Search

Background: Potential deceased organ donors are screened for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) with serologic tests and nucleic acid tests (NATs). The results of these tests on the utilization of donors have not been directly measured., Methods: Twenty-six organ procurement organizations (OPOs) provided primary HIV, HBV, and HCV screening results and utilization information for donor referrals evaluated from 2004 to 2017. Additional information regarding donor organ utilization was obtained from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Data were analyzed using logistic regression., Results: Test results were submitted for 38 166 potential deceased organ donors; 31 (0.1%) were HIV NAT-negative but seropositive, 5.2% were HBV core antibody-positive and NAT-negative, while 1.8% were HCV antibody-positive and NAT-negative. Organ utilization of HBV and/or HCV NAT-negative organs increased over time despite positive antibody status., Conclusions: Nucleic acid test detected infections in seronegative donors, especially for HCV. The use of NAT for deceased donor screening correlated with increased utilization of donor organs., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Infectious diseases (ID) specialists with experience in managing infections in transplant recipients and other immunocompromised hosts are increasingly needed as these fields expand., Methods: To evaluate experiences and identify trainee-described needs in transplant infectious diseases (TID) training, the American Society of Transplantation, Infectious Diseases Community of Practice (AST IDCOP) surveyed ID fellows across the United States and TID fellows in the United States and Canada and received responses from 203 ID fellows and 13 TID fellows., Results: Among ID fellows, the amount of TID training during ID fellowship was rated between less than ideal and adequate. Reasons cited included limited frequency of didactic activities and limited exposure to transplant patients during training. In particular, ID fellows at low-volume transplantation centers expressed interest in more TID training time, away training opportunities, and specific TID didactics. Educational resources of high interest among trainees were case-based interactive websites, mobile phone applications with TID guidelines, and a centralized collection of relevant articles. Pediatric ID fellows reported lower satisfaction scores with TID training, while TID fellows were overall satisfied or more than satisfied with their training experience., Conclusion: Findings from this survey will inform local and national TID educational initiatives., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Organ Procurement & Transplantation Network policy requires post-transplant screening of recipients of organs from donors at increased risk for transmission of HIV, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus. Available data suggest that follow-up testing of recipients is not routinely conducted. Data on increased risk donors and recipients of their organs from 2008 to 2012 were retrospectively collected from 6 transplant centers after IRB approval. Descriptive statistics were performed. About 363 (60%) recipients were screened for transmission of HIV, HBV, and/or HCV at some time point; 257 (70.8%) within 90 days of transplant. The type of test used to screen for infection was variable with many recipients (25%-43%) screened with serology alone. Our results reveal that post-transplant screening for HIV, HBV, and HCV in recipients of increased risk donor organs did not universally occur and testing methods were variable., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Before the 2014 policy change pertaining to infectious disease screening, many organ procurement organizations (OPOs) were supplementing serologic screening of deceased organ donors with nucleic acid testing (NAT) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV). The number of seronegative, NAT-positive donors has not been directly measured., Methods: HIV, HBV, and HCV screening results of 11 229 donor referrals evaluated from 2010 to 2013 were obtained from 3 OPO-affiliated laboratories, capturing 35% of all donors in the United States. Laboratories used either polymerase chain reaction assay or transcription-mediated amplification assay to test 9643 deceased donors by NAT., Results: The NAT results were positive in 21 (0.2%), 1 (0.02%), and 11 (0.1%) donors who were seronegative for HIV, HBV, and HCV, respectively. All discordant HIV-1 results were from one laboratory using a polymrease chain reaction assay. Thirteen of the reactive HIV NAT results in seronegative referrals were repeated and were non-reproducibly positive (NRP). Ten (0.1%), 452 (7.8%), and 197 (2.2%) of HIV-, HBV-, and HCV-seropositive donors, respectively, were negative by NAT., Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of robust quality assurance to minimize NRP NAT results. NAT may allow for increased utilization of organs from HBV- and HCV-seropositive, NAT-negative donors., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Data are limited regarding the use of direct-acting antivirals for treatment of hepatitis C infection post lung transplant, especially in a donor-derived infection. We present a case of a lung transplant recipient with donor-derived hepatitis C that was successfully treated with a 12-week regimen of simeprevir and sofosbuvir. This case reiterates the importance of screening recipients of increased-risk donor organs for disease transmission and the value of early therapy., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The optimal treatment for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in adult immunocompromised patients is unknown. We assessed the management of RSV and other non-influenza respiratory viruses in Midwestern transplant centers., Methods: A survey assessing strategies for RSV and other non-influenza respiratory viral infections