Complicaciones infecciosas relacionadas con la asistencia circulatoria mecánica de corta duración en candidatos a trasplante cardiaco urgente / Infectious complications associated with short-term mechanical circulatory support in urgent heart transplant candidates

Introducción y objetivos: El uso de dispositivos de asistencia circulatoria mecánica de corta duración como puente a trasplante es frecuente en España. Se desconocen la epidemiología y la repercusión de las complicaciones infecciosas en estos pacientes. Métodos: Descripción sistemática de la epidemiología y análisis de la repercusión pronóstica de las complicaciones infecciosas en un registro multicéntrico retrospectivo de pacientes tratados con dispositivos de asistencia circulatoria mecánica de corta duración como puente a trasplante cardiaco urgente entre 2010 y 2015 en 16 hospitales españoles. Resultados: Se estudió a 249 pacientes; 87 (34,9%) de ellos tuvieron un total de 102 infecciones. La vía respiratoria fue la localización más frecuente (n=47; 46,1%). En 78 casos (76,5%) se obtuvo confirmación microbiológica; se aislaron en total 100 gérmenes causales, con predominio de bacterias gramnegativas (n=58, 58%). Los pacientes con complicaciones infecciosas presentaron mayor mortalidad durante el periodo de asistencia circulatoria mecánica (el 25,3 frente al 12,3%; p=0,009) y menor probabilidad de recibir un trasplante (el 73,6 frente al 85,2%; p=0,025) que los pacientes sin infección. La mortalidad posoperatoria tras el trasplante fue similar en ambos grupos (con infección, el 28,3%; sin infección, el 23,4%; p=0,471). Conclusiones: Los pacientes tratados con dispositivos de asistencia circulatoria mecánica de corta duración como puente al trasplante cardiaco están expuestos a un alto riesgo de complicaciones infecciosas, las cuales se asocian con una mayor mortalidad en espera del órgano (AU)

Introduction and objectives: Short-term mechanical circulatory support is frequently used as a bridge to heart transplant in Spain. The epidemiology and prognostic impact of infectious complications in these patients are unknown. Methods: Systematic description of the epidemiology of infectious complications and analysis of their prognostic impact in a multicenter, retrospective registry of patients treated with short-term mechanical devices as a bridge to urgent heart transplant from 2010 to 2015 in 16 Spanish hospitals. Results: We studied 249 patients, of which 87 (34.9%) had a total of 102 infections. The most frequent site was the respiratory tract (n=47; 46.1%). Microbiological confirmation was obtained in 78 (76.5%) episodes, with a total of 100 causative agents, showing a predominance of gram-negative bacteria (n=58, 58%). Compared with patients without infection, those with infectious complications showed higher mortality during the support period (25.3% vs 12.3%, P=.009) and a lower probability of receiving a transplant (73.6% vs 85.2%, P=.025). In-hospital posttransplant mortality was similar in the 2 groups (with infection: 28.3%; without infection: 23.4%; P=.471). Conclusions: Patients supported with temporary devices as a bridge to heart transplant are exposed to a high risk of infectious complications, which are associated with higher mortality during the organ waiting period (AU)

Effect of early conversion to everolimus together with prophylaxis with valganciclovir in the prevention of cytomegalovirus infection in heart transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Viral infections, especially cytomegalovirus (CMV), are a leading cause of early death and morbidity after heart transplantation. Several strategies have been used to minimize the risk, including universal prophylaxis with ganciclovir or valganciclovir and preemptive therapy. Lately, everolimus (EVE) efficacy studies have shown a protective effect against CMV infection. METHODS: We studied retrospectively a series of 223 heart transplant patients, dividing them into 5 groups according to CMV prevention strategy: 16 patients were at low risk for infection (negative recipient [R-]/negative donor [D-]) and received no treatment; 26 patients received prophylactic therapy with ganciclovir, 8 patients prophylaxis with valganciclovir, 145 patients received preemptive therapy and 28 patients prophylaxis with valganciclovir and early conversion to EVE. RESULTS: There were no cases of CMV infection in the low-risk group. There was 1 case of CMV infection in the group that received valganciclovir and conversion to EVE. Among the patients who received prophylaxis with ganciclovir or valganciclovir or preemptive therapy, CMV infection was detected in 68 patients (37%). CONCLUSIONS: Early conversion to EVE in addition to valganciclovir prophylaxis was superior to other strategies in our series for the prevention of CMV infection.