Cytomegalovirus infection is a frequent complication after transplantation. This infection occurs due to transmission from the transplanted organ, due to reactivation of latent infection, or after a primary infection in seronegative patients and can be defined as follows: latent infection, active infection, viral syndrome or invasive disease. This condition occurs mainly between 30 and 90 days after transplantation. In hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in particular, infection usually occurs within the first 30 days after transplantation and in the presence of graft-versus-host disease. The major risk factors are when the recipient is cytomegalovirus seronegative and the donor is seropositive as well as when lymphocyte-depleting antibodies are used. There are two methods for the diagnosis of cytomegalovirus infection: the pp65 antigenemia assay and polymerase chain reaction. Serology has no value for the diagnosis of active disease, whereas histology of the affected tissue and bronchoalveolar lavage analysis are useful in the diagnosis of invasive disease. Cytomegalovirus disease can be prevented by prophylaxis (the administration of antiviral drugs to all or to a subgroup of patients who are at higher risk of viral replication) or by preemptive therapy (the early diagnosis of viral replication before development of the disease and prescription of antiviral treatment to prevent the appearance of clinical disease). The drug used is intravenous or oral ganciclovir; oral valganciclovir; or, less frequently, valacyclovir. Prophylaxis should continue for 90 to 180 days. Treatment is always indicated in cytomegalovirus disease, and the gold-standard drug is intravenous ganciclovir. Treatment should be given for 2 to 3 weeks and should be continued for an additional 7 days after the first negative result for viremia.

Objective: To assess whether a restrictive strategy of RBC transfusion reduces 28-day mortality when compared with a liberal strategy in cancer patients with septic shock. Design: Single center, randomized, double-blind controlled trial. Setting: Teaching hospital. Patients: Adult cancer patients with septic shock in the first 6 hours of ICU admission. Interventions: Patients were randomized to the liberal (hemoglobin threshold, < 9 g/dL) or to the restrictive strategy (hemoglobin threshold, < 7 g/dL) of RBC transfusion during ICU stay. Measurements and Main Results: Patients were randomized to the liberal (n = 149) or to the restrictive transfusion strategy (n = 151) group. Patients in the liberal group received more RBC units than patients in the restrictive group (1 [0–3] vs 0 [0–2] unit; p < 0.001). At 28 days after randomization, mortality rate in the liberal group (primary endpoint of the study) was 45% (67 patients) versus 56% (84 patients) in the restrictive group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53–1.04; p = 0.08) with no differences in ICU and hospital length of stay. At 90 days after randomization, mortality rate in the liberal group was lower (59% vs 70%) than in the restrictive group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.53–0.97; p = 0.03). Conclusions: We observed a survival trend favoring a liberal transfusion strategy in patients with septic shock when compared with the restrictive strategy. These results went in the opposite direction of the a priori hypothesis and of other trials in the field and need to be confirmed.

Since 1963, when the first human liver transplantation (LT) was performed by Thomas Starzl, the world has witnessed 50 years of development in surgical techniques, immunosuppression, organ allocation, donor selection, and the indications and contraindications for LT. This has led to the mainstream, well-established procedure that has saved innumerable lives worldwide. Today, there are hundreds of liver transplant centres in over 80 countries. This review aims to describe the main aspects of LT regarding the progressive changes that have occurred over the years. We herein review historical aspects since the first experimental studies and the first attempts at human transplantation. We also provide an overview of immunosuppressive agents and their potential side effects, the evolution of the indications and contraindications of LT, the evolution of survival according to different time periods, and the evolution of methods of organ allocation.

Clonal outbreaks due to azole-resistant Candida parapsilosis (ARCP) isolates have been reported in numerous studies, but the environmental niche of such isolates has yet to be defined. Herein, we aimed to identify the environmental niche of ARCP isolates causing unremitting clonal outbreaks in an adult ICU from a Brazilian cancer referral center. C. parapsilosis sensu stricto isolates recovered from blood cultures, pericatheter skins, healthcare workers (HCW), and nosocomial surfaces were genotyped by multilocus microsatellite typing (MLMT). Antifungal susceptibility testing was performed by the EUCAST (European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing) broth microdilution reference method and ERG11 was sequenced to determine the azole resistance mechanism. Approximately 68% of isolates were fluconazole-resistant (76/112), including pericatheter skins (3/3, 100%), blood cultures (63/70, 90%), nosocomial surfaces (6/11, 54.5%), and HCW’s hands (4/28, 14.2%). MLMT revealed five clusters: the major cluster contained 88.2% of ARCP isolates (67/76) collected from blood (57/70), bed (2/2), pericatheter skin (2/3), from carts (3/7), and HCW’s hands (3/27). ARCP isolates were associated with a higher 30 day crude mortality rate (63.8%) than non-ARCP ones (20%, p = 0.008), and resisted two environmental decontamination attempts using quaternary ammonium. This study for the first time identified ARCP isolates harboring the Erg11-Y132F mutation from nosocomial surfaces and HCW’s hands, which were genetically identical to ARCP blood isolates. Therefore, it is likely that persisting clonal outbreak due to ARCP isolates was fueled by environmental sources. The resistance of Y132F ARCP isolates to disinfectants, and their potential association with a high mortality rate, warrant vigilant source control using effective environmental decontamination.

Organ transplantation is the only alternative for many patients with terminal diseases. The increasing disproportion between the high demand for organ transplants and the low rate of transplants actually performed is worrisome. Some of the causes of this disproportion are errors in the identification of potential organ donors and in the determination of contraindications by the attending staff. Therefore, the aim of the present document is to provide guidelines for intensive care multi-professional staffs for the recognition, assessment and acceptance of potential organ donors.