of serum CMV immunoglobulin M and CMV immunoglobulin G; and for clinical evidence of CMV-related symptoms. In addition, we compared the incidence of cardiac allograft vasculopathy and infection among the groups. RESULTS: During the first 5 years after transplantation, CMV disease developed in 79 patients (20.96%). Comparison among the groups showed significantly increased risk for CMV disease in allograft recipients of organs from seropositive donors (D+, 27.31%; D-, 11.33%; p = 0.0003). We observed 6 CMV-associated deaths, all in CMV-antibody-negative recipients. Additionally CMV-positive recipients had a greater incidence of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (p = 0.048), and a greater overall infection rate (p = 0.0034). CONCLUSIONS: Cytomegalovirus hyperimmune globulin administration prevents CMV disease and infection in aggressively immunosuppressed heart transplant recipients. Because fatal CMV disease in CMV-negative recipients of organs from seropositive donors could not be prevented with CMVIG alone, we recommend the additional use of prophylactic ganciclovir in this CMV-mismatched population.     

Cytomegalovirus prophylaxis with intravenous polyvalent immunoglobulin in high-risk renal transplant recipients

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) seronegative renal allograft recipients (R-), particularly those with a graft from a CMV-seropositive donor (D+), are at high risk for primary CMV infection. CMV resistance to antiviral oral therapy is an emerging problem in renal transplantation, prompting development of new prophylactic strategies. We retrospectively studied the 1-year posttransplantation incidence of CMV infection in high-risk renal transplant recipients, in whom polyvalent intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) were used as prophylaxis. Forty R- patients received immunoprophylaxis by polyvalent IVIg (0.25 g/kg weekly for 8 weeks, starting on the operative day). CMV serological tests remained negative in eight patients (20%). Eight patients (20%) had asymptomatic CMV infection while 24 (60%) developed CMV syndrome and were treated with gancyclovir (10 mg/kg/day intravenously for 3 weeks). None had CMV disease or opportunistic infection. Six patients (15%) had biopsy-proven acute rejection, which followed CMV syndrome in three cases. One-year renal allograft and patient survivals were 95% and 97.5%, respectively. Mean serum creatinine level was 124 +/- 33 micromol/L at 1 year. Clinical tolerance of IVIg was excellent, without any episode of acute renal failure. Polyvalent IVIg provides effective prophylaxis in renal transplant recipients at high risk for CMV infection and is associated with excellent 1-year allograft survival. Because of their immunomodulatory functions, IVIg may have a beneficial effect on the incidence of acute and chronic rejection and allograft survival. A randomized prospective study is required to evaluate long-term effects of CMV prophylaxis with polyvalent IVIg compared to antiviral agents in renal transplant recipients.     

Infectious complications in kidney transplant recipients: a single-center experience

To determine the patterns of infectious complications in renal transplant recipients in our center, we evaluated 48 patients (29 men and 19 women) who were transplanted between 1994 and 2003. The average age of the patients was 29 years. Thirty (62.5%) and 18 (37.5%) transplants were from living related and cadaveric donors, respectively. Posttransplant immunosuppression consisted of azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), prednisone, antithymocyte globulin (ATG), and cyclosporine or tacrolimus. The acute rejection episodes were treated with pulse doses of methylprednisolone; steroid-resistant rejection was treated with ATG or muromonab (OKT3). All patients received prophylaxis with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine; none received prophylaxis against cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. Thirty-nine (81%) recipients developed 77 confirmed episodes of infection; 35 (46%) episodes occurred in the early postoperative period, 28 (36%) in the first month and 14 (18%) after 6 months. According to the type of infection, there were 24 urinary tract, 16 CMV, seven herpetic, nine general septic, six fungal, four pneumonia, one disseminated nocardial, and 10 miscellaneous episodes. All 26 (100%) patients who had acute rejection episodes developed infections compared with 13/22 (59%) who did not have rejection (P < .01). There was a significant correlation between CMV disease and acute rejection and/or tacrolimus or MMF use. CMV infection occurred after the additional immunosuppressive treatment for acute rejection in 10 patients or during the use of tacrolimus or MMF in six patients. We conclude that CMV infection was the most frequent opportunistic pathogen in our renal transplant population and related to the intensive antirejection therapy, followed by urinary tract infections within 3 months after surgery.     

Aztreonam can safely be used in combination with cyclosporin without aggravating nephrotoxicity

Abstract. The administration of antibiotics to renal transplant patients using cyclosporin can be difficult because of the risk of severe nephrotoxicity. An investigation was therefore carried out to determine whether aztreonam, a synthetic monocyclic β-lac-tam antibiotic, can safely be combined with cyclosporin. In this retrospective study 68 renal transplant patients who received preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis consisting of aztreonam, ampicillin, and lincomycin were compared with 68 patients who received ceftazidime instead of aztreonam. Both groups were treated with cyclosporin and prednisolone and followed for 3 months. After transplantation 28. 7% of the patients suffered from an acute renal failure and 1. 5% had a wound infection. There were no significant differences between the two groups in acute renal failure, wound infections, other infections, incidence of rejections, duration of admission, or graft survival. We therefore conclude that aztreonam can safely be administered together with cyclosporin. We also conclude that the combination of aztreonam, ampicillin, and lincomycin is a good preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in renal transplant patients.     

