Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Böbrek nakli yapılan hastalarda nakil öncesi ve nakil sonrası enfeksiyon etkenlerinin sıklığı

Year 2022, Volume: 47 Issue: 3, 1050 - 1058, 30.09.2022
https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.1099130

Abstract

Amaç: Böbrek nakli, böbrek yetmezliğinin en önemli ve başarılı tedavi yöntemidir. Bu çalışmada, böbrek nakli alıcılarında nakil öncesi ve nakil sonrası ilk altı ayda Cytomegalovirus (CMV), BK virüs (BKV) ve bakteriyel etkenlerin sıklığının araştırılması amaçlanmıştır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Fakültemiz Organ Nakli Merkezinde böbrek nakli yapılan hastalardan, nakilden bir hafta önce ve nakilden sonra birinci, üçüncü ve altıncı aylarda alınan kan örneklerinde Real-time PCR ile CMV ve BKV araştırıldı. Kan, idrar, balgam/yara (gerekiyor ise) kültürleri yapıldı. İdrar sitolojisinde Decoy hücreleri değerlendirildi.
Bulgular: Böbrek nakli alıcılarının yaş ortalaması 32,60±11,71 28 (% 62,2)’i erkek ve 39 (% 86,7)’u akraba olan canlı vericili, altısı kadavra vericili idi. Nakil sonrası 11/38 (% 28,9) hastada BKV, 25/41 (% 60,9) hastada CMV, 11/31 (% 35,4) hastada Decoy hücre pozitiflikleri saptandı. Real-time PCR pozitifliği en yüksek oran BKV için üçüncü ve altıncı aylarda iken, CMV için birinci ay olup altıncı aya doğru giderek azalma gösterdi. İdrar kültüründe Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, albicans-dışı Candida, Enterococcus faecalis, kan kültüründe Staphylococcus hominis, Streptecoccus epidermidis, solunum yolu örneklerinin kültüründe Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Aspergillus fumigatus ve Candida albicans üredi..
Sonuç: Böbrek nakli alıcılarımızda bakteriyel enfeksiyonlar erken dönemde gelişti. Real-time PCR pozitiflik oranı en yüksek BKV için üçüncü ve altıncı aylarda iken CMV için birinci ay olup altıncı aya doğru giderek azalma gösterdi. Böbrek nakil hastalarında Decoy hücre pozitifliği de BKV enfeksiyonu tanısı için önemli olabilir.

Supporting Institution

ÇUKUROVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ

References

  • 1. Daskalaki E, Koukoulaki M, Bakalis A, Papastamopolulos V, Belesiotou E, Perivolioti E, et al. Blood stream infections in renal transplant recipients: a single centre study. Transplantation Proceedings. 2014; 46:3191-3193.
  • 2. Karadeniz A. Böbrek transplantı alıcılarında transplantasyon sonrası dönemde görülen İnfeksiyonların sıklığı ve özellikleri. Uzmanlık Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları ve Klinik Mikrobiyoloji Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul, 2008.
  • 3. Svabodova I. Honsova. C. Infections after kidney transplantation. Patol. 2015 ;51(3):120-2.
  • 4. Novotna E, Viklicky O. BK viral infection after renal transplantation..Vnitr Lek. 2008 Sep;54(9):835-41.
  • 5. Kaya Ş, Ay N, Alp V, Beyazıt Ü, Anıl M, Kaya S, et al. Böbrek nakli yapılan hastalarda idrar yolu enfeksiyonları: Sıklığı, etkenler ve risk faktörleri. Fırat Med J, 2015; 20(3):161-164.
  • 6. GarciaPrado ME, Cordero E, Cabello V, Pereira P, Torrubia FJ, Ruiz M, et al.Complicaciones infecciosas en 159 receptores de trasplante renal consecutivos ınfectious diseases in 159 consecutive kidney transplant recipients. Enfermeda desınfecciosasy microbiologia clinica,2009; 27(1): 22-27.
  • 7. Aytutuldu A, Kurtaran B, Paydaş S, Candevir A, Balal M, Demir E, et al.Renal transplantasyon sonrası erken dönemde görülen üriner sistem enfeksiyonlarının epidemiyolojisi ve risk faktörleri. ANKEM Derg, 2010;24(4): 220-226
  • 8. Arencibia N, AgüeraML, Rodelo C, Lopez I, SanchezAgesta M, Hurtarte A, et al. Short-term out come of untreated versus treated asymptomatic bacteri uria in renal transplant patients. Transplantation proceeding, 2016;48:2941-2943.
  • 9. Adamska Z, Karczewski M, Cichanska L, Wieckowska B, Malkiewicz T, Mahadea D, et al.Bacterial Infections in Renal Transplant Recipients. Transplantation Procedings, 2015;47:1808-1812
  • 10. Miller MH, Alexander BD, Sudan DL, Pieper C, Schmader KE. Infections after kidney transplantation. Does age matter? ClinicalTransplantation 2019; 33(4) Erişim:https://doi.org/10.1111/ctr.13516.
  • 11. Kawecki D, Wszola M, Kwiatkowski A, Grzelak AS, Durlik M, Paczek L, et al.Bacterial and fungal infections in the early post-transplant period after kidney transplantation: etiolıgıcal agents and their susceptibility, Transplantation Proceedings, 2014; 46: 2733-2737.
  • 12. Kalra V, Agarwal SK, Khilnani GC, Kapil A, Dar L, Singh UB,etal.Spectrum of pulmonary infections in renal transplant recipients in the tropics: a single centre study. İnternational Urology and Nephrology, 2005;37:551-559.
  • 13. Yu LX, Zeng MX.Pulmonary fungal infection after renal transplantation: analysis of 40 cases. Journal of Southern Medical Üniversity/ Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao, 2016; 36(6):880-3.
  • 14. Ersoy A, Gültepe A, Sayılar EI, Ayar Y, Akalın H, Coşkun F, et al. CMV profilaksisi alan böbrek nakli olan hastalarda CMV enfeksiyonu sıklığı ve risk faktörlerinin değerlendirilmesi, Türk Mikrobiyoloji Cem Derg, 2013; 43(3): 84-89.
  • 15. Erkmen PE, Yıldız S, Derici ZS, Avkan OV, Sayıner AA, Ellidokuz H, et al. Böbrek nakli alıcılarında Sitomegalovirüs enfeksiyonu ve hastalığının araştırılması Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi hastanesi deneyimi, Türkiye Organ nakli kuruluşları koordinasyon derneği XII. Kongresi.,Trabzon 2018: 80.
  • 16. Eidgahi ES, Lotfi Z, Tayefi M, Bahrami A, Shams SF, Shakeri S, et al.İncidence and risk factors of Common viral infections among rena ltransplant recipients during the first year post-transplant in North-eastern Iran, Saudi j KidneyDisTranspl, 2019;30:597-605.
  • 17. Alessandro MD, Poli L, LaiQ, Gaeta A, Nazzari C, Garofalo M ,et al. Automated ıntelligent Microscopy for the recognition of decoy cells in urine samples of kidney transplant patients, Transplantation Proceedings, 2019;51:157-159.
  • 18. Pakfetrat M, Yaghobi R, Salmanpoor Z, Roozbeh J, Torabinezhad S, Kadkhodaei S. Frequency of Polyomavirus BK infection in kidney transplant patients suspected to nephropathy, Int J Organ Transplant Med., 2015;6(2):77-84.
  • 19. Sanchez DM, Garcia LJ, Jimenez IL, Lujan IMS, Soriano MJG, Vinas SL, et al. Renal function İmpairment in kidney transplantation: İmportance of early BK virus detection,Transplantation proceedings, 2019;51:350-352.
  • 20. Alagöz S. Renal Transplant Hastalarında BK Virus Enfeksiyonu. Uzmanlık Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Cerrahpaşa Tıp Fakültesi İç hastalıkları Ana Bilim Dalı, İstanbul,2014.
  • 21. Maia TMC, Silva SFR, Silva SL, Holanda MC, Nascimento JM, Ferreira MVP. Polyomavirus- Infected decoy cells in cytocentrifuged urine cytology specimens from renal transplant recipients, Acta cytologica,2011;55:445-448.
  • 22. Gouvea ALF, Cosendey RIJ, Carvalho FR, Varella RB, Souza CF, Lopes PF, et al. Pilot study of early Monitoring using urinary screening for BK polyomavirus as a strategy for prevention of BKV nephropathy İn kidney transplantation, Transplantation Proceedings, 2016;48:2310-2314.
  • 23. Chakera A, Dyar OJ, Hughes E, Bennett S, Hughes D, Roberts ISD. Detection of polyomavirus BK Reactivation after renal transplantation using an intensive decoy cell surveillance program is cost- effective, Transplantation, 2011;92:1018-1023.

Frequency of pre- and post-transplant infectious agents in kidney transplant patients

Year 2022, Volume: 47 Issue: 3, 1050 - 1058, 30.09.2022
https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.1099130

Abstract

Purpose: Renal transplantation is the most important and successful treatment method for renal failure. In this study, it was aimed to investigate the frequency of Cytomegalovirus (CMV), BK virus (BKV) and bacterial agents in kidney transplant recipient (KTR)s before and in the first six months after transplantation.
Materials and Methods: CMV and BKV were investigated by Real-time PCR in blood samples taken from patients who underwent kidney transplantation at the Organ Transplantation Center of our faculty, one week before the transplantation and in the first, third and sixth months after transplantation. Blood, urine, respiratory tract /wound (if necessary) cultures were performed. Decoy cells were evaluated in urine cytology.
Results: The mean age of KTRs was 32.60±11.71 years, 28 (62.2%) were male. Donor origins were living related donors 39 (86.7%) and cadaveric 6 (13.3%). After transplantation, BKV was detected in 11/38 (28.9%) patients, CMV was found in 25/41 (60.9%) patients, and Decoy cell positivity was detected in 11/31 (35.4%) patients. While the highest rate of Real-time PCR positivities were in the third months and sixth months for BKV and first, month for CMV and gradually decreased towards the sixth month. Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Candida nonalbicans, Enterococcus faecalis were most commonly grown in urine culture. Staphylococcus hominis, Streptecoccus epidermidis, were grown in blood culture. Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Aspergillus fumigatus and Candida albicans grew in the culture of respiratory tract samples.
Conclusion: Bacterial infections developed early in our KTRs. While the highest Real-time PCR positivity rate was in the third and sixth months for BKV, it was the first month for CMV and gradually decreased towards the sixth month. Decoy cell positivity may be also important for diagnosis of BKV infection in KTRs.

References

  • 1. Daskalaki E, Koukoulaki M, Bakalis A, Papastamopolulos V, Belesiotou E, Perivolioti E, et al. Blood stream infections in renal transplant recipients: a single centre study. Transplantation Proceedings. 2014; 46:3191-3193.
  • 2. Karadeniz A. Böbrek transplantı alıcılarında transplantasyon sonrası dönemde görülen İnfeksiyonların sıklığı ve özellikleri. Uzmanlık Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları ve Klinik Mikrobiyoloji Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul, 2008.
  • 3. Svabodova I. Honsova. C. Infections after kidney transplantation. Patol. 2015 ;51(3):120-2.
  • 4. Novotna E, Viklicky O. BK viral infection after renal transplantation..Vnitr Lek. 2008 Sep;54(9):835-41.
  • 5. Kaya Ş, Ay N, Alp V, Beyazıt Ü, Anıl M, Kaya S, et al. Böbrek nakli yapılan hastalarda idrar yolu enfeksiyonları: Sıklığı, etkenler ve risk faktörleri. Fırat Med J, 2015; 20(3):161-164.
  • 6. GarciaPrado ME, Cordero E, Cabello V, Pereira P, Torrubia FJ, Ruiz M, et al.Complicaciones infecciosas en 159 receptores de trasplante renal consecutivos ınfectious diseases in 159 consecutive kidney transplant recipients. Enfermeda desınfecciosasy microbiologia clinica,2009; 27(1): 22-27.
  • 7. Aytutuldu A, Kurtaran B, Paydaş S, Candevir A, Balal M, Demir E, et al.Renal transplantasyon sonrası erken dönemde görülen üriner sistem enfeksiyonlarının epidemiyolojisi ve risk faktörleri. ANKEM Derg, 2010;24(4): 220-226
  • 8. Arencibia N, AgüeraML, Rodelo C, Lopez I, SanchezAgesta M, Hurtarte A, et al. Short-term out come of untreated versus treated asymptomatic bacteri uria in renal transplant patients. Transplantation proceeding, 2016;48:2941-2943.
  • 9. Adamska Z, Karczewski M, Cichanska L, Wieckowska B, Malkiewicz T, Mahadea D, et al.Bacterial Infections in Renal Transplant Recipients. Transplantation Procedings, 2015;47:1808-1812
  • 10. Miller MH, Alexander BD, Sudan DL, Pieper C, Schmader KE. Infections after kidney transplantation. Does age matter? ClinicalTransplantation 2019; 33(4) Erişim:https://doi.org/10.1111/ctr.13516.
  • 11. Kawecki D, Wszola M, Kwiatkowski A, Grzelak AS, Durlik M, Paczek L, et al.Bacterial and fungal infections in the early post-transplant period after kidney transplantation: etiolıgıcal agents and their susceptibility, Transplantation Proceedings, 2014; 46: 2733-2737.
  • 12. Kalra V, Agarwal SK, Khilnani GC, Kapil A, Dar L, Singh UB,etal.Spectrum of pulmonary infections in renal transplant recipients in the tropics: a single centre study. İnternational Urology and Nephrology, 2005;37:551-559.
  • 13. Yu LX, Zeng MX.Pulmonary fungal infection after renal transplantation: analysis of 40 cases. Journal of Southern Medical Üniversity/ Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao, 2016; 36(6):880-3.
  • 14. Ersoy A, Gültepe A, Sayılar EI, Ayar Y, Akalın H, Coşkun F, et al. CMV profilaksisi alan böbrek nakli olan hastalarda CMV enfeksiyonu sıklığı ve risk faktörlerinin değerlendirilmesi, Türk Mikrobiyoloji Cem Derg, 2013; 43(3): 84-89.
  • 15. Erkmen PE, Yıldız S, Derici ZS, Avkan OV, Sayıner AA, Ellidokuz H, et al. Böbrek nakli alıcılarında Sitomegalovirüs enfeksiyonu ve hastalığının araştırılması Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi hastanesi deneyimi, Türkiye Organ nakli kuruluşları koordinasyon derneği XII. Kongresi.,Trabzon 2018: 80.
  • 16. Eidgahi ES, Lotfi Z, Tayefi M, Bahrami A, Shams SF, Shakeri S, et al.İncidence and risk factors of Common viral infections among rena ltransplant recipients during the first year post-transplant in North-eastern Iran, Saudi j KidneyDisTranspl, 2019;30:597-605.
  • 17. Alessandro MD, Poli L, LaiQ, Gaeta A, Nazzari C, Garofalo M ,et al. Automated ıntelligent Microscopy for the recognition of decoy cells in urine samples of kidney transplant patients, Transplantation Proceedings, 2019;51:157-159.
  • 18. Pakfetrat M, Yaghobi R, Salmanpoor Z, Roozbeh J, Torabinezhad S, Kadkhodaei S. Frequency of Polyomavirus BK infection in kidney transplant patients suspected to nephropathy, Int J Organ Transplant Med., 2015;6(2):77-84.
  • 19. Sanchez DM, Garcia LJ, Jimenez IL, Lujan IMS, Soriano MJG, Vinas SL, et al. Renal function İmpairment in kidney transplantation: İmportance of early BK virus detection,Transplantation proceedings, 2019;51:350-352.
  • 20. Alagöz S. Renal Transplant Hastalarında BK Virus Enfeksiyonu. Uzmanlık Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Cerrahpaşa Tıp Fakültesi İç hastalıkları Ana Bilim Dalı, İstanbul,2014.
  • 21. Maia TMC, Silva SFR, Silva SL, Holanda MC, Nascimento JM, Ferreira MVP. Polyomavirus- Infected decoy cells in cytocentrifuged urine cytology specimens from renal transplant recipients, Acta cytologica,2011;55:445-448.
  • 22. Gouvea ALF, Cosendey RIJ, Carvalho FR, Varella RB, Souza CF, Lopes PF, et al. Pilot study of early Monitoring using urinary screening for BK polyomavirus as a strategy for prevention of BKV nephropathy İn kidney transplantation, Transplantation Proceedings, 2016;48:2310-2314.
  • 23. Chakera A, Dyar OJ, Hughes E, Bennett S, Hughes D, Roberts ISD. Detection of polyomavirus BK Reactivation after renal transplantation using an intensive decoy cell surveillance program is cost- effective, Transplantation, 2011;92:1018-1023.
There are 23 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Clinical Sciences
Journal Section Research
Authors

Suzan Dinkçi 0000-0002-8044-6031

Filiz Kibar 0000-0003-2983-2399

Erkan Demir 0000-0003-2676-5346

Saime Paydas 0000-0001-6651-8265

Seyda Erdoğan 0000-0002-4113-2080

Akgün Yaman 0000-0003-3309-3074

Publication Date September 30, 2022
Acceptance Date July 17, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 47 Issue: 3

Cite

MLA Dinkçi, Suzan et al. “Böbrek Nakli yapılan Hastalarda Nakil öncesi Ve Nakil Sonrası Enfeksiyon Etkenlerinin sıklığı”. Cukurova Medical Journal, vol. 47, no. 3, 2022, pp. 1050-8, doi:10.17826/cumj.1099130.