H1N1 novel influenza A in pregnant and immunocompromised patients

Lapinsky, Stephen E. MB, BCh, MSc, FRCPC

Critical Care Medicine:
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181c85d5f
Clinical Issues

Objective: To describe the increased risk of severe disease and the appropriate management of patients at high risk such as pregnant women and immunosuppressed patients who acquire novel influenza A (H1N1).

Design: Review of the literature regarding influenza A in these patient groups, and review of published and unpublished data with regard to novel influenza A (H1N1).

Main Results: Pregnant women are at increased risk for severe pneumonitis and respiratory failure from influenza infection, particularly during pandemics, including the current pandemic. Fetal morbidity is significant, usually resulting from maternal fever and severe hypoxemia. Early antiviral therapy using oseltamivir may be beneficial, and intensive care unit support should target adequate oxygenation at all times. Immunosuppressed patients are at increased risk for influenza, as well as at risk for more severe or prolonged infection. Patients after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, after lung transplantation, and those receiving chemotherapy for leukemia are at highest risk, whereas the risk for human immunodeficiency virus-infected individuals appears relatively low. Treatment with antiviral therapy may be beneficial, even after the usual cut-off of 48 hrs after symptom onset.

Conclusions: Optimal management of these patients is preventive by influenza vaccination, but the neuraminidase inhibitor antiviral agents provide effective treatment.

Author Information

From Mount Sinai Hospital and the Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

The author has not disclosed any potential conflicts of interest.

For information regarding this article, E-mail: stephen.lapinsky@utoronto.ca

Article Outline

The 2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza virus infection has been associated with a worldwide outbreak of febrile respiratory infection (1). Overall, the severity of this illness does not appear to be very different from that of seasonal influenza (2). However, the virus appears to have a predilection for infection of the lower respiratory tract (3), in some cases producing a severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, which is difficult to manage despite advanced ventilatory techniques. Certain patient groups are at increased risk for complications and mortality from this infection. This article reviews the manifestations and management of H1N1 infection in pregnant patients and in those with immune deficiency. Published literature on influenza A and previous pandemics were reviewed, as well as published and unpublished data from the current pandemic.

Back to Top | Article Outline
The Pregnant Patient: Increased Susceptibility

A number of changes occur in a pregnant woman's immune system to allow tolerance to paternally derived fetal antigens. Some suppression of cell-mediated immunity occurs, and maternal lymphocytes demonstrate a diminished proliferative response to soluble antigens and to allogeneic lymphocytes (4). Decreased numbers of T-helper cells have been documented, either because of an absolute decrease in numbers or because of a reduction in the CD4-to-CD8 ratio (4). These effects are balanced by an intact or possibly enhanced humoral immune response (5). The effect of these alterations on maternal immunity is a predisposition to more severe manifestations of certain infections, including influenza. Preliminary data from the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic from Australia noted that pregnant women with more severe disease had an immunoglobulin G subclass 2 deficiency (6). The significance of this finding remains unclear.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention therefore recommend trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in otherwise healthy women during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy,(7) although some reports suggest the risk-to-benefit ratio warrants vaccinations at all stages of pregnancy for women with certain comorbidities, and during pandemics (8).

Back to Top | Article Outline
Influenza Outcome in Pregnancy

Viral pneumonia is a serious concern in pregnancy, with reported increased mortality rates compared with the general population, particularly during pandemics. In general, younger patients tend to be at increased risk for severe disease during pandemics, whereas older patients are at risk in the decade after the pandemic (9). Pregnant women without comorbidities are at increased risk for seasonal influenza-related pulmonary hospitalization, with risk increasing with later gestation and with associated comorbidity (10). Interpandemic maternal mortality related to influenza is low (9). In previous influenza pandemics, the maternal mortality rate has been higher than that of the general population. During the influenza pandemic of 1918 to 1919, the maternal rate of mortality was as high as 27%; in the epidemic of 1957 to 1958, 50% of fatalities among women of childbearing age occurred in pregnant women (11). The recent swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) pandemic has been associated with a high incidence of severe disease in pregnant women, with significant maternal mortality (12). In this study, the rate of admission of pregnant women was four-times higher than in the general population with H1N1 infection. Six maternal deaths occurred among the 34 pregnant cases of H1N1 identified: one in the first trimester, one in the second trimester, and four in the third trimester (12).

