Publication:
Efficacy and safety of conventional antiviral agents in preventive strategies for cytomegalovirus infection after kidney transplantation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

dc.contributor.authorNarisa Ruenroengbunen_US
dc.contributor.authorPawin Numthavajen_US
dc.contributor.authorTunlanut Sapankaewen_US
dc.contributor.authorKamolpat Chaiyakittisoponen_US
dc.contributor.authorAtiporn Ingsathiten_US
dc.contributor.authorGareth J. Mckayen_US
dc.contributor.authorJohn Attiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorAmmarin Thakkinstianen_US
dc.contributor.otherRamathibodi Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherSchool of Medicine and Public Healthen_US
dc.contributor.otherSilpakorn Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherSchool of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciencesen_US
dc.contributor.otherSlipakorn Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-04T09:00:58Z
dc.date.available2022-08-04T09:00:58Z
dc.date.issued2021-12-01en_US
dc.description.abstractCytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is common in kidney transplantation (KT). Antiviral-agents are used as universal prophylaxis. Our purpose aimed to compare and rank efficacy and safety. MEDLINE, Embase, SCOPUS, and CENTRAL were used from inception to September 2020 regardless language restriction. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the CMV infection/disease prophylaxis among antiviral-agents in adult KT recipients. Of 24 eligible RCTs, prophylactic valganciclovir (VGC) could significantly lower the overall CMV infection and disease risks than placebo with pooled risk differences (RDs) [95% confidence interval (CI)] of −0.36 (−0.54, −0.18) and −0.28 (−0.48, −0.08), respectively. Valacyclovir (VAC) and ganciclovir (GC) significantly decreased risks with the corresponding RDs of −0.25 (−0.32, −0.19) and −0.30 (−0.37, −0.22) for CMV infection and −0.26 (−0.40, −0.12) and −0.22 (−0.31, −0.12) for CMV disease. For subgroup analysis by seropositive-donor and seronegative-recipient (D+/R−), VGC and GC significantly lowered the risk of CMV infection/disease with RDs of −0.42 (−0.84, −0.01) and −0.35 (−0.60, −0.12). For pre-emptive strategies, GC lowered the incidence of CMV disease significantly with pooled RDs of −0.33 (−0.47, −0.19). VGC may be the best in prophylaxis of CMV infection/disease follow by GC. VAC might be an alternative where VGC and GC are not available.en_US
dc.identifier.citationTransplant International. Vol.34, No.12 (2021), 2720-2734en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/tri.14122en_US
dc.identifier.issn14322277en_US
dc.identifier.issn09340874en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85117948914en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/77496
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85117948914&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleEfficacy and safety of conventional antiviral agents in preventive strategies for cytomegalovirus infection after kidney transplantation: a systematic review and network meta-analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85117948914&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections