In this narrative review, we discuss the relevant issues of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) in critically ill patients. For many conditions, the optimal indication, device type, frequency, duration, type of replacement fluid and criteria for stopping TPE are uncertain. TPE is a potentially lifesaving but also invasive procedure with risk of adverse events and complications and requires close monitoring by experienced teams. In the intensive care unit (ICU), the indications for TPE can be divided into (1) absolute, well-established, and evidence-based, for which TPE is recognized as first-line therapy, (2) relative, for which TPE is a recognized second-line treatment (alone or combined) and (3) rescue therapy, where TPE is used with a limited or theoretical evidence base. New indications are emerging and ongoing knowledge gaps, notably regarding the use of TPE during critical illness, support the establishment of a TPE registry dedicated to intensive care medicine.
This review presents a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm for pneumonia and other severe respiratory events in the solid cancer population. It aims to increase awareness of the risk factors and the different etiologies in this changing scenario in which neutropenia no longer seems to be a decisive factor in poor outcome. Bacterial pneumonia is the leading cause, but opportunistic diseases and non-infectious etiologies, especially unexpected adverse effects of radiation, biological drugs and monoclonal antibodies, are becoming increasingly frequent. Options for respiratory support and diagnostics are discussed and indications for antibiotics in the management of pneumonia are detailed. Expert commentary: Prompt initiation of critical care to facilitate optimal decision-making in the management of respiratory failure, early etiological assessment and appropriate antibiotic therapy are cornerstones in management of severe pneumonia in oncologic patients.
ObjectiveTo assess the adherence to Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic
Society guidelines and the causes of lack of adherence during empirical antibiotic
prescription in severe pneumonia in Latin America.MethodsA clinical questionnaire was submitted to 36 physicians from Latin America; they
were asked to indicate the empirical treatment in two fictitious cases of severe
respiratory infection: community-acquired pneumonia and nosocomial pneumonia.ResultsIn the case of communityacquired pneumonia, 11 prescriptions of 36 (30.6%) were
compliant with international guidelines. The causes for non-compliant treatment
were monotherapy (16.0%), the unnecessary prescription of broad-spectrum
antibiotics (40.0%) and the use of non-recommended antibiotics (44.0%).In the case of nosocomial pneumonia, the rate of adherence to the Infectious
Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines was 2.8% (1
patient of 36). The reasons for lack of compliance were monotherapy (14.3%) and a
lack of dual antibiotic coverage against Pseudomonas aeruginosa
(85.7%). If monotherapy with an antipseudomonal antibiotic was considered
adequate, the antibiotic treatment would be adequate in 100% of the total
prescriptions.ConclusionThe compliance rate with the Infectious Disease Society of America/American
Thoracic Society guidelines in the community-acquired pneumonia scenario was
30.6%; the most frequent cause of lack of compliance was the indication of
monotherapy. In the case of nosocomial pneumonia, the compliance rate with the
guidelines was 2.8%, and the most important cause of non-adherence was lack of
combined antipseudomonal therapy. If the use of monotherapy with an
antipseudomonal antibiotic was considered the correct option, the treatment would
be adequate in 100% of the prescriptions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.