No significant adverse perinatal outcome has been noted associated with respiratory hospitalization for seasonal influenza (13). Although influenza virus does cross the placenta, viremia is rare. A direct teratogenic effect has not been demonstrated, although there are reports of neural tube defects and cleft lip and palate (14). Indirect effects of influenza, particularly fever, may increase the risk of congenital abnormalities (14). The recent swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) pandemic has been associated with a high incidence of perinatal morbidity and mortality (12, 15). Six pregnant women in Winnipeg, Canada, required mechanical ventilation for influenza A (H1N1) (Oluyomi T, unpublished data). Two maternal deaths occurred, with three fetal losses and one fetus with severe hypoxic encephalopathy. Much of the fetal morbidity was attributed to fetal hypoxia in mothers with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome and marked hypoxemia.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Management of Respiratory Failure Caused by H1N1 in Pregnancy: Antiviral Therapy

Amantadine has been used in pregnancy as treatment and as prophylaxis, but the current pandemic strain is resistant. Oseltamivir has been used quite extensively in pregnancy with good results (16), and zanamivir, administered by inhalation, is increasingly a treatment option. These drugs are of most benefit when administered within 48 hrs of symptom onset and may reduce the incidence of pneumonia in patients with seasonal influenza (17). In a report of six maternal deaths with H1N1 pandemic influenza, none of these patients had received antivirals within 48 hrs of onset of symptoms (12).

Ribavirin, used in some combination therapy options for H1N1, is not recommended in pregnancy. No data exist regarding the use of intravenous neuraminidase inhibitors, such as zanamivir and peramivir.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Pregnant women have a diminished functional residual capacity and increased oxygen consumption that result in rapid oxygen desaturation in response to apnea or hypoventilation (18). Upper airway mucosal edema and friability occur in pregnancy and can impede visualization and increase risk of bleeding. Failed intubation is eight-times more common in the obstetric population than in other anesthetic intubations (19). Nasal intubation should be avoided and a smaller endotracheal tube may be required. Preoxygenation with 100% oxygen is essential, but respiratory alkalosis should be avoided because this adversely affects uterine blood flow (20). The pregnant patient should always be considered to have a full stomach because of delayed gastric emptying and the elevated intra-abdominal pressure of pregnancy.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Mechanical Ventilation

Little data are available to guide mechanical ventilation of pregnant patients in the ICU. Hyperventilation should be avoided because the respiratory alkalosis causes uterine vasoconstriction (20). The usual ventilatory approach of lung protective ventilation with pressure and volume limitation, sometimes with permissive hypercapnia, has not been assessed in pregnancy. It should be remembered that chest wall compliance is reduced in the near-term patient, and the usual pressure limits (e.g., plateau pressure of 35 cmH2O) may not be appropriate. Slightly higher ventilatory pressures may be acceptable to achieve appropriate tidal volumes in pregnant women near term, because transpulmonary pressures may not be elevated. Oxygenation should be optimized to ensure adequate fetal oxygen delivery, keeping arterial oxygen saturation >92%. Late pregnancy is normally associated with a mild respiratory alkalosis to facilitate fetal excretion of carbon dioxide, resulting in Paco2 levels of approximately 30 Torr (4 kPa), but it is unclear if it is necessary to keep arterial CO2 levels at these low levels. A case report (21) suggests that maternal hypercapnia up to 60 Torr (8 kPa), in the presence of adequate oxygenation, does not appear to be detrimental to the fetus. Although maternal respiratory acidosis may produce fetal acidemia, with associated fetal heart rate changes, these changes do not have the same implications as fetal acidosis occurring as a result of fetal hypoxia. However, the right shift of the hemoglobin oxygen dissociation curve caused by this acidosis may reduce the beneficial oxygen carrying characteristics of fetal hemoglobin. If marked respiratory acidosis results from permissive hypercapnia, then treatment with bicarbonate should improve maternal and fetal acidemia. Few data exist on the use of non-conventional modes of ventilation and oxygenation, which have not been used extensively in pregnant women until the current 2009 pandemic.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Other Management Issues

