Incidence, risk factors and clinical outcome of multidrug-resistant organisms after heart transplantation

BACKGROUND Transplant recipients commonly harbor multidrug-resistant organisms(MDROs),as a result of frequent hospital admissions and increased exposure to antimi-crobials and invasive procedures.AIM To investigate the impact of patient demographic and clinical characteristics on MDRO acquisition,as well as the impact of MDRO acquisition on intensive care unit(ICU)and hospital length of stay,and on ICU mortality and 1-year mortality post heart transplantation.METHODS This retrospective cohort study analyzed 98 consecutive heart transplant patients over a ten-year period(2013-2022)in a single transplantation center.Data was collected regarding MDROs commonly encountered in critical care.RESULTS Among the 98 transplanted patients(70%male),about a third(32%)acquired or already harbored MDROs upon transplantation(MDRO group),while two thirds did not(MDRO-free group).The prevalent MDROs were Acinetobacter baumannii(14%),Pseudomonas aeruginosa(12%)and Klebsiella pneumoniae(11%).Compared to MDRO-free patients,the MDRO group was characterized by higher body mass index(P=0.002),higher rates of renal failure(P=0.017),primary graft dysfunction(10%vs 4.5%,P=0.001),surgical re-exploration(34%vs 14%,P=0.017),mechanical circulatory support(47%vs 26%P=0.037)and renal replacement therapy(28%vs 9%,P=0.014),as well as longer extracorporeal circulation time(median 210 vs 161 min,P=0.003).The median length of stay was longer in the MDRO group,namely ICU stay was 16 vs 9 d in the MDRO-free group(P=0.001),and hospital stay was 38 vs 28 d(P=0.006),while 1-year mortality was higher(28%vs 7.6%,log-rank-χ2:7.34).CONCLUSION Following heart transplantation,a predominance of Gram-negative MDROs was noted.MDRO acquisition was associated with higher complication rates,prolonged ICU and total hospital stay,and higher post-transplantation mortality.

Hepatitis B in renal transplant patients

Hepatitis B virus(HBV) poses a significant challenge for both dialysis patients and kidney transplant recipients despite its decreasing rates, especially in developed countries. The best preventive method is vaccination. Patients with chronic renal disease should ideally be vaccinated prior to dialysis, otherwise, reinforced vaccination practices and close antibody titer monitoring should be applied while on dialysis. HBV infected dialysis patients who are renal transplant candidates must be thoroughly examined by HBV-DNA, and liver enzyme testing and by liver biopsy. When needed, one must consider treating patients with tenofovir or entecavir rather than lamivudine. Depending on the cirrhosis stage, dialysis patients are eligible transplant recipients for either a combined kidney-liver procedure in the case of decompensated cirrhosis or a lone kidney transplantation since even compensated cirrhosis after sustained viral responders is no longer considered an absolute contraindication. Nucleoside analogues have led to improved transplantation outcomes with both long-term patient and graft survival rates nearing those of HBs Ag(-) recipients. Moreover, in the cases of immunized HBs Ag(-) potential recipients with concurrent prophylaxis, we are enabled today to safely use renal grafts from both HBs Ag(+) and HBs Ag(-)/antiHBc(+) donors. In so doing, we avoid unnecessary organ discarding. Universal prophylaxis with entecavir is recommended in HBV kidney recipients and should start perioperatively. One of the most important issues in HBV(+) kidney transplantation is the duration of antiviral prophylaxis. In the absence of robust data, it seems that prophylactic treatment may be discontinued in selected stable, low-risk recipients during maintenance immunosuppression and should be reintroduced when the immune status is altered. All immunosuppressive agents in kidney transplantation can be used in HBV(+) recipients. Immunosuppression is intimately associated with increased viral replication; thus it is important to minimize the total immunosuppression burden long term.