ArticleTransplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society
Infections Management in the Lung Transplant Setting in Italy: A Web-Survey.
Article in Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society. 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.
- Managing Cytomegalovirus Infection in Lung Transplant Recipients in Real Life: Results of a French Multicenter Survey.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025Article
- Multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria in lung transplantation: a narrative review of infectious complications and current management.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionInfections significantly impact morbidity and mortality in lung transplant (LuTx) recipients. This survey focused on documenting current practices regarding the prevention and management of infections in LuTx in Italy.
methodsA 52-question survey was administered online in the period from December 1, 2023, to January 31, 2024, assessing center characteristics, Tx team organization, microbiological investigations, infection prevention, and management. All Italian LuTx centers were invited to participate.
resultsNine out of 10 Italian LuTx centers answered. Most centers (6/9, 67%) performed LuTx only on adults. Chronic infection or colonization by Mycobacterium abscessus and Burkholderia cenocepacia is considered a contraindication to LuTx in five and two centers, respectively. For cytomegalovirus D+/R- patients, prophylaxis is used in six centers (67%), with a variable duration from 3 to 12 months. Two centers also use IgG. Three centers (33%) use a pre-emptive strategy. Four centers (45%) screen for Human herpesvirus 8 infection. Regarding antibiotic prophylaxis, most centers (6/9, 67%) utilise a dual regimen of anti-pseudomonal penicillin plus glycopeptide. The two most common durations of antibiotic prophylaxis were 72 h and 7 days, each reported by two centers (22%). Targeted prophylaxis against fungal infections is employed by a minority of centers (4/9, 44%). Inhaled amphotericin B is the most common antifungal, used as targeted prophylaxis (2/4, 50%) and universal prophylaxis (2/5, 40%). Almost all centers (8/9, 89%) involve the Tx infectious diseases specialist in the recipient management since the pre-listing period.
conclusionThere is considerable heterogeneity in infection management among Italian LuTx centers. Establishing a shared platform for data collection and outcome evaluation is essential to improve infection management.
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.