Radiologic investigations are necessary for the assessment and management of the pregnant patient with respiratory failure. Although there is potential for risk to the fetus from radiation, the perception of this risk is often higher than the real risk (22). Shielding the abdomen with lead and using a well-collimated radiograph beam can reduce fetal exposure. The adverse effects of radiation exposure of the fetus include oncogenicity (increased incidence of childhood cancer) and teratogenicity. Nevertheless, most common radiologic investigations performed on the mother, including chest X-rays and computed tomography chest scan, can be performed with fetal radiation exposure within safe limits (22), although investigations such as abdominal–pelvic computed tomography will cause significant fetal radiation exposure. Every effort should be made to minimize uterine exposure, particularly in the first trimester.

The optimal drugs for prolonged sedation, analgesia, or neuromuscular blockade to facilitate ventilation in pregnancy are not known, based on currently available data. Benzodiazepines cross the placenta and their use in early pregnancy may be associated with some increased risk of congenital abnormalities, as well as preterm birth (23). Midazolam and lorazepam cross the placenta to a lesser degree than diazepam, although whether this is clinically significant is unclear. Propofol has been used as an induction agent for caesarean section, but data on its prolonged use in pregnancy are limited. A single report (24) of two cases in pregnancy describes the development of mild acidemia during propofol infusion. Congenital malformations have not been demonstrated with use of narcotic analgesics such as morphine and fentanyl. Most nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents cross the placenta, including pancuronium, vecuronium, and atracurium, but transfer is unlikely to have clinical effects on the fetus in the short term. If sedative or paralytic agents are used in the pregnant woman at the time of delivery, then it is essential that this information be communicated to the neonatologist, and the need for ventilatory support for the fetus should be anticipated.

Pregnancy increases the risks of venous thrombosis attributable to hypercoagulability and venous stasis. In the critically ill patient, antithrombotic measures, including physical interventions and heparin prophylaxis, should be utilized.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Delivery of the Fetus

Pregnancy has a number of effects on maternal respiratory physiology, and these changes, as well as anecdotal reports, may suggest that delivery of the pregnant patient with respiratory failure will result in improvement in the mother's condition (25). However, two case series (26, 27) addressing this issue have not found a consistent benefit to the mother. Some improvement in oxygenation was noted, but this was not accompanied by a change in positive end-expiratory pressure requirements or improvement in compliance (26). If the fetus is at a viable gestation (determined largely by the neonatal resources available) and is at risk because of intractable maternal hypoxia, then there may be a benefit to the fetus in delivery. Any decision to administer steroids to promote fetal lung maturity should be made on an individual basis, in consultation with obstetrics and neonatology. Although cesarean section allows more rapid delivery in the critically ill patient, the increased physiologic stress of operative delivery may be associated with higher mortality in these patients (28). Therefore, delivery should not be performed with the sole purpose of improving maternal oxygenation or ventilation. However, it is important that preparations are made for urgent delivery and neonatal resuscitation in the event of sudden maternal or fetal deterioration or spontaneous labor. Obstetric indications should always determine the mode of delivery.

Back to Top | Article Outline
The Immunocompromised Patient: Immune Response to Influenza

The immune response to the influenza virus is complex and multifaceted (29). Defense against acquisition of infection involves the mucous layer and integrity of the mucosal surface, nonspecifically activated phagocytes, and antibody to the virus. Surface-neutralizing antibodies of the IgA subtype are important in the upper respiratory tract, whereas IgG antibodies play a major role in the lower respiratory tract (29). The level of antibodies against hemagglutinin and neuraminidase correlates with resistance to illness and limitation of viral replication in the respiratory tract (30).

Once infection occurs, immune mechanisms are activated to eliminate the virus. Interferon levels are elevated early in infection and play a role in decreasing viral production and promoting elimination of the infection. The cell-mediated immune response is important in viral clearance and promoting recovery (29). The major cellular immune response is CD8 T-lymphocyte–mediated cytotoxicity. Reductions in T-cell number or function will produce an increased magnitude and duration of infection.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Who Is at Risk?

Patients who are immunocompromised may be at risk for serious influenza-associated complications, as well as prolonged viral shedding, and at increased risk for resistance to antiviral agents (31). Some data in regard to risk factors are available for seasonal and pandemic influenza before the current influenza A H1N1 pandemic, but recent data are limited. An initial report of 18 patients from Mexico with H1N1 pneumonitis (32) did not report on immunosuppressed patients, and a subsequent report of 58 patients requiring ICU care describes two patients as having underlying immunosuppressive disease (33). An early report of 30 hospitalized patients with novel influenza A (H1N1) from California describes 20% as having an underlying immunosuppressive condition (34). A larger study from Canada of 168 critically ill patients with pandemic influenza A (H1N1) reports 20% of patients having an underlying immunosuppressive disorder, the majority being corticosteroid treatment (15). A short report on two patients after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation acquiring novel influenza A (H1N1) describes prolonged viral shedding associated with the development of osetamivir resistance (35).

Back to Top | Article Outline
Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients

Patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation are profoundly immunocompromised after their intensive regimens before transplantation, and delayed engraftment and graft-versus-host disease can cause more prolonged immune dysfunction. The frequency of influenza among these patients is relatively low (0.2%–2.8%) (36), but high rates of infection have been noted during influenza epidemics (23%–29%) (36). Clinical presentation in these patients may lack the typical features of myalgia and high fever seen in immunocompetent individuals (37). A large European report of 1863 hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients followed-up through three influenza seasons documented influenza A viral infection in 2.1% (38). Lymphocytopenia was identified as the major risk factor for development of lower respiratory tract infection, and mortality attributable to influenza A was 15.4%. A single-center review of 12 influenza seasons documented an infection rate of 1.3% (39). Among these patients, pneumonia developed in 29%, associated with the presence of lymphopenia and an earlier posttransplantation period. Mortality in patients with pneumonia was 28%, and oseltamivir treatment was noted to prevent the development of pneumonia. Viral shedding was prolonged, particularly in patients administered higher-dose corticosteroids (>1 mg/kg per day) (39).

Back to Top | Article Outline
Solid Organ Transplants

Influenza after solid organ transplantation appears to be more common among lung transplant recipients (40) but also causes significant morbidity among renal, liver, and heart transplantation patients. The increased frequency in lung transplantation patients is likely related to local effects, such as ciliary dysfunction and epithelial injury, impaired lymphatic drainage, or decreased secretory antibodies, with the lung being the primary site of influenza infection (36). Influenza infection has also been associated with allograft rejection in lung and kidney recipients (40–42). The risk of influenza in patients with solid organ transplantation may be related to the immunosuppressive regimen, which can also influence the degree of serological response to influenza vaccination (43). However, adequate antibody responses have been documented in patients with a variety of immunosuppressive regimens (44, 45).

Back to Top | Article Outline
Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

The immune deficiency associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection may increase the risk for acquiring influenza infection or for developing more severe infection. HIV-infected children and infants, who may not have preexisting immunity, may be at increased risk. Data from seasonal influenza in HIV-infected individuals may give some insight into the effects of the current pandemic influenza A. Case reports and small series suggest that the presentation and complications are not different to the non-HIV population, although the duration of illness may be prolonged (46, 47). The prolonged illness may be associated with prolonged viral shedding (48). Increased severity of illness is suggested by a report of a marked increase in the rate of death from pneumonia among the 25- to 44-yr-old age group in cities with a high incidence of acquired immune deficiency syndrome when comparing influenza seasons in the pre-HIV period with that of the late 1980s (49). The effects of influenza in the HIV-infected patients are significantly impacted by treatment with highly active anti-retroviral therapy. A retrospective cohort study compared cardiopulmonary hospitalization rates and mortality during the influenza seasons from 1995 to 1999, during the time of introduction of highly active anti-retroviral therapy (50). A 53% decline in hospitalizations and 77% decline in mortality were attributed to introduction of highly active anti-retroviral therapy. A cluster of seven patients with influenza and HIV infection, five of whom were administered highly active anti-retroviral therapy, was reported from the 1997 to 1998 influenza season (51). A spectrum from uncomplicated influenza through severe primary viral pneumonitis and secondary bacterial infection was noted. None of these patients required mechanical ventilation and all survived.

Little data are available regarding the effect of the current pandemic influenza A (H1N1) in HIV-infected individuals. South Africa, a country with a prevalence of HIV infection of 15% to 20%, (52) has not reported a significant effect of H1N1 in their HIV population during their winter pandemic period in August to September 2009. In fact, their reported H1N1 mortality rate of 0.4% (31 deaths in 7606 cases) is lower than that in many countries with a low prevalence of HIV, despite the difficulties in identifying the denominator of infected cases (53).

Back to Top | Article Outline
Other Immunosuppressive Conditions

Several other patient groups are potentially at risk for increased incidence or severity of influenza because of immunosuppression. Common causes include malignant disease in patients undergoing chemotherapy and receiving corticosteroid treatment for inflammatory conditions.

The effects of chemotherapy on the immune system are quite variable and depend on the specific drug regimen. Patients undergoing chemotherapy for leukemia are at significant risk, and influenza may be responsible for 11% to 33% of these patients presenting with symptoms of respiratory tract infection (54, 55). Mortality of these patients in whom influenza developed was approximately 25% (54, 55).

Little data exist on the effect of corticosteroid therapy on influenza risk or severity. The overall risk of infections is increased (56), but the influenza-specific risk is unknown. Antibody response to influenza vaccination appears to be adequate in patients receiving steroid therapy (57, 58). However, steroid use may prolong viral shedding after severe influenza infection (59). A recent report of 168 critically ill patients with pandemic influenza A (H1N1) describes 15% as using corticosteroid therapy (15).

Back to Top | Article Outline
Alterations to Usual Management

The most important approach to influenza management in the immunosuppressed patient is prevention by vaccination and infection control precautions. Despite abnormalities in immune function, vaccination has been shown to be effective in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients (60, 61), in HIV patients (62), and in those receiving chemotherapy (63) or corticosteroid therapy (57, 58). In hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients, the immune response to vaccination is blunted if vaccination is administered too early, before adequate immune reconstitution (61, 64). Patients with lymphoma appear to have a poor humoral response to influenza vaccination (65). In terms of infection-control precautions, these are not different in the immunocompetent patient, with the recognition that viral shedding may be significantly prolonged in the immunocompromised group.

Back to Top | Article Outline


It is essential for the clinician managing an immunosuppressed patient with lower respiratory tract infection to consider and test for the presence of influenza A (H1N1), in addition to the usual opportunistic organisms. In view of the significant benefit from earlier administration of antiviral agents (66), empirical treatment should be considered, pending results of viral studies. However, unlike patients with healthy immune systems who derive little benefit from oseltamivir administered after 48 hrs of symptom onset, peak viral replication and viral clearance occur later in the immunosuppressed patient and the benefit of treatment after 48 hrs may be more significant (67). Preemptive therapy may prevent progression of disease to the lower respiratory tract (39). Antiviral therapy may reduce mortality in immunocompromised patients with seasonal influenza (38, 68). The risk of development of resistance to antivirals is increased in immunosuppressed patients with prolonged viral shedding (31, 35). In view of this, some have suggested a role for higher-dose oseltamivir or even combination therapy in the management of these patients (69, 70), with early reports suggesting a possible benefit of triple therapy with oseltamivir, amantadine, and ribavirin (71).

Back to Top | Article Outline


1.Zarocostas J: World Health Organization declares A (H1N1) influenza pandemic. BMJ 2009; 338:b2425
2.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Fluview week 34: Pneumonia and Influenza (P&I) mortality surveillance. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm#MortalityData. Accessed September 9, 2009
3.Itoh Y, Shinya K, Kiso M, et al: In vitro and in vivo characterization of new swine-origin H1N1 influenza viruses. Nature 2009; 460:1021–1025
4.Lederman MM: Cell-mediated immunity and pregnancy. Chest 1984; 86:6S–9S.
5.Wegmann TG, Lin H, Guilbert L, et al: Bidirectional cytokine interactions in the maternal-fetal relationship: Is successful pregnancy a TH2 phenomenon? Immunol Today 1993; 14:353–356
6.Gordon CL, Johnson PD, Permezel M, et al: Association between severe swine-origin influenza A virus [S-OIV] infection and immunoglobulin G2 subclass deficiency. 49th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 2009
7.Centers for Disease Control: Prevention and control of influenza: Recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Immunization. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2002; 51:1–47
8.Skowronski DM, De Serres G: Is routine influenza immunization warranted in early pregnancy? Vaccine 2009; 27:4754–7470
9.Simonsen L, Clarke MJ, Schonberger LB, et al: Pandemic versus epidemic influenza mortality: A pattern of changing age distribution. J Infect Dis 1998; 178:53–60
10.Neuzil KM, Reed GW, Mitchel EF, et al: Impact of influenza on acute cardiopulmonary hospitalizations in pregnant women. Am J Epidemiol 1998; 148:1094–1102
11.McKinney P, Volkert P, Kaufman J: Fatal swine influenza pneumonia occurring during late pregnancy. Arch Intern Med 1990; 150:213–215
12.Jamieson DJ, Honein MA, Rasmussen SA, et al: H1N1 2009 influenza virus infection during pregnancy in the USA. Lancet 2009; 374:429–430
13.Hartert TV, Neuzil KM, Shintani AK, et al: Maternal morbidity and perinatal outcomes among pregnant women with respiratory hospitalizations during influenza season. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189:1705–1712
14.Acs N, Bánhidy F, Puhó E, et al: Maternal influenza during pregnancy and risk of congenital abnormalities in offspring. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2005; 73:989–996
15.Kumar A, Zarychanski R, Pinto R, et al: Critically ill patients with novel swine origin influenza virus A/H1N1 infection in Canada. JAMA 2009; 302:1872–1879
16.Tanaka T, Nakajima K, Murashima A, et al: Safety of neuraminidase inhibitors against novel influenza A (H1N1) in pregnant and breastfeeding women. CMAJ 2009; 181:55–58
17.Fiore AE, Shay DK, Broder K, et al: Prevention and control of influenza: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), 2008. MMWR Recomm Rep 2008;57:1–60
18.Archer GW, Marx GF: Arterial oxygen tension during apnoea in parturient women. Br J Anaesth 1974; 46:358–360
19.King TA, Adams AP: Failed tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 1990; 65:400–414
20.Levinson G, Shnider SM, deLorimier AA, et al: Effects of maternal hyperventilation on uterine blood flow and fetal oxygenation and acid-base status. Anesthesiology 1974; 40:340–347
21.Ivankovic AD, Elam JO, Huffman J: Effect of maternal hypercarbia on the newborn infant. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1970; 107:939–946
22.Ratnapalan S, Bentur Y, Koren G: Doctor, will that x-ray harm my unborn child? CMAJ 2008; 179:1293–1296
23.Wikner BN, Stiller CO, Bergman U, et al: Use of benzodiazepines and benzodiazepine receptor agonists during pregnancy: Neonatal outcome and congenital malformations. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2007; 16:1203–1210
24.Hilton G, Andrzejowski JC: Prolonged propofol infusions in pregnant neurosurgical patients. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2007; 19:67–68
25.Daily WH, Katz AR, Tonnesen A, et al: Beneficial effect of delivery in a patient with adult respiratory distress syndrome. Anesthesiology 1990; 72:383–386
26.Tomlinson MW, Caruthers TJ, Whitty JE, et al: Does delivery improve maternal condition in the respiratory-compromised gravida? Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91:108–111
27.Mabie WC, Barton JR, Sibai BM: Adult respiratory distress syndrome in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167(4 Pt 1):950–957
28.Jenkins TM, Troiano NH, Graves CR, et al: Mechanical ventilation in an obstetric population: Characteristics and delivery rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188:549–552
29.Couch RB, Englund JA, Whimbey E: Respiratory viral infections in immunocompetent and immunocompromised persons. Am J Med 1997; 102:2–9
30.Clements ML, Betts RF, Tierney EL, et al: Serum and nasal wash antibodies associated with resistance to experimental challenge with influenza A wild-type virus. J Clin Microbiol 1986; 24:157–160
31.Englund JA, Champlin RE, Wyde PR, et al: Common emergence of amantadine- and rimantadine-resistant influenza A viruses in symptomatic immunocompromised adults. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 26:1418–1424
32.Perez-Padilla R, de la Rosa-Zamboni D, Ponce de Leon S, et al: Pneumonia and respiratory failure from swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) in Mexico. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:680–689
33.Domínguez-Cherit G, Lapinsky SE, Macias AE, et al: Critically ill patients with 2009 influenza A (H1N1) in Mexico. JAMA 2009; 302:1880–1887
34.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Hospitalized patients with novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection—California, April–May, 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009; 58:536–541
35.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Oseltamivir-resistant novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in two immunosuppressed patients—Seattle, Washington, 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009; 58:893–896
36.Kunisaki KM, Janoff EN: Influenza in immunosuppressed populations: A review of infection frequency, morbidity, mortality, and vaccine responses. Lancet Infect Dis 2009; 9:493–504
37.Boeckh M: The challenge of respiratory virus infections in hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. Br J Haematol 2008; 143:455–467
38.Ljungman P: Respiratory virus infections in stem cell transplant patients: The European experience. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2001; 7(Suppl):5S–7S
39.Nichols WG, Guthrie KA, Corey L, et al: Influenza infections after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: Risk factors, mortality, and the effect of antiviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39:1300–1306
40.Vilchez RA, McCurry K, Dauber J, et al: Influenza virus infection in adult solid organ transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2002; 2:287–291
41.Keane WR, Helderman JH, Luby J, et al: Epidemic renal transplant rejection associated with influenza A victoria. Proc Clin Dial Transplant Forum 1978; 8:232–236
42.Khalifah AP, Hachem RR, Chakinala MM, et al: Respiratory viral infections are a distinct risk for bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome and death. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004; 170:181–187
43.Smith KG, Isbel NM, Catton MG, et al: Suppression of the humoral immune response by mycophenolate mofetil. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1998; 13:160–164
44.Versluis DJ, Beyer WE, Masurel N, et al: Impairment of the immune response to influenza vaccination in renal transplant recipients by cyclosporine, but not azathioprine. Transplantation 1986; 42:376–379
45.Keshtkar-Jahromi M, Argani H, Rahnavardi M, et al: Antibody response to influenza immunization in kidney transplant recipients receiving either azathioprine or mycophenolate: a controlled trial. Am J Nephrol 2008; 28:654–660
46.Safrin S, Rush JD, Mills J: Influenza in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Chest 1990; 98:33–37
47.Thurn JR, Henry K: Influenza A pneumonitis in a patient infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Chest 1989; 95:807–810
48.Evans KD, Kline MW: Prolonged influenza A infection responsive to rimantadine therapy in a human immunodeficiency virus-infected child. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995; 14:332–334
49.Increase in pneumonia mortality among young adults and the HIV epidemic—New York City, United States. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1988; 37:593–596
50.Neuzil KM, Coffey CS, Mitchel EF Jr, et al: Cardiopulmonary hospitalizations during influenza season in adults and adolescents with advanced HIV infection. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2003; 34:304–307
51.Radwan HM, Cheeseman SH, Lai KK, et al: Influenza in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients during the 1997–1998 influenza season. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31:604–606
52.World Health Organization: South Africa: Epidemiological country profile on HIV and AIDS. Available online at: http://apps.who.int/globalatlas/predefinedReports/EFS2008/short/EFSCountryProfiles2008_ZA.pdf. Accessed September 18, 2009
53.World Health Organization: Pandemic influenza (H1N1): Current situation in the AFRO region. Available at: http://www.afro.who.int/ddc/influenzaa/index.html. Accessed September 18, 2009
54.Elting LS, Whimbey E, Lo W, et al: Epidemiology of influenza A virus infection in patients with acute or chronic leukemia. Support Care Cancer. 1995; 3:198–202
55.Yousuf HM, Englund J, Couch R, et al: Influenza among hospitalized adults with leukemia. Clin Infect Dis 1997; 24:1095–1099
56.Stuck AE, Minder CE, Frey FJ: Risk of infectious complications in patients taking glucocorticosteroids. Rev Infect Dis 1989; 11:954–963
57.Kubiet MA, Gonzalez-Rothi RJ, Cottey R, et al: Serum antibody response to influenza vaccine in pulmonary patients receiving corticosteroids. Chest 1996; 110:367–370
58.Hanania NA, Sockrider M, Castro M, et al: Immune response to influenza vaccination in children and adults with asthma: Effect of corticosteroid therapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004; 113:717–724
59.Lee N, Chan PK, Hui DS, et al: Viral loads and duration of viral shedding in adult patients hospitalized with influenza. J Infect Dis 2009; 200:492–500
60.Machado CM, Cardoso MR, da Rocha IF, et al: The benefit of influenza vaccination after bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2005; 36:897–900
61.Engelhard D, Nagler A, Hardan I, et al: Antibody response to a two-dose regimen of influenza vaccine in allogeneic T cell-depleted and autologous BMT recipients. Bone Marrow Transplant 1993; 11:1–5
62.Tasker SA, Treanor JJ, Paxton WB, et al: Efficacy of influenza vaccination in HIV-infected persons. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1999; 131:430–433
63.Nordøy T, Aaberge IS, Husebekk A, et al: Cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy show adequate serological response to vaccinations against influenza virus and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Med Oncol 2002; 19:71–78
64.Gandhi MK, Egner W, Sizer L, et al: Antibody responses to vaccinations given within the first two years after transplant are similar between autologous peripheral blood stem cell and bone marrow transplant recipients. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001; 28:775–781
65.Mazza JJ, Yale SH, Arrowood JR, et al: Efficacy of the influenza vaccine in patients with malignant lymphoma. Clin Med Res 2005; 3:214–220
66.Moscona A: Medical management of influenza infection. Annu Rev Med 2008; 59:397–413
67.Allen UD, Aoki FY, Stiver HG: The use of antiviral drugs for influenza: Recommended guidelines for practitioners. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol 2006; 17:273–284
68.Khanna N, Steffen I, Studt JD, et al: Outcome of influenza infections in outpatients after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Transpl Infect Dis 2009; 11:100–105
69.Shay DK, Ridenhour BJ: Can we “hedge” against the development of antiviral resistance among pandemic influenza viruses? PLoS Med 2009; 6:e1000103
70.Beigel J, Bray M: Current and future antiviral therapy of severe seasonal and avian influenza. Antiviral Res 2008; 78:91–102
71.Nguyen JT, Hoopes JD, Smee DF, et al: Triple combination of oseltamivir, amantadine, and ribavirin displays synergistic activity against multiple influenza virus strains in vitro. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53:4115–4126

influenza A; pandemic; H1N1; mechanical ventilation; pregnancy; fetal outcome; immunosuppression; transplant; chemotherapy; human immunodeficiency virus

© 2010 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Lippincott Williams & Wilkins