was sent to 13 centers., Results: Multiplex polymerase chain reaction assay was used for diagnosis in 11/12 centers. Eight of 12 centers used inhaled ribavirin (RBV) in some patient populations. Barriers included cost, safety, lack of evidence, and inconvenience. Six of 12 used intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), mostly in combination with RBV. Inhaled RBV was used more than oral, and in the post-stem cell transplant population, patients with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), graft-versus-host disease, and more recent transplantation were treated at higher rates. Ten centers had experience with lung transplant patients; all used either oral or inhaled RBV for LRTI, 6/10 treated upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). No center treated non-lung solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with URTI; 7/11 would use oral or inhaled RBV in the same group with LRTI. Patients with hematologic malignancy without hematopoietic stem cell transplantation were treated with RBV at a similar frequency to non-lung SOT recipients. Three of 12 centers, in severe cases, treated parainfluenza and metapneumovirus, and 1/12 treated coronavirus., Conclusions: Treatment of RSV in immunocompromised patients varied greatly. While most centers treat LRTI, treatment of URTI was variable. No consensus was found regarding the use of oral versus inhaled RBV, or the use of IVIG. The presence of such heterogeneity demonstrates the need for further studies defining optimal treatment of RSV in immunocompromised hosts., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Transplant providers must understand the definition of increased risk donor (IRD) organs to effectively educate transplant candidates and obtain informed consent. This study surveyed non-physician providers from 20 transplant centers about their educational and informed consent practices of IRD kidneys., Methods: An anonymous, web-based survey about the content and timing of education and informed consent for potential recipients of IRD kidneys, providers' knowledge of IRD kidneys, and provider and center characteristics was completed by most (67%; 90 of 135) of those invited to participate; 87 responses were included in analysis., Results: Most (80%) reported understanding the concept of IRD kidneys. However, few reported sufficient knowledge of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network definition of IRDs, risk factors, screening tests, window periods, and infection transmission rates. Most (56%) felt uncomfortable with obtaining specific informed consent for IRD kidneys. Most respondents received informal education about IRD kidneys (78%), and recognized the need for (98%) and were interested in receiving (99%) further education on this topic., Conclusion: Non-physician transplant providers need and are interested in better education about IRD kidneys to effectively educate patients and obtain patients' informed consent., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In 1994, the Public Health Service published guidelines to minimize the risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission and to monitor recipients following the transplantation of organs from increased-risk donors. A 2007 survey revealed the post-transplant surveillance of recipients of organs from increased-risk donors (ROIRD) is variable., Methods: An electronic survey was sent to transplant infectious diseases physicians at US solid organ transplant centers., Results: A total of 126 surveys were sent to infectious diseases physicians, and we received 51 (40%) responses. We found that 22% of respondents obtain only verbal, 69% verbal and written, and 8% do not obtain any special consent from ROIRD, despite an Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network policy requiring such consent. Post-solid organ transplantation serologies for HIV, hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) are performed by 6-8% of respondents in all recipients, by 69% of respondents in ROIRD only, and 25% of respondents do not perform them at all. Post-transplant nucleic acid testing is carried out by 55-64% of respondents in ROIRD, by 0-2% in all recipients, and not performed by 35-43% of respondents., Conclusion: Screening RIORD for HIV, HBV, and HCV has increased since 2007, but remains less than optimal and is incomplete when screening for disease transmission at many centers., (© 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Background: Tuberculosis (TB) reactivation is a rare but significant complication of organ transplantation, and screening of all transplant candidates for latent infection is recommended with either an interferon-γ release assay (IGRA) or tuberculin skin test (TST)., Methods: After institutional review board approval, we retrospectively collected data to describe the yield of transplant candidate screening using the QuantiFERON-TB Gold (QFT) and QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-IT) assays since the institution of TB screening in 2008 and the epidemiology of all cases of post-transplant TB in our institution since 2004., Results: A total of 2392 patients were screened with either the QFT or QFT-IT assay through October 2009; 245 (10.2%) tested positive and 206 (8.6%) were indeterminate. Of those with positive results, 107 (43.7%) were foreign born and most of the remainder had prior TB exposures. Of the tests performed at a reference lab, 29% were indeterminate, whereas 14% were indeterminate using our in-house lab. The majority of indeterminate results were seen in liver transplant candidates (40.6% vs. 11.8% in non-liver candidates). Three of 694 (0.43%) screened patients who underwent transplantation developed TB post transplant., Conclusions: Post-transplant TB occurs at a low rate with universal IGRA-based candidate screening, which is comparable to studies using TST screening., (© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)