Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Modulating immunosuppression in liver transplant patients with COVID-19
  1. Manuel Rodriguez-Peralvarez1,2,3,
  2. Magdalena Salcedo3,4,
  3. Jordi Colmenero3,5,
  4. Jose Antonio Pons6
  1. 1 Hepatology and Liver Transplantation, Reina Sofia University Hospital, Cordoba, Andalucía, Spain
  2. 2 Grupo G02, Maimonides Institute of Biomedical Research of Córdoba (IMIBIC), Córdoba, Spain
  3. 3 CIBEREHD, Madrid, Madrid, Spain
  4. 4 Hepatology, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Madrid, Spain
  5. 5 Hepatology and Liver Transplantation, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain
  6. 6 Virgen de la Arrixaca University Hospital, El Palmar, Murcia, Spain
  1. Correspondence to Dr Manuel Rodriguez-Peralvarez, Hepatology and Liver Transplantation, Reina Sofia University Hospital, Cordoba, Andalucía, Spain; ropeml{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

We read with great interest the COVID-LT study by C Becchetti et al,1 which included 57 liver transplant (LT) patients from 12 European institutions who were diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Simultaneously, the Spanish Society of Liver Transplantation (SETH) has conducted a nationwide prospective study including 22 transplant institutions and 111 LT patients with COVID-19.2 Since there were only nine overlapped cases, both cohorts add up to 159 LT patients and taken together their close analysis (table 1) may derive in practical conclusions.

View this table:
Table 1

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of LT patients included in the European COVID-LT cohort and in the nationwide study from the Spanish Society of Liver Transplantation (SETH)

The crude incidence of COVID-19 was increased in the SETH study as compared with the COVID-LT study (0.84% vs 0.48%), even with a shorter recruitment period. This could be explained because the SETH study was performed during the outbreak period in Spain, one of the toughest in Europe.3 The SETH study …

View Full Text


  • Contributors MRP drafted the manuscript; MS, JC and JAP critically reviewed the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors have approved the final version of the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.