Back
For best output, select "Paper Size" as "A4" and "Margin" as "0" or "None".
To save or print to PDF, please select Print Destination > Save as PDF, enable Background Graphics under "More Settings", then click "Save".
During the congress, E-Posters will be accessible to all participants on the congress website 24/7, as well as in the E-poster stations in the congress center.
Preparing your E-Poster
Please review the E-Poster format requirements carefully when preparing your E-Poster. Should your E-Poster not meet the mentioned requirements, it may not be displayed as described above.
E-Poster Submission Deadline
Please prepare and upload your E-Poster no later than March 14, 2026 11.59PM CET. After this date, you will no longer be able to prepare and upload your E-poster and it will not be displayed and accessible on the congress website.
Please follow the instructions below to input your abstract title.
Abstract titles should be brief and reflect the content of the abstract.
Monitoring CMV is essential in transplant patients to detect reactivation early and prevent serious complications. However, excessive testing can lead to unnecessary interventions and costs. Finding the right balance enables timely detection while reducing patient burden, improving outcomes, and optimising healthcare resources. We analysed the results of CMV monitoring in our local cohort, as outlined in our current guidelines. The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of our current practice.
All renal patients transplanted from January 1, 2015, to April 23, 2025, who were under hospital follow-up were identified and categorised according to their CMV risk group: high-risk (D+R-), intermediate-risk (D+R+ and D-R+) and low-risk (D-R-). The study population consisted of all individuals who had ever been included in the cohort, regardless of their current status (alive and under follow-up, deceased, or no longer followed). Patient identification was based on records from transplant specialist nurses, with all laboratory and clinical data extracted from our electronic health record systems. Results were systematically tabulated, and the point at which CMV monitoring was ceased was determined by visually identifying when the rate of positivity decreased to a low level and remained stable.
A total of 217 patients were identified, with 12 patients excluded due to incomplete D/R status records.
The results showed that 613 CMV tests were conducted in the low-risk cohort (n = 70), yielding only one positive result over ten years. This patient remained below the treatment threshold and later tested negative again, indicating that no treatable CMV cases were identified in this group during the study period.
In the high-risk group (n = 41), about 34% of patients were positive at least once within the first two years after transplant, with a decline in positivity afterwards. When asymptomatic and using a viral load of >500 IU/ml as the treatment threshold, the treatable positivity rate falls further to 12% and 4.8% at 12 months and 17 months, respectively.
The intermediate-risk group (n = 94) exhibited a similar pattern to the high-risk cohort, characterised by early positivity followed by a decline in later years. The highest density of positive results occurred within the first 500 days, with predominantly negative test results over 1000 days from transplantation. Patients who remained consistently negative during the first 2-3 years continued to be negative. 3 patients with late positives (>1000 days) showed repeat positive tests in later years. 1 patient became positive after radiotherapy.
The data is limited by incomplete follow-up and missing D/R data; however, the results suggest that routine testing can be discontinued entirely for the low-risk group at our centre. For the intermediate and high-risk groups, routine testing can be safely halted after three years, with ongoing reliance on symptom monitoring. Having established appropriate routine monitoring durations, the next step is to identify which subtypes of high- and intermediate-risk groups can cease monitoring earlier and to assess the optimal frequency of monitoring. Streamlining testing enables healthcare providers to focus monitoring on patients who genuinely need it, reducing unnecessary interventions and making better use of hospital resources.
