Antibiotics Therapy for Acute Bacterial Tonsillitis

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Antibiotics Therapy for Acute Bacterial Tonsillitis Pract Otol(Kyoto) 96:11;983~987, 2003 983 Antibiotics Therapy for Acute Bacterial Tonsillitis Shinya Takano and Hideki Kurihara Tokyo Women's Medical University Daini Hospital We reviewed the treatment of 96 patients with acute bacterial tonsillitis. Using multivariate analysis, we examined whether oral or intravenous administration of antibiotics (cephems, penicillin, other ƒÀ-lactams, tetracycline, clindamycin, new quinolones, and macrorides) had an influence on the treatment period. We found that the best class of oral antibiotics for acute bacterial tonsillitis was cefcapene pivoxil (CFPN-PI) and the best intravenous agent was sulbactum/cefoperazone (SBT/CPZ). Key words:retrospective study, acute bacterial tonsillitis, antibiotics, oral administration, intravenous injection Introduction tis such as infectious mononucleosis were excluded by Acute bacterial tonsillitis is one form of upper respira- blood tests. tory tract infection, in which bacteria invade the palatine We selected the administration of antibiotics at ran- tonsil and cause fever, sore throat, pus, and pain on swal- dom. lowing. The day when symptoms resolved and the WBC and In Europe and The United States, the drug of first CRP were normalized was defined as a "the day of cure" choice for acute bacterial tonsillitis is penicillin. How- and the treatment period defined as the interval between ever, there have been no reports on the first line treat- the first examination and this day. Using multivariate ment for acute tonsillitis in Japan, and only new analysis, we examined whether oral administration antibiotics have been examined for effectiveness against (levofloxacin (LVFX), clarithromycin (CAM), minocy- acute tonsillitis. cline (MIND), cefcapene pivoxil (CFPN-PI), ampicillin Penicillin is contraindicated in patients with infectious (ABPC), faropenem (FRPM), and no medication) or mononucleosis because it causes an exacerbation of their intravenous administration (cefepirome (CPR), clinda- rash1). Therefore, it is important to discriminate acute mycin (CLDM), minocycline (MINO), sulbactum/cefop- tonsillitis from infectious mononucleosis, and it is neces- erazone (SBT/CPZ), and no injection) and/or the bacteria sary to administrate the appropriate antibiotics. isolated (K. pneumoniae, S. aureus, H. influenzae, S. Because it is important to determine the antibiotics of pneumoniae, normal flora, and negative culture) influ- first choice for acute infectious diseases in Japan, we ret- enced the duration of the treatment period. rospectively examined the clinical use of antibiotics for Analysis was performed with Stat Partner for Win- acute tonsillitis and reviewed the literature. dows Ver.3 (NEC Software Company). Subjects and Methods Results The subjects were 96 patients treated at our hospital 1. Bacteriologicalexamination in 2001. There were 51 females (26.5•}10.6 years old: The distribution of bacteria detected in tonsillar pus is mean•}SD) and 45 males (33.9•}10.6 years). Patient age shown in Figure 2.S. pneumoniae was detected in 25% distribution is shown in Figure 1. Causes of viral tonsilli- of the patients, while H. influenzae and S. aureus were 984 Shinya Takano and Hideki Kurihara pract Otol (Kyoto) 96:11 Fig. 1 Age distribution of the subjects. (r=4.263). 3. Relationship between the treatment period and oral antibiotics The relationship between the treatment period and oral antibiotics administered is shown in Figure 3. CFPN-PI and FRPM shortened the treatment period, while CAM and MINO actually extended the treatment period. 4. Relationship between treatment the period and bacteria isolated The relationship between the treatment period and the bacteria isolated is shown in Figure 4. The treatment Fig. 2 Bacteria detected in all patients period was longer when S. aureus was isolated. 5. Relationship between the treatment period and intravenous antibiotics each detected in 8% of the patients. In addition, normal The relationship between the treatment period and flora was detected in 54% and no bacteria were isolated the type of antibiotics given intravenously is shown in in 3%. Resistant bacteria were not detected. Figure 5. SBT/CPZ shortened the treatment period. In 2. Multivariate analysis contrast MIND extended the treatment period. The treatments used and the combinations of oral and The average treatment period is stratified according to intravenous antibiotics varied between patients, so we the kind of antibiotics and the bacteria isolated in Table 2. investigated which combination provided the best ther- CFPN-PI were effective after oral administration and apy for acute bacterial tonsillitis by multivariate analysis. SBT/CPZ were effective after intravenous injection The results are shown in Table 1. The multiple correla- when the bacteria were S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae, tion coefficient was r=0.5239, and the most important which were detected commonly. determinant of the treatment period was oral administra- tion (r=4.877), followed by the type of bacteria isolated Pract Otol(Kyoto) 96:11 Acute Tonsillitis 985 Fig. 3 Relationship between the treatment period and oral administration Fig. 4 Relationship between the treatment period and the bacteria isolated Fig. 5 Relationship between the treatment period and intravenous administration 986 Shinya Takano and Hideki Kurihara Pract Otol (Kyoto) 96:11 Table 1 Results of multivariate analysis. Table 2 Average treatment period (relationship between the bacteria isolated and the antibiotics used) Discussion been many reports on the clinical efficacy of newer anti- Penicillin is the drug of first choice for acute tonsillitis biotics in Japan2•`5, but there is no report describing in Europe and The United States. Since 1980, there have guidelines for the use of antibiotics for acute infectious Pract Otol (Kyoto) 96:11 Acute Tonsillitis 987 diseases in the otolaryngology field. We considered it The detection rate of S. pneumoniae was highest, fol- necessary to develop treatment guidelines for acute lowed by H. influenzae,and S. aureus. infectious diseases in Japan from the aspect of medical The treatment period was dependent on the antibiotics treatment economy. used for oral administration, the bacteria detected, and For antibiotic therapy, it is important to continuously the antibiotics given intravenously. maintain drug concentrations equal to or higher than the Cefcapene pivoxil (CFPN-PI) is recommended as the MIC for the bacteria in the lesion. However, this is actu- first choice for oral therapy for acute bacterial tonsillitis, ally difficult to achieve, and administration every 8-10 while sulbactum/cefoperazone (SBT/CPZ) is the first hours is desirable in patients with normal immunity6). choice for intravenous therapy. Penicillin achieves high tissue levels in the palatine tonsil7). In particular, the tissue levels achieved in the References 1) Takano S, Aramaki H, Yoda K, et al.:Infectious mononucleo- palatine tonsil by amoxicillin/clavulanic acid are excellent sis and bacterial tonsillitis-differencial diagnosis from clinical after oral administration7), while intravenous ampicillin7) symptom-. J of Jpn Soc for Infect Disin Otol 17:70~72, is also excellent in this respect. 1999. In the case of oral cephems, tissue levels in the 2) Kawasaki Y, Sakamoto Y, Ogawa S, et aI.:Clinical studies on palatine tonsil achieved by cefalexin and cefaclor are T-2588 in the field of otorhinolaryngology. The JPn J Antibiot good7), while intravenous therapy achieves excellent tis- 39:2710~2715, 1986. sue levels using cefazolin, cefoperazon, or cefoxitin6). 3) Fujita T, Fukui T, Okui S, et al.:In vitro and in vivo clinical Especially, cefalexin and cefaclor show higher tissue lev- evaluation of BMY-28100. Chemotherapy 37:222~233, 1989. 4) Obana M, Matsuoka Y and Irimajiri S:Clinical study on S-1108 els than the serum concentration7). in respiratory tract infections. Chemotherapy 41:776~780, The tissue uptake in the palatine tonsil of ƒÀ-lactams is 1993. low after oral administration and intravenous injection7), 5) Majima Y, Shinogi J, Yamagiwa M, et al.:Clinical effects of cef- but a sufficient effect can be expected when considering podoxime proxetiil in otorhinolaryngological infection. Prog MIC values for the relevant bacteria7). Med 14:1002~1005, 1994. Suzuki et al.8) reported that there were no changes in 6) Eagle H, Fleischman R, Musselman A, et al.:The bacterial action of penicillin in vivo;the participation of the host, and the the bacteria detected from patients with acute tonsillitis slow recovery of the surviving Organisms. Ann Intern Med over in the past ten years, and that S. pyogenes, S. aureus 331:544~571, 1950. S. pneumoniae, and H. influenzae were commonly in 7) Suzuki K:The usage and dosage of anti-bacterial agents from detected in acute tonsillitis. An increase in the detection the tissue concentration-from the point of the systemic rate of PRSP was reported, but there was no change in administration-. J of JPn Soc for Infect Dis in Otol 6:136~ the MRSA detection rate8). 142, 1988. These results suggest that CFPN-PI is the drug of 8) Suzuki K and Baba S:Study of isolated bacteria from tonsilli- tis. J of JPn Soc for Stomato-pharyngol 11:231~237, 1999. first choice for oral administration in patients with acute bacterial tonsillitis, while SBT/CPZ is the first choice for intravenous therapy. Received February 20, 2003 Accepted April 23, 2003 Mailing address:Shinya Takano, Department of Otorhi- Summary nolaryngology, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, 3211 Kozukue- cho Kouhoku-ku Yokohama, Kanagawa, 222-0036 We reviewed the treatment of 96 patients with acute bacterial tonsillitis..
Recommended publications
  • Redalyc.Patterns of Antimicrobial Therapy in Acute Tonsillitis: a Cross
    Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências ISSN: 0001-3765 [email protected] Academia Brasileira de Ciências Brasil JOHN, LISHA J.; CHERIAN, MEENU; SREEDHARAN, JAYADEVAN; CHERIAN, TAMBI Patterns of Antimicrobial therapy in acute tonsillitis: A cross-sectional Hospital-based study from UAE Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, vol. 86, núm. 1, enero-marzo, 2014, pp. 451-457 Academia Brasileira de Ciências Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=32730090032 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (2014) 86(1): 451-457 (Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences) Printed version ISSN 0001-3765 / Online version ISSN 1678-2690 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201420120036 www.scielo.br/aabc Patterns of Antimicrobial therapy in acute tonsillitis: A cross-sectional Hospital-based study from UAE LISHA J. JOHN1, MEENU CHERIAN2, JAYADEVAN SREEDHARAN3 and TAMBI CHERIAN2 1Department of Pharmacology, Gulf Medical University, 4184, Ajman, United Arab Emirates 2Department of ENT, Gulf Medical College Hospital, 4184, Ajman, United Arab Emirates 3Statistical Support Facility, Centre for Advanced Biomedical Research and Innovation, Gulf Medical University, 4184, Ajman, United Arab Emirates Manuscript received on December 20, 2012; accepted for publication on October 14, 2013 ABSTRACT Background: Diseases of the ear, nose and throat (ENT) are associated with significant impairment of the daily life and a major cause for absenteeism from work.
    [Show full text]
  • AMR Surveillance in Pharma: a Case-Study for Data Sharingauthor by Professor Barry Cookson
    AMR Open Data Initiative AMR Surveillance in Pharma: a case-study for data sharingauthor by Professor Barry Cookson External Consultant to Project eLibrary • Division of Infection and Immunity, Univ. College London ESCMID• Dept. of Microbiology, © St Thomas’ Hospital Background of “90 day Project” Addressed some recommendations of the first Wellcome funded multi-disciplinary workshop (included Pharma Academia & Public Health invitees: 27thauthor July 2017 (post the Davos Declaration): by 1) Review the landscape of existing Pharma AMR programmes, their protocols,eLibrary data standards and sets 2) Develop a "portal" (register/platform) to access currently available AMR Surveillance data ESCMID Important ©to emphasise that this is a COLLABORATION between Pharma and others Overview of Questionnaire Content • General information - including name,author years active, countries, antimicrobials, microorganisms.by • Methodology - including accreditation, methodology for; surveillance, isolate collection, organism identification, breakpointseLibrary used, • Dataset - including data storage methodology, management and how accessed. ESCMID © 13 Company Responses author 7 by 3 3 eLibrary ESCMID © Structure of register Companies can have different ways of referring to their activities: We had to choose a consistent framework. author Companies Companyby 1 Programmes Programme A Programme B eLibrary Antimicrobials 1 2 3 4 5 company’s product comparator company’s product antimicrobials Programmes canESCMID contain multiple studies (e.g. Pfizer has© single
    [Show full text]
  • Consideration of Antibacterial Medicines As Part Of
    Consideration of antibacterial medicines as part of the revisions to 2019 WHO Model List of Essential Medicines for adults (EML) and Model List of Essential Medicines for children (EMLc) Section 6.2 Antibacterials including Access, Watch and Reserve Lists of antibiotics This summary has been prepared by the Health Technologies and Pharmaceuticals (HTP) programme at the WHO Regional Office for Europe. It is intended to communicate changes to the 2019 WHO Model List of Essential Medicines for adults (EML) and Model List of Essential Medicines for children (EMLc) to national counterparts involved in the evidence-based selection of medicines for inclusion in national essential medicines lists (NEMLs), lists of medicines for inclusion in reimbursement programs, and medicine formularies for use in primary, secondary and tertiary care. This document does not replace the full report of the WHO Expert Committee on Selection and Use of Essential Medicines (see The selection and use of essential medicines: report of the WHO Expert Committee on Selection and Use of Essential Medicines, 2019 (including the 21st WHO Model List of Essential Medicines and the 7th WHO Model List of Essential Medicines for Children). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 1021). Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/330668/9789241210300-eng.pdf?ua=1) and Corrigenda (March 2020) – TRS1021 (https://www.who.int/medicines/publications/essentialmedicines/TRS1021_corrigenda_March2020. pdf?ua=1). Executive summary of the report: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/325773/WHO- MVP-EMP-IAU-2019.05-eng.pdf?ua=1.
    [Show full text]
  • WO 2010/025328 Al
    (12) INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (19) World Intellectual Property Organization International Bureau (10) International Publication Number (43) International Publication Date 4 March 2010 (04.03.2010) WO 2010/025328 Al (51) International Patent Classification: (81) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every A61K 31/00 (2006.01) kind of national protection available): AE, AG, AL, AM, AO, AT, AU, AZ, BA, BB, BG, BH, BR, BW, BY, BZ, (21) International Application Number: CA, CH, CL, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DK, DM, DO, PCT/US2009/055306 DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, (22) International Filing Date: HN, HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IS, JP, KE, KG, KM, KN, KP, 28 August 2009 (28.08.2009) KR, KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LT, LU, LY, MA, MD, ME, MG, MK, MN, MW, MX, MY, MZ, NA, NG, NI, (25) Filing Language: English NO, NZ, OM, PE, PG, PH, PL, PT, RO, RS, RU, SC, SD, (26) Publication Language: English SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TJ, TM, TN, TR, TT, TZ, UA, UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, ZM, ZW. (30) Priority Data: 61/092,497 28 August 2008 (28.08.2008) US (84) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every kind of regional protection available): ARIPO (BW, GH, (71) Applicant (for all designated States except US): FOR¬ GM, KE, LS, MW, MZ, NA, SD, SL, SZ, TZ, UG, ZM, EST LABORATORIES HOLDINGS LIMITED [IE/ ZW), Eurasian (AM, AZ, BY, KG, KZ, MD, RU, TJ, —]; 18 Parliament Street, Milner House, Hamilton, TM), European (AT, BE, BG, CH, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, Bermuda HM12 (BM).
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Antibiotics Book
    Andrew V DeLong, Jared C Harris, Brittany S Larcart, Chandler B Massey, Chelsie D Northcutt, Somuayiro N Nwokike, Oscar A Otieno, Harsh M Patel, Mehulkumar P Patel, Pratik Pravin Patel, Eugene I Rowell, Brandon M Rush, Marc-Edwin G Saint-Louis, Amy M Vardeman, Felicia N Woods, Giso Abadi, Thomas J. Manning Computational Antibiotics Valdosta State University is located in South Georgia. Computational Antibiotics Index • Computational Details and Website Access (p. 8) • Acknowledgements (p. 9) • Dedications (p. 11) • Antibiotic Historical Introduction (p. 13) Introduction to Antibiotic groups • Penicillin’s (p. 21) • Carbapenems (p. 22) • Oxazolidines (p. 23) • Rifamycin (p. 24) • Lincosamides (p. 25) • Quinolones (p. 26) • Polypeptides antibiotics (p. 27) • Glycopeptide Antibiotics (p. 28) • Sulfonamides (p. 29) • Lipoglycopeptides (p. 30) • First Generation Cephalosporins (p. 31) • Cephalosporin Third Generation (p. 32) • Fourth-Generation Cephalosporins (p. 33) • Fifth Generation Cephalosporin’s (p. 34) • Tetracycline antibiotics (p. 35) Computational Antibiotics Antibiotics Covered (in alphabetical order) Amikacin (p. 36) Cefempidone (p. 98) Ceftizoxime (p. 159) Amoxicillin (p. 38) Cefepime (p. 100) Ceftobiprole (p. 161) Ampicillin (p. 40) Cefetamet (p. 102) Ceftoxide (p. 163) Arsphenamine (p. 42) Cefetrizole (p. 104) Ceftriaxone (p. 165) Azithromycin (p.44) Cefivitril (p. 106) Cefuracetime (p. 167) Aziocillin (p. 46) Cefixime (p. 108) Cefuroxime (p. 169) Aztreonam (p.48) Cefmatilen ( p. 110) Cefuzonam (p. 171) Bacampicillin (p. 50) Cefmetazole (p. 112) Cefalexin (p. 173) Bacitracin (p. 52) Cefodizime (p. 114) Chloramphenicol (p.175) Balofloxacin (p. 54) Cefonicid (p. 116) Cilastatin (p. 177) Carbenicillin (p. 56) Cefoperazone (p. 118) Ciprofloxacin (p. 179) Cefacetrile (p. 58) Cefoselis (p. 120) Clarithromycin (p. 181) Cefaclor (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Different Antibiotic Treatments for Group a Streptococcal Pharyngitis (Review)
    Different antibiotic treatments for group A streptococcal pharyngitis (Review) van Driel ML, De Sutter AIM, Keber N, Habraken H, Christiaens T This is a reprint of a Cochrane review, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration and published in The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 10 http://www.thecochranelibrary.com Different antibiotic treatments for group A streptococcal pharyngitis (Review) Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. TABLE OF CONTENTS HEADER....................................... 1 ABSTRACT ...................................... 1 PLAINLANGUAGESUMMARY . 2 BACKGROUND .................................... 2 OBJECTIVES ..................................... 3 METHODS ...................................... 3 RESULTS....................................... 5 DISCUSSION ..................................... 8 AUTHORS’CONCLUSIONS . 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . 11 REFERENCES ..................................... 12 CHARACTERISTICSOFSTUDIES . 16 DATAANDANALYSES. 43 Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Cephalosporin versus penicillin, Outcome 1 Resolution of symptoms post-treatment (ITT analysis). ................................... 45 Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Cephalosporin versus penicillin, Outcome 2 Resolution of symptoms post-treatment (evaluable participants)................................... 46 Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 Cephalosporin versus penicillin, Outcome 3 Resolution of symptoms within 24 hours of treatment(ITTanalysis).. 47 Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 Cephalosporin versus penicillin, Outcome
    [Show full text]
  • BMJ Open Is Committed to Open Peer Review. As Part of This Commitment We Make the Peer Review History of Every Article We Publish Publicly Available
    BMJ Open is committed to open peer review. As part of this commitment we make the peer review history of every article we publish publicly available. When an article is published we post the peer reviewers’ comments and the authors’ responses online. We also post the versions of the paper that were used during peer review. These are the versions that the peer review comments apply to. The versions of the paper that follow are the versions that were submitted during the peer review process. They are not the versions of record or the final published versions. They should not be cited or distributed as the published version of this manuscript. BMJ Open is an open access journal and the full, final, typeset and author-corrected version of record of the manuscript is available on our site with no access controls, subscription charges or pay-per-view fees (http://bmjopen.bmj.com). If you have any questions on BMJ Open’s open peer review process please email [email protected] BMJ Open Pediatric drug utilization in the Western Pacific region: Australia, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan Journal: BMJ Open ManuscriptFor ID peerbmjopen-2019-032426 review only Article Type: Research Date Submitted by the 27-Jun-2019 Author: Complete List of Authors: Brauer, Ruth; University College London, Research Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy Wong, Ian; University College London, Research Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy; University of Hong Kong, Centre for Safe Medication Practice and Research, Department
    [Show full text]
  • Revision of Precautions
    Published by Translated by Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency This English version is intended to be a reference material to provide convenience for users. In the event of inconsistency between the Japanese original and this English translation, the former shall prevail. Revision of Precautions Cefmenoxime hydrochloride (preparations for otic and nasal use), chloramphenicol (solution for topical use, oral dosage form), tetracycline hydrochloride (powders, capsules), polymixin B sulfate (powders), clindamycin hydrochloride, clindamycin phosphate (injections), benzylpenicillin potassium, benzylpenicillin benzathine hydrate, lincomycin hydrochloride hydrate, aztreonam, amoxicillin hydrate, ampicillin hydrate, ampicillin sodium, potassium clavulanate/amoxicillin hydrate, dibekacin sulfate (injections), sultamicillin tosilate hydrate, cefaclor, cefazolin sodium, cefazolin sodium hydrate, cephalexin (oral dosage form with indications for otitis media), cefalotin sodium, cefