Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are common after lung transplantation and there are limited data for the use of antifungal prophylaxis in these patients. Our aim was to compare the safety and describe the effectiveness of universal prophylaxis with two azole regimens in lung transplant recipients. This is a retrospective study in lung transplant recipients from July 2003 to July 2006 who received antifungal prophylaxis with itraconazole or voriconazole plus inhaled amphotericin B to compare the incidence of hepatotoxicity. Secondary outcomes include describing the incidence of IFI, clinical outcomes after IFI and mortality.Sixty-seven consecutive lung transplants received antifungal prophylaxis, 32 itraconazole and 35 voriconazole and inhaled amphotericin B. There were no significant differences between groups in the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) score at the time of transplantation, demographic characteristics, comorbidities and concomitant use of hepatotoxic medications. Hepatotoxicity occurred in 12 patients receiving voriconazole and inhaled amphotericin B and in no patients receiving itraconazole (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups with regard to the percentage of transplants with IFI, but one case of zygomycosis occurred in a transplant treated with voriconazole. Voriconazole prophylaxis after lung transplantation was associated with a higher incidence of hepatotoxicity and similar clinical effectiveness when compared to itraconazole.
The use of combination antibiotic therapy for severe pseudomonal infections is a standard practice in many hospitals; however, the data supporting its use are somewhat unclear. Possible benefits of combination therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections include in vitro antibiotic synergy, prevention of the emergence of bacterial resistance while receiving therapy, and improved adequacy of empiric therapy. Unfortunately, the potential disadvantages are also considerable, the most worrisome of which are drug toxicity and creation of multidrug-resistant organisms in the environment. Many in vitro and animal studies have attempted to shed light on this clinically challenging issue; however, these studies have often yielded conflicting results and used different study methods, which limits the clinical utility of the results. Clinical studies have also attempted to clarify this issue, particularly in patients with serious pseudomonal infections such as bacteremia and ventilator-associated pneumonia, but again, often resulted in conflicting conclusions. Thus, we performed a MEDLINE search (1950-May 2010) of clinical and in vitro studies evaluating the use of antibiotic combination therapy and monotherapy for bacteremia and pneumonia due to P. aeruginosa. Although a clear answer still eludes this controversy, combination therapy for seriously ill patients suspected of having pseudomonal infection has been shown, with considerable evidence, to improve the likelihood of an active agent being included in the initial antibiotic regimen of these patients. The clinical status of the patient and true likelihood of encountering a multidrug-resistant organism should be evaluated before deciding on empiric combination therapy. Future research may be able to better identify which patient populations might receive the most benefit from combination therapy rather than using combination therapy for everyone at risk for these infections.
A significant increase in the number of appropriately ordered and drawn serum vancomycin levels occurred after implementation of TDM criteria in the hospital's CPOE system. The majority of orders that were deemed inappropriate were due to improper timing of laboratory collection.
Intravenous bicarbonate therapy did not decrease time to resolution of acidosis or time to hospital discharge for patients with DKA with an initial pH less than 7.0.
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.