ArticleTransplantation2017
Effectiveness of Preemptive Therapy for Cytomegalovirus Disease in Pediatric Liver Transplantation.
Article in Transplantation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of antiviral prophylaxis on EBV viremia and posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders in solid organ transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Virology journal · 2025Pooled it
- Global research hotspots and trends of acute rejection after liver transplantation from 1988 to 2022: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Antiviral prophylaxis or preemptive therapy for cytomegalovirus after liver transplantation?: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Debates in Management and Treatment of CMV in Pediatric Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Case-Based Discussion.Pediatric transplantation · 2025Review
- Cytomegalovirus-RNA Accurately Identifies Clinically Significant Infection Needing Preemptive Therapy in Liver Transplanted Children: A Proof-of-Concept Study.Journal of medical virology · 2025Article
- Current and Emerging Antiviral Agents in the Prevention and Treatment of Cytomegalovirus in Pediatric Transplant Recipients.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2024Article
- A quick algorithmic review on management of viral infectious diseases in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- Antiviral Therapeutics in Pediatric Transplant Recipients.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2022Review
- Cytomegalovirus in the Pediatric Transplant Recipient: Where Are We Now?Transplantation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost pediatric liver transplantation (LT) centers administer long courses of prophylaxis against cytomegalovirus (CMV) without evidence of benefit and with significant drug exposure and costs. We aimed at evaluating overall outcomes, direct and putative indirect effects of CMV, possible impact of viremia and risk factors for CMV infection in pediatric LT recipients managed with ganciclovir-based preemptive therapy (PET).
methodsThe records of all the children who underwent LT between 2008 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed.
resultsOne hundred children were included. Three children had CMV disease; no CMV-related death or graft loss was recorded. The only identified risk factor for CMV infection was the donor/recipient serostatus (odds ratio, 17.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.88-157.87; P = 0.012), while viremia per se did not worsen LT outcomes, such as the incidence of acute rejection, Epstein-Barr virus infection, sepsis, biliary and vascular complications, nor graft dysfunction/loss or death at 3 and 5 years after LT. When compared with a historical cohort of children receiving ganciclovir prophylaxis, PET did not differ from prophylaxis for any of the selected outcomes, but was rather associated with lower antiviral drug exposure (6.4 ± 13 days vs 38.6 ± 14 days, P < 0.0001) and cost per patient (2.2 ± 3.9 k&OV0556; vs 6.6 ± 8.2 k&OV0556;, P = 0.001).
conclusionsPET is effective in controlling CMV in children receiving LT, with lower costs and lower exposure to antivirals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.