Search

STUDY OBJECTIVE The optimal pharmacodynamic parameter for the prediction of efficacy of vancomycin is the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), and current published data indicate that dosing based on vancomycin trough concentrations is an inaccurate substitute. In this study, our objective was to compare the achievement of therapeutic target attainment after switching from a trough-based to an AUC-based dosing strategy as a part of our institution's vancomycin-per-pharmacy protocol. DESIGN Prospective observational quality assurance study. SETTING Academic medical center. PATIENTS A total of 296 hospitalized adults who received vancomycin and monitoring under our institution's vancomycin-per-pharmacy protocol were included in the analysis. The preimplementation retrospective comparison group consisted of 179 patients in whom vancomycin was initiated using a trough-based dosing strategy between November 22, 2017, and January 22, 2018. The postimplementation group included 117 patients in whom vancomycin was initiated using an AUC-based dosing strategy using two-point sampling between June 19, 2018, and July 19, 2018, after hospital-wide implementation of this protocol on June 19, 2018. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS AUC values were calculated from two vancomycin concentrations (peak and trough). The primary outcome was achievement of therapeutic AUC values (400-800 mg·hr/L) in the postimplementation group or therapeutic trough level values (10-20 mg/L) in the preimplementation group. Only 98 (55%) of 179 initial trough values were therapeutic in the preimplementation group (trough-only dosing method) versus 86 (73.5%) of 117 initial AUC values in the postimplementation group (AUC-based dosing method) (p=0.0014). A lower proportion of supratherapeutic AUC values was observed in the postimplementation group compared with supratherapeutic trough concentrations in the preimplementation group (1.7% vs 18%, p

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C (HCV), and hepatitis B (HBV) are common chronic viral infections in the end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patient population that were once considered relative contraindications to kidney transplantation. In this review, we will summarize the current state of kidney transplantation in patients with HIV, HCV, and HBV, which is rapidly evolving. HIV+ patients enjoy excellent outcomes in the modern transplant era and may have new transplant opportunities with the use of HIV+ donors. Direct-acting antivirals for HCV have substantially changed the landscape of care for patients with HCV infection. HBV+ patients now have excellent patient and allograft survival with HBV therapy. Currently, kidney transplantation is a safe and appropriate treatment for the majority of ESKD patients with HIV, HCV, and HBV.

The OMRON HEM-907XL is a commercial oscillometric blood pressure (BP) monitor that was used in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), in which 28% of participants had chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study examined the accuracy of the monitor in nondialytic patients with CKD. Eighty-seven patients met inclusion criteria. The authors used a modified Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) protocol, with one observer recording measurements from the monitor and two blinded physicians obtaining simultaneous aneroid values by auscultation. Using AAMI method 1, there was a 2.5±9.5 mm Hg difference in OMRON and aneroid systolic BP, and a -1.6±6.5 mm Hg difference in diastolic BP. Using AAMI method 2, there was a 5.1±7.4 mm Hg difference in systolic BP and a -0.2±5.4 mm Hg difference in diastolic BP. In patients with CKD, the OMRON HEM-907XL appears to be accurate for measuring diastolic BP, but did not perform as well for systolic BP.

Background Pediatric patients with chronic and/or refractory autoimmune multi-lineage cytopenias present challenges in both diagnosis and management. Increasing availability of diagnostic testing has revealed an underlying immune dysfunction in patients previously diagnosed with Evans Syndrome. However, the data are sparse and the majority of patients are adults. Procedure We performed a retrospective chart review to document the natural history of 23 pediatric patients with autoimmune multi-lineage cytopenias followed at three tertiary care pediatric hematology clinics. Results Investigations revealed seven patients (30.4%) with an autoimmune lymphoproliferative-like syndrome and six patients (26.1%) with other primary immunodeficiencies. Only one (4.3%) patient was suspected to have systemic lupus erythematosus and six patients (26.1%) had other types of autoimmunity. Treatment consisted of immunosuppressive therapy, intravenous gammaglobulin, and splenectomy. Supportive care included granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, and blood product transfusions. Two patients (8.7%) died. Complete remission was achieved in 3 patients (13.0%); of the remaining, 14 patients (60.9%) had chronic immune thrombocytopenic purpura, 10 patients (43.5%) chronic autoimmune neutropenia, and 4 patients (17.4%) chronic autoimmune hemolytic anemia with a median follow up of 5 years (2 months–12 years). Conclusions These data suggest that pediatric patients presenting with autoimmune multi-lineage cytopenias should undergo investigation for underlying immune dysregulation, including autoimmune lymphoproliferative syndrome, other primary immunodeficiencies and autoimmune disorders. The development of an international registry for such patients is imperative to improve the understanding of their complex natural history. Pediatr Blood Cancer © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background Health-care professionals frequently recommend fever treatment regimens for children who either combine paracetamol and ibuprofen or alternate them.However, there is uncertainty about whether these regimens are better than using single agents and about the adverse effect profile of combination regimens. Objectives To assess the results and side effects of combining paracetamol and ibuprofen, or alternating them in consecutive treatments, compared with monotherapy for treating fever in children. Search methods In September 2013, we searched Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; LILACS and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (2009-2011). Selection criteria We included randomized controlled trials that compared alternating or combined paracetamol and ibuprofen regimens with monotherapy in children with fever. Data collection and analysis One review author and two assistants independently screened the searches and applied the inclusion criteria. Two authors assessed risk of bias and graded the evidence independently. We conducted various analyses for different comparison groups (combined therapy versus monotherapy, alternating therapy versus monotherapy and combined therapy versus alternating therapy). Main results Six studies, enrolling 915 participants, are included. Compared to administering a single antipyretic alone, administering combined paracetamol and ibuprofen to febrile children can result in a lower mean temperature at 1 hour after treatment (mean difference -0.27 ∘C, 95% confidence interval -0.45 to -0.08, two trials, 163 participants, moderate quality evidence). If no further antipyretics are given, combined treatment probably also results in a lower mean temperature at 4 hours (mean difference -0.70 ∘C, 95% confidence interval -1.05 to -0.35, two trials, 196 participants, moderate quality evidence), and in fewer children remaining or becoming febrile for at least 4 hours after treatment (relative risk 0.08, 95% confidence interval 0.02 to 0.42, two trials, 196 participants, moderate quality evidence). Only one trial assessed a measure of child discomfort (fever, associated symptoms at 24 and 48 hours), but did not find a significant difference in this measure between the treatment regimens (one trial, 156 participants, evidence quality not graded). In practice, caregivers are often advised to initially provide a single agent (paracetamol or ibuprofen), and then provide a further dose of the alternative if the child;s fever fails to resolve or recurs. Giving alternating treatment in this manner may result in a lower mean temperature at 1 hour after the second dose (mean difference -0.60 ∘C, 95% confidence interval -0.94 to -0.26, two trials, 78 participants, low quality evidence), and may also result in fewer children remaining or becoming febrile for up to 3 hours after it is given (relative risk 0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 0.55, two trials, 109 participants, low quality evidence). One trial assessed child discomfort (mean pain scores at 24, 48 and 72 hours), finding that these mean scores were lower, with alternating therapy, despite fewer doses of antipyretic being given overall (one trial, 480 participants, low quality evidence) Only one small trial compared alternating therapy with combined therapy. No statistically significant differences were seen in mean temperature or in the number of febrile children at 1, 4 or 6 hours (one trial, 40 participants, very low quality evidence). In all the trials, there were no serious adverse events that were directly attributed to the medications used. Authors' conclusions There is some evidence that both alternating and combined antipyretic therapies may be more effective at reducing temperatures than monotherapy alone. However, the evidence for improvements in measures of child discomfort remains inconclusive. There is insufficient evidence to decide which of combined or alternating therapy might be more beneficial. Future research needs to measure child discomfort using standardized tools, and assess the safety of combined and alternating antipyretic therapies.