Treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic leukemic patients with the antibiotic combinations piperacillin or ceftazidime plus amikacin: results of a randomized study.

S Fenu, R Raccah, S Santilli, A Micozzi, C Girmena, P Martino, G Avvisati
{"title":"Treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic leukemic patients with the antibiotic combinations piperacillin or ceftazidime plus amikacin: results of a randomized study.","authors":"S Fenu,&nbsp;R Raccah,&nbsp;S Santilli,&nbsp;A Micozzi,&nbsp;C Girmena,&nbsp;P Martino,&nbsp;G Avvisati","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Seventy-six consecutive neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancies, admitted to the \"Department of Hematology\" of Rome between March and September 1986, were randomly assigned to receive either piperacillin (300 mg/kg in four divided doses) or ceftazidime (100 mg/kg in four divided doses) plus amikacin (15 mg/kg in two divided doses) whenever they developed a febrile episode (temperature greater than 38 degrees C thrice over 12 hours, not related to drugs or transfusions, or else temperature greater than 38.5 degrees C). After 72 hours of antibiotic therapy, in case of persistent fever, piperacillin or ceftazidime was added to the ceftazidime + amikacin or piperacillin + amikacin combination, respectively. The antibiotic treatment was, however, modified according to in vitro susceptibility if a positive culture was present. Success without regimen modification was observed in both antibiotic combinations in 52.6% of cases. Considering the empiric cross of antibiotics, the response rate reached 78%. Neither toxicity nor side effects were observed in the reported groups. Considering blood isolates, we observed a greater incidence of gram-positive organisms compared with gram-negatives (28 cases vs 5 cases, 84.7% vs 15.3% respectively). Fungal infections were documented in four cases, two in each group. Even though no statistical difference was found between the two groups as far as patients not responding to the first antibiotic combination are concerned, piperacillin seems to have had more efficacy (twelve patients responding to the addition of piperacillin vs seven patients responding to the addition of ceftazidime). Piperacillin + amikacin seems to be as effective as ceftazidime + amikacin in the empirical therapy of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":9733,"journal":{"name":"Chemioterapia : international journal of the Mediterranean Society of Chemotherapy","volume":"7 5","pages":"323-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1988-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemioterapia : international journal of the Mediterranean Society of Chemotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Seventy-six consecutive neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancies, admitted to the "Department of Hematology" of Rome between March and September 1986, were randomly assigned to receive either piperacillin (300 mg/kg in four divided doses) or ceftazidime (100 mg/kg in four divided doses) plus amikacin (15 mg/kg in two divided doses) whenever they developed a febrile episode (temperature greater than 38 degrees C thrice over 12 hours, not related to drugs or transfusions, or else temperature greater than 38.5 degrees C). After 72 hours of antibiotic therapy, in case of persistent fever, piperacillin or ceftazidime was added to the ceftazidime + amikacin or piperacillin + amikacin combination, respectively. The antibiotic treatment was, however, modified according to in vitro susceptibility if a positive culture was present. Success without regimen modification was observed in both antibiotic combinations in 52.6% of cases. Considering the empiric cross of antibiotics, the response rate reached 78%. Neither toxicity nor side effects were observed in the reported groups. Considering blood isolates, we observed a greater incidence of gram-positive organisms compared with gram-negatives (28 cases vs 5 cases, 84.7% vs 15.3% respectively). Fungal infections were documented in four cases, two in each group. Even though no statistical difference was found between the two groups as far as patients not responding to the first antibiotic combination are concerned, piperacillin seems to have had more efficacy (twelve patients responding to the addition of piperacillin vs seven patients responding to the addition of ceftazidime). Piperacillin + amikacin seems to be as effective as ceftazidime + amikacin in the empirical therapy of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
哌拉西林或头孢他啶加阿米卡星联合抗生素治疗嗜中性粒细胞白血病患者发热发作:一项随机研究的结果。
1986年3月至9月间,罗马血液科收治了76例连续中性粒细胞减少的恶性血液病患者,他们被随机分配接受哌西林(300 mg/kg分4次)或头孢他啶(100 mg/kg分4次)加阿米卡星(15 mg/kg分2次),只要他们出现发热发作(12小时内温度超过38℃3次,与药物或输血无关)。抗生素治疗72小时后,如持续发热,在头孢他啶+阿米卡星或哌拉西林+阿米卡星组合中分别加入哌拉西林或头孢他啶。然而,如果存在阳性培养,则根据体外敏感性修改抗生素治疗。在不改变方案的情况下,两种抗生素联合使用的成功率为52.6%。考虑到抗生素的经验交叉,应答率达到78%。在报告的组中未观察到毒性和副作用。考虑到血液分离株,我们观察到革兰氏阳性菌的发生率高于革兰氏阴性菌(28例对5例,84.7%对15.3%)。真菌感染4例,每组2例。即使两组之间没有发现统计学差异,就患者对第一次抗生素组合的反应而言,哌拉西林似乎更有效(12例患者对哌拉西林的加入有反应,7例患者对头孢他啶的加入有反应)。哌拉西林+阿米卡星与头孢他啶+阿米卡星在中性粒细胞减少患者发热发作的经验治疗中同样有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The natural history of hepatitis B virus infection. The effectiveness of chemotherapy in localized malignant fibrous histiocytoma (MFH) of bone: the Rizzoli Institute experience with 66 patients treated with surgery alone or surgery + adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Perspectives for the chemotherapy of AIDS. Treatment of chronic hepatitis B with human lymphoblastoid interferon: results of a controlled trial. Interferon treatment of anti-HBe positive and HBV DNA positive chronic hepatitis B.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1