ArticleKorean journal of transplantation2020
Effectiveness of valacyclovir prophylaxis against the occurrence of cytomegalovirus infection in kidney transplant recipients.
Article in Korean journal of transplantation, 2020. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Valacyclovir for the prevention of cytomegalovirus infection after kidney transplantation.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Laboratory diagnostic testing for cytomegalovirus infection in solid organ transplant patients.Korean journal of transplantation · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a crucial infection in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) despite advancements in diagnostic and treatment methods. There are still many controversies about the ways to prevent CMV infection. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 153 KTRs who underwent kidney transplantation (KT) between September 2013 and January 2016. We classified KTRs into two groups: valacyclovir prophylaxis group (intravenous ganciclovir for 2 weeks after KT, followed by oral valacyclovir for 3 months) and historical control group (only intravenous ganciclovir for 2 weeks after KT). We evaluated the incidence of CMV infection, clinical outcomes, CMV-free survival rate between the two groups and risk factors for the development of CMV infection. Results: Mean time between KT and diagnosis of CMV infection was 4.5±3.3 months. The valacyclovir prophylaxis group showed lower incidence of CMV infection than the historical control group (21.7% vs. 43.9%, P=0.011). The valacyclovir prophylaxis group showed higher CMV-free survival rate than the control group (P=0.011). In multivariable-adjusted analysis, independent risk factors for the development of CMV infection were no valacyclovir prophylaxis, older age at KT, thymoglobulin induction, and delayed graft function. Conclusions: Valacyclovir prophylaxis for 3 months showed significant reduction in the incidence of CMV infection in KTRs. Therefore, we suggest valacyclovir prophylaxis for 3 months in KTRs with risk factors such as old age, thymoglobulin induction, and delayed graft function.
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.