Search

Background: Infection is still a leading cause of death during the first year after lung transplantation. We performed a multicenter study among teaching hospitals to assess monitoring of early humoral immunity as a means of identifying lung recipients at risk of serious infections., Methods: We prospectively analyzed 82 adult lung recipients at 5 centers in Spain. Data were collected before transplantation and at 7 and 30 days after transplantation. Biomarkers included IgG, IgM, IgA, complement factors C3 and C4, titers of antibodies to pneumococcal polysaccharide antigens (IgG, IgA, IgM) and antibodies to cytomegalovirus (IgG), and serum B-cell activating factor (BAFF) levels. The clinical follow-up period lasted 6 months. Clinical outcomes were bacterial infections requiring intravenous anti-microbial agents, cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease, and fungal infections requiring therapy., Results: We found that 33 patients (40.2%) developed at least 1 serious bacterial infection, 8 patients (9.8%) had CMV disease, and 10 patients (12.2%) had fungal infections. Lower IgM antibody levels against pneumococcal polysaccharide antigens at Day 7 (defined as <5 mg/dl) were a risk factor for serious bacterial infection (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39 to 11.26; p = 0.0099). At Day 7 after transplantation, IgG hypogammaglobulinemia (defined as IgG <600 mg/dl) was associated with a higher risk of CMV disease (after adjustment for CMV mismatch: OR 8.15; 95% CI 1.27 to 52.55; p = 0.028) and fungal infection (adjusted OR 8.03, 95% CI 1.51 to 42.72; p = 0.015). Higher BAFF levels before transplantation were associated with a higher rate of development of serious bacterial infection and acute cellular rejection., Conclusion: Early monitoring of specific humoral immunity parameters proved useful for the identification of lung recipients who are at risk of serious infections., (Copyright © 2018 International Society for the Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prophylaxis with inhaled liposomal amphotericin B has proven to be safe and effective for preventing infection due to Aspergillus spp in lung transplant recipients. However, the liposome contains a large quantity of phospholipids, and inhalation of these substances could potentially change the composition of pulmonary surfactant. The aim of this study was to determine the lipid composition of pulmonary surfactant in patients receiving inhaled liposomal amphotericin B prophylaxis., Methods: A prospective, open, controlled multicenter study was conducted in 2 groups: 19 lung transplant recipients who received regular prophylaxis with inhaled amphotericin B (study group) and 19 recipients who did not receive inhaled prophylaxis (control group). From both groups, 15 ml of the third aliquot of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid was obtained and phospholipid content determined in the active fraction of surfactant (large aggregates) and in the inactive fraction (small aggregates). Large aggregate cholesterol content was also determined., Results: Patient demographic data and characteristics were similar in the 2 groups. No between-group differences in median phospholipid content were found for large aggregates (study group, 0.4 [range, 0.18-1.9] μmol vs controls, 0.36 [range 2.15-0.12] μmol; p = 0.69) or small aggregates (study group, 0.23 [range, 0.1-0.58] μmol vs controls, 0.29 [range, 0.18-0.65] μmol; p = 0.33). The small aggregate-to-large aggregate phospholipid ratio, commonly used as a marker of alveolar injury, showed no differences between the groups (study group, 0.56 vs controls, 0.69; p = 0.28). Nor were there differences in the cholesterol content of large aggregates (study group, 0.04 μmol [range 0.01-0.1] vs controls, 0.04 μmol [range 0.02-0.27); p = 0.13)., Conclusions: These results seem to indicate that prophylaxis with nebulized liposomal amphotericin B does not cause changes in the lipid content of pulmonary surfactant., (Copyright © 2013 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The antiproliferative effect of everolimus provides a therapeutic option in the immunosuppression therapy of lung transplantation, by reducing both the risk of acute rejection and the process of progressive fibrosis that determines chronic graft rejection. However, few data on the use of everolimus in lung transplantation have been published to date, and the specific indications of the drug, along with the most adequate time for its introduction or dosing, have not been defined yet. The aim of this article is to propose recommendations for the use of everolimus in lung transplant recipients, including indications, dosing schedules and the use of concomitant immunosuppression. This consensus document has been developed by experts of all the Spanish lung transplant groups from the review of the existing literature and the clinical experience., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The present guidelines have been prepared with the consensus of at least one representative of each of the hospitals with lung transplantation programs in Spain. In addition, prior to their publication, these guidelines have been reviewed by a group of prominent reviewers who are recognized for their professional experience in the field of lung transplantation. Within the following pages, the reader will find the selection criteria for lung transplantation candidates, when and how to remit a patient to a transplantation center and, lastly, when to add the patient to the waiting list. A level of evidence has been identified for the most relevant questions. Our intention is for this document to be a practical guide for pulmonologists who do not directly participate in lung transplantations but who should consider this treatment for their patients. Finally, these guidelines also propose an information form in order to compile in an organized manner the patient data of the potential candidate for lung transplantation, which are relevant in order to be able to make the best decisions possible., (Copyright © 2011 SEPAR. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)

Seventy-six cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seropositive lung transplant recipients receiving valganciclovir (900 mg/day) for CMV prophylaxis were compared with a group of 87 patients receiving oral ganciclovir (3000 mg/day). Prophylaxis was administered to day 120 post-transplantation and follow-up was 1 year. In addition, a study was conducted on risk factors for CMV infection/disease. CMV disease incidence was 7.9% and 16.1% for valganciclovir and oral ganciclovir, respectively (p = 0.11). Patients receiving valganciclovir had fewer viral syndromes (2.6% vs. 11.5%, p < 0.05), a similar rate of tissue-invasive disease (5.2% vs. 4.6%, p = ns), longer time-to-onset of CMV infection/disease (197.5 vs. 155.2 days, p < 0.05), and a lower probability of infection/disease while on prophylaxis (1.3% vs. 12.6%, p < 0.01). Nonetheless, leukopenia incidence was higher with valganciclovir (15.8% vs. 2.3%, p < 0.01), as was the need for treatment withdrawal due to adverse effects (11.8% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.01). CMV infection was similar in both groups (32.9% vs. 34.5%). Induction therapy with basiliximab and glucocorticosteroid treatment were independent risk factors for developing CMV infection/disease. In conclusion, valganciclovir prophylaxis results in a low incidence of CMV disease in lung transplant recipients and appears more effective than oral ganciclovir. Despite the comparatively higher incidence of adverse events with valganciclovir, the drug can be considered safe for prophylaxis.