Wexner Medical Center, Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Division, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Am J Transplant. 2015 Feb;15(2):472-81. doi: 10.1111/ajt.13044. Epub 2014 Dec 17.
We systematically reviewed and meta-analyze the efficacy of universal prophylaxis (UP) and preemptive (PE) strategies (using ganciclovir or valganciclovir) in preventing cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease (CMD) among liver transplant recipients (LTRs). We performed an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database till December 2013. Studies that assessed UP or PE for preventing CMD in LTRs were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The primary outcome was CMD, secondary outcomes being acute cellular rejection (ACR), graft loss (GL) and mortality. Due to the heterogeneity of comparative studies, an indirect comparison was performed. Pooled incidence rates with 95% confidence interval (CI) are calculated for each outcome using a random-effects model. Thirty-two studies involving 2456 LTRs were included. The majority of the studies were of low risk of bias. Irrespective of donor/recipient CMV sero-status, CMD was 10% with UP (95% CI: 6-14; I(2) = 87%; 16 studies, n = 1581) and 7% with PE (95% CI: 3-10; I(2) = 84%; 16 studies, n = 875) (mean difference 2.6; 95% CI: -3.25 to 8.45, p = 0.34). Likewise, ACR and mortality were similar with the two strategies. However, GL was significantly lower in the UP group, regardless of donor/recipient sero-status. In indirect comparison, the incidence of CMD, ACR and mortality in LTRs were similar with two strategies. Trials comparing the two strategies directly are needed.
我们系统地回顾和荟萃分析了普遍预防(UP)和先发制人(PE)策略(使用更昔洛韦或缬更昔洛韦)预防肝移植受者(LTR)巨细胞病毒(CMV)病(CMD)的疗效。我们对 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 数据库进行了电子检索,截止到 2013 年 12 月。纳入评估 LTR 中 UP 或 PE 预防 CMD 的研究。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估偏倚风险。主要结局是 CMD,次要结局是急性细胞排斥(ACR)、移植物丢失(GL)和死亡率。由于比较研究的异质性,进行了间接比较。使用随机效应模型计算每个结局的合并发生率及其 95%置信区间(CI)。纳入 32 项研究,涉及 2456 例 LTR。大多数研究的偏倚风险较低。无论供体/受体 CMV 血清状态如何,UP 的 CMD 发生率为 10%(95%CI:6-14;I²=87%;16 项研究,n=1581),PE 的 CMD 发生率为 7%(95%CI:3-10;I²=84%;16 项研究,n=875)(平均差异 2.6;95%CI:-3.25 至 8.45,p=0.34)。同样,两种策略的 ACR 和死亡率也相似。然而,无论供体/受体血清状态如何,UP 组的 GL 均显著降低。间接比较显示,两种策略的 LTR 中 CMD、ACR 和死亡率的发生率相似。需要进行直接比较两种策略的试验。