ArticleTransplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society2021
Empiric vs screening-based use of isoniazid for tuberculosis prophylaxis: Safety and effectiveness in lung transplant recipients in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hepatotoxicity induced by isoniazid in patients with latent tuberculosis infection: a meta-analysis.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2023Review
- Empiric vs screening-based use of isoniazid for tuberculosis prophylaxis: Safety and effectiveness in lung transplant recipients in Saudi Arabia.Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTuberculosis (TB) is a major complication following transplantation. The likelihood of TB may be increased in transplant patients living in TB-endemic areas such as Saudi Arabia. In areas where TB is less common, guidelines recommend isoniazid (INH) for TB prophylaxis depending on patient and donor screening results. However, in TB-endemic regions, studies have supported its use in all transplant patients regardless of TB screening results. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of administering INH prophylaxis therapy based on the TB screening results of lung transplant (LT) recipients.
methodsWe conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study on LT recipients. The outcomes were compared between patients who were administered screening-based prophylaxis (SBP) with INH based on their tuberculin skin tests (TSTs) or QuantiFERON results and those who were administered empirical prophylaxis (EP) with INH regardless of TB screening results. The primary endpoint was the incidence of TB infection, and the secondary endpoints were INH-induced hepatotoxicity and INH resistance.
resultsA total of 50 patients received SBP and 30 received EP. TB incidences were 8% and 0%, respectively (P = .0487). One of these patients had INH resistance, and one patient experienced INH-induced hepatotoxicity (P = .1591); both were in the SBP group.
conclusionThe low rates of TB infection, INH-induced hepatotoxicity, and INH resistance in the EP group suggest that INH prophylaxis appears to prevent TB and can be safely used in all LT recipients. However, prospective studies using large sample sizes are required to confirm these findings.
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.