Aztreonam can safely be used in combination with cyclosporin without aggravating nephrotoxicity

The administration of antibiotics to renal transplant patients using cyclosporin can be difficult because of the risk of severe nephrotoxicity. An investigation was therefore carried out to determine whether aztreonam, a synthetic monocyclic β-lactam antibiotic, can safely be combined with cyclosporin. In this retrospective study 68 renal transplant patients who received preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis consisting of aztreonam, ampicillin, and lincomycin were compared with 68 patients who received ceftazidime instead of aztreonam. Both groups were treated with cyclosporin and prednisolone and followed for 3 months. After transplantation 28.7% of the patients suffered from an acute renal failure and 1.5% had a wound infection. There were no significant differences between the two groups in acute renal failure, wound infections, other infections, incidence of rejections, duration of admission, or graft survival. We therefore conclude that aztreonam can safely be administered together with cyclosporin. We also conclude that the combination of aztreonam, ampicillin, and lincomycin is a good preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in renal transplant patients.     

A retrospective analysis of the use of caspofungin in recipients of liver transplant with a modified high index of suspicion for fungal infection. A critical review of mortality,acute cellular rejection,infections, and changes in the liver function tests while on caspofungin

Doria C, Bodzin AS, Vaccino S, Daskalakis C, Krawitz S, Ramirez CB. A retrospective analysis of the use of caspofungin in recipients of liver transplant with a modified high index of suspicion for fungal infection. A critical review of mortality, acute cellular rejection, infections, and changes in the liver function tests while on caspofungin.
Clin Transplant 2011: 25: 569–575. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: This study is a retrospective analysis of death, adverse events (AE), fungal infections, and hepatic function among recipients of liver transplantation at high risk of fungal infection who received prophylactic treatment with caspofungin. After reviewing data of 105 patients who had received isolated liver transplant between January 2003 and April 2007, we identified and analyzed 82 high‐risk patients. Post‐transplant patients at high risk for fungal infection are commonly defined by the presence of at least one of the following: (i) re‐transplantation; (ii) re‐operation; (iii) renal dysfunction. However, in our practice, patients are also considered at high risk for developing fungal infections if they present with the following: (iv) fever of unknown origin; (v) hypothermia; (vi) positive random culture for fungus at the time of transplant (bile and/or ascites); (vii) sepsis; (viii) use of vasopressors; (ix) re‐intubation, during the first hospitalization after liver transplant; (x) prolonged intubation (>24 h), and (xi) acute respiratory distress syndrome, until negative fungal cultures are obtained. Exact conditional logistic regression was used to compare the risk of death, AEs, and fungal infections between patients who received caspofungin, other antifungal drugs, and no antifungal drugs. Analyses were then performed with SAS 9.1 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Patients were between 27 and 72 yr old (mean = 55), with two‐thirds male and three‐quarters Caucasian. Sixteen patients received caspofungin (11 preventively), and 32 received other antifungal (26 preventively). There were no proven fungal infections among the patients who received caspofungin, three infections among patients who received other antifungal (3/26 = 12%), and 14 infections among patients who were not preventively treated (14/45 = 31%). These infection rates were significantly different across the three groups (p = 0.029), with caspofungin and other antifungal preventive treatment comparable (p = 0.540), and both better than no preventive treatment at all (OR = 0.15, p = 0.049, for caspofungin versus no preventive treatment; OR = 0.29, p = 0.085, for other antifungal versus no preventive treatment). Caspofungin appears to be an effective preventive agent against fungal infections when used in recipients of liver transplant designated as high risk for fungal infection. Usage of caspofungin in these patients does not carry an apparent increase in risk of death or acute cellular rejection, although we observed a significantly higher risk of AEs, especially acute renal failure (p = 0.001), in patients who received this agent.     

Invasive aspergillosis in the recipients of liver retransplantation.

Retransplantation is a major risk factor for invasive aspergillosis in liver transplant recipients. However, the risk for invasive aspergillosis with time elapsed since retransplantation, clinical characteristics, and outcome of patients who develop this infection after retransplantation of the liver has not been defined. Patients comprised 17 liver retransplant recipients with invasive aspergillosis between 1990 and 2004. Retransplantation was considered early if it was performed within 30 days and late if performed after 30 days of the first or primary transplant. Retransplant recipients comprised 25% of all cases of invasive aspergillosis after liver transplantation. Fifty-three percent of the Aspergillus infections occurred within 30 days, and 76% within 90 days of retransplantation. In all, 53% (9/17) of the patients were late retransplant recipients. Late compared to early retransplant recipients with invasive aspergillosis were more likely to have central nervous system involvement with invasive aspergillosis (56% vs. 0%, P = 0.03). Mortality rate was 100% for late and 63% for early retransplant recipients with Aspergillus infections. In conclusion, time-varying risk for invasive aspergillosis after retransplantation has implications relevant for guiding antifungal prophylaxis. Given a greater risk for disseminated infection and poor outcome in late retransplant recipients with aspergillosis, potent and aggressive antifungal therapy should be considered upfront in these patients.     

Prevention of Cytomegalovirus Disease in Renal Transplantation: Single-Center Experience

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and CMV disease remain important issues in renal transplantation. Incidence depends on individual patient risk. There are different possible strategies for CMV prophylaxis. In our center CMV prevention includes prophylaxis with low-dose valganciclovir for all high-risk recipients; for the remaining patients, valganciclovir is only prescribed when there is evidence of CMV replication. All recipients are monitored for viral replication. We evaluated the results of this preventive strategy in all 135 patients who underwent transplantation between 2006 and 2007 in our center. Average follow-up time was 16 months (6-30 months). Fifty-one recipients (38%) received CMV prophylaxis. The median duration of prophylaxis was 84 days. In 37% of the recipients (50 patients) CMV antigenemia became positive, and were given therapeutic doses of valganciclovir. Of these patients, 32% were high-risk recipients undergoing prophylaxis. CMV infection rate was 40% in the group not receiving prophylaxis. No association was observed between CMV infection and prophylaxis duration. However, 50% of patients who suspended prophylaxis before completion of the first 3 months became infected. There were 3 cases of CMV disease (2.2%). Leukopenia was seen in 34% of patients receiving prophylaxis. Valganciclovir prophylaxis for high-risk patients seems to be effective and safe among subjects who complete the full duration of treatment. Despite CMV-positive antigenemia in 40% of patients not undergoing prophylaxis, pre-emptive therapy with valganciclovir was effective to prevent CMV disease, but close monitoring is essential for disease prevention.     

The Utility of Diagnostic Testing for Active Coccidioidomycosis in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

Solid organ transplant recipients who acquire coccidioidomycosis have high rates of disseminated infection and mortality, and diagnosis of infection in these immunosuppressed patients is challenging because of suboptimal sensitivity of diagnostic tests. To characterize the utility of diagnostic tests for coccidioidomycosis in this population, we conducted a retrospective chart review of all solid organ transplant recipients with newly acquired coccidioidomycosis who were seen at our institution from 1999 to 2011. We identified 27 solid organ transplant recipients with newly acquired, active coccidioidomycosis. The positivity of any single serologic test ranged from 21% (5/24; immunoglobulin M by immunodiffusion) to 56% (14/25; immunoglobulin G by enzyme immunoassay), compared with 77% (20/26) seropositivity for a battery of serologic tests (enzyme immunoassay, immunodiffusion and complement fixation). Serology performed approximately 1 month later increased positive test findings to 92%. Culture of respiratory or tissue specimens yielded Coccidioides sp in 54% (14/26) of the cultures submitted, and 10/16 (63%) of patients tested. Chest‐computed tomography was abnormal in 86% (19/22). Multiple test modalities may be needed to diagnose coccidioidomycosis in solid organ transplant recipients, and repeat studies over time may increase sensitivity of the diagnostic assays.     

Antifungal Prophylaxis with Voriconazole or Itraconazole in Lung Transplant Recipients: Hepatotoxicity and Effectiveness

Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are common after lung transplantation and there are limited data for the use of antifungal prophylaxis in these patients. Our aim was to compare the safety and describe the effectiveness of universal prophylaxis with two azole regimens in lung transplant recipients.
This is a retrospective study in lung transplant recipients from July 2003 to July 2006 who received antifungal prophylaxis with itraconazole or voriconazole plus inhaled amphotericin B to compare the incidence of hepatotoxicity. Secondary outcomes include describing the incidence of IFI, clinical outcomes after IFI and mortality.
Sixty-seven consecutive lung transplants received antifungal prophylaxis, 32 itraconazole and 35 voriconazole and inhaled amphotericin B. There were no significant differences between groups in the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) score at the time of transplantation, demographic characteristics, comorbidities and concomitant use of hepatotoxic medications. Hepatotoxicity occurred in 12 patients receiving voriconazole and inhaled amphotericin B and in no patients receiving itraconazole (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups with regard to the percentage of transplants with IFI, but one case of zygomycosis occurred in a transplant treated with voriconazole. Voriconazole prophylaxis after lung transplantation was associated with a higher incidence of hepatotoxicity and similar clinical effectiveness when compared to itraconazole.