Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Liapis, H.
Right arrow Articles by Brennan, D. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Liapis, H.
Right arrow Articles by Brennan, D. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant (2003) 18: 397-402
© 2003 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association

CMV infection of the renal allograft is much more common than the pathology indicates: a retrospective analysis of qualitative and quantitative buffy coat CMV-PCR, renal biopsy pathology and tissue CMV-PCR

Helen Liapis1,, Gregory A. Storch3, D. Ashley Hill1, Jose Rueda2 and Daniel C. Brennan2

1 Department of Pathology and Immunology, 2 Department of Medicine and 3 Department of Pediatrics, Washington University, St Louis, MO, USA

Background. Quantitative blood polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for cytomegalovirus (CMV) is used to direct therapy in kidney transplant patients, but cytomegalic inclusions are rarely found in allograft renal biopsies even with an elevated serum creatinine and apparent CMV disease. The relationship between quantitative blood CMV and renal allograft pathology is unknown.

Methods. Thirteen biopsy samples were available for analysis from patients suspected of CMV disease, who had a buffy coat CMV-PCR drawn within 2–5 days of a renal allograft biopsy for an elevated creatinine. All were evaluated for CMV pathologically, by light microscopy, immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization and tissue PCR.

Results. Qualitative and quantitative buffy coat CMV-PCR were positive in 10/13 (77%) patients. Tissue CMV-PCR was positive in five (50%) biopsies, including two with CMV inclusions and three with no inclusions. Quantitative buffy coat CMV-PCR levels did not correlate with detection of CMV inclusions in renal tissue. Paradoxically, quantitative buffy coat CMV-PCR was low (239 and 538 copies/µg of DNA) when CMV inclusions were detected. All five biopsies with acute rejection were associated with CMV viraemia and two of the five with allograft CMV inclusions. A quantitative buffy coat CMV-PCR of <100 copies/µg of DNA ruled out disease with CMV inclusions.

Conclusions. CMV nephropathy is much more common than previously reported when sensitive techniques are used for detection in tissue. Acute rejection and CMV viraemia occur commonly together in patients at risk for CMV. Quantitative buffy coat CMV-PCR does not correlate with the presence of CMV inclusions. These findings have implications for management of patients who have elevated serum creatinine and are at risk for CMV disease.

Keywords: biopsy; blood; CMV-PCR; histopathology; kidney; transplant

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Helen Liapis, MD, Washington University School of Medicine, Department of Pathology and Immunology, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8118, St Louis, MO 63110-1093, USA. Email: liapis{at}path.wustl.edu


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
CJASNHome page
B. C. Weikert and E. A. Blumberg
Viral Infection after Renal Transplantation: Surveillance and Management
Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., March 1, 2008; 3(Supplement_2): S76 - S86.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.