Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Hepatol. Jun 18, 2015; 7(11): 1494-1508
Published online Jun 18, 2015. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v7.i11.1494
Published online Jun 18, 2015. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v7.i11.1494
Ref. | No. of patients receiving CMVIg | Efficacy of CMVIg on immunology/survival |
Farges et al[80] | n = 19 | Significant reduction of acute rejection rate (19%) compared to recipients without CMVIg (48%; P = 0.01); no impact of on incidence of chronic rejection and bacterial infections |
Falagas et al[121] | n = 90 | Improved 1-yr survival (86% vs 72%; P = 0.029) and a clear trend towards improved long-term survival (68% vs 54%; P = 0.055). CMVIg as independent predictor of beneficial outcome at one year post-LT (P = 0.042) |
Bucuvalas et al[124] | n = 336 | Lower rate of acute rejection at 3-mo (31% vs 40%; P = 0.02); (CMV)Ig treatment as independent predictor for absence of acute rejection (HR = 0.73; P = 0.0019); significantly increased death-free allograft survival (HR = 0.57; P = 0.014) by (CMV)Ig |
Fisher et al[125] | n = 2805 | Significantly lower risk of graft loss and recipients' death (with or without additional antiviral agents; P < 0.001) at 7 yr post-LT; significantly higher 7-yr-survival rate after CMVIg monoprophylaxis (72%) vs no prophylaxis (67%; P = 0.02) |
- Citation: Kornberg A. Intravenous immunoglobulins in liver transplant patients: Perspectives of clinical immune modulation. World J Hepatol 2015; 7(11): 1494-1508
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5182/full/v7/i11/1494.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v7.i11.1494