Both topical moxifloxacin 0.5% and gatifloxacin 0.3% penetrated the vitreous in the uninflamed eye, but the vitreous concentrations attained were all lower than the 90% minimum inhibitory concentration for the commonest bacterial pathogens causing acute postoperative endophthalmitis.
The influence of disulfiram on theophylline metabolism was studied in 20 recovering alcoholics. Ten of the patients, who were selected at random, received 250 mg of disulfiram daily. The other 10 patients received 500 mg of disulfiram daily. Two single-dose studies of theophylline kinetics were performed--one as a baseline control and the other after 1 week of treatment with disulfiram. With disulfiram pretreatment, the plasma clearance of theophylline was decreased from 105.7 +/- 10.2 (mean +/- SEM) to 83.1 +/- 8.1 ml/kg per hour (p less than 0.001) in the 250 mg group and from 94.3 +/- 13.3 to 65.4 +/- 10.7 ml/mg per hour (p less than 0.001) in the 500 mg group. The elimination half-life was prolonged significantly in both groups. The percent reduction in theophylline clearance was greater in the 500 mg group (32.5 +/- 3.1; range, 21.6 to 49.6) than it was in the 250 mg group (21.2 +/- 1.7; range, 14.6 to 29.6; p less than 0.01). Disulfiram decreased the formation of all theophylline metabolites in smokers in both treatment groups. In each group, the hydroxylation pathway was affected more than the demethylation pathway. These data indicate that at therapeutic doses disulfiram exerts a dose-dependent inhibitory effect on theophylline metabolism. Depending on the dose of disulfiram, a dose reduction of theophylline by as much as 50% may be necessary to minimize the risk of toxicity.
Objectives: Timeliness of antibiotic administration is recognized as an important factor in reducing mortality associated with sepsis. According to guidelines, antibiotics should be administered within 1 hour of sepsis presentation and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services mandates administration within 3 hours. This study evaluates the difference in time from sepsis diagnosis to first-dose completion of β-lactam antibiotics between IV push and IV piggyback administration. Design: Single-center, retrospective analysis. Setting: Urban, tertiary-care emergency department. Patients: Inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) adult patients (n = 274) diagnosed with severe sepsis or septic shock per Sepsis-2 criteria from September to November 2016 and from September to November 2017 and 2) received β-lactam antibiotic. Interventions: Initial β-lactam agent administered as either IV push or IV piggyback. Measurements and Main Results: Median time (interquartile range) from sepsis diagnosis to administration of a β-lactam antibiotic was 48 minutes (19–96 min) versus 72 minutes (8–180 min) and to administration of the complete broad-spectrum regimen was 108 minutes (66–144 min) versus 114 minutes (42–282 min) in the IV push (n = 143) versus IV piggyback (n = 131) groups, respectively. When controlling for time to sepsis diagnosis and other factors, IV push was associated with approximately 32-minute time savings to β-lactam (β = –0.60; 95% CI, –0.91 to –0.29) and approximately 32-minute time savings to broad-spectrum (β = –0.32; 95% CI, –0.62 to –0.02) antibiotic administrations. The IV push group was less likely to fail the goal of β-lactam antibiotics within 1 hour (44.6% vs 57.3%; odds ratio, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.34–3.86) and 3 hours (7.6% vs 24.5%; odds ratio, 4.31; 95% CI, 2.01–10.28) of sepsis diagnosis compared with IV piggyback. The IV push strategy did not affect mortality, need for ICU admission, or ICU length of stay. No adverse events, including infusion reactions, were found in either arm. Conclusions: Use of an IV push strategy may safely facilitate more rapid administration of β-lactam antibiotics and may allow for better compliance with sepsis management guidelines.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.