Cytomegalovirus seroprevalence among blood donors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background Screening for cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific antibodies is not routine in some settings. Thus, transfusion of blood products poses risks for susceptible individuals. Objectives To investigate the global pooled CMV seroprevalence among volunteer blood donors. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. The databases searched included Embase, Google Scholar, Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Data were extracted independently and analyzed using STATA version 11. Results The global seroprevalence of CMV IgG, CMV IgM, and both CMV IgM and IgG was 83.16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.55–87.77%, I2 = 99.5%), 13.77% (95% CI: 11.59–15.95%, I2 = 98.8%), and 23.78% (95% CI: 10.50–37.06%, I2 = 98.7), respectively. Conclusion The global seroprevalence of CMV was high among blood donors. Therefore, regular CMV screening should be conducted to identify CMV-seronegative blood donors.

Herpesvirus and neurological manifestations in patients with severe coronavirus disease

“…However, although the detection of herpesvirus in body fluids of patients in an immunosuppressed state is strongly suggestive of a reactivation, we cannot determine if that it is a reactivation or a primary infection. Although, it has been shown that the global prevalence of some herpesviruses is high, between 80- 90% [ 48 ], which includes the herpesviruses detected with high prevalence in our study cohort: Adane and Getawa [ 49 ], reported a global seroprevalence of CMV in blood donors of 83.16%, and Souza et al [ 50 ], in Brazil showed a seroprevalence of 96.4%. As for HHV-6 and 7, both are highly prevalent in the global population, and specific IgG antibodies for HHV-6 and to HHV-7 were detected in more than 90% of adults [ 51 ].…”

Discordance in serology for cytomegalovirus, Epstein‐Barr virus and toxoplasma among thoracic organ donors

“…First, it is possible that organ donors received blood products containing these antibodies. 3 Second, these critically ill donors may have developed primary CMV or EBV infection later during their hospitalization, although this is likely uncommon. 4 Third, differences in the assay sensitivity and analytical performance of the serologic tests could lead to a falsely-negative or falsely-positive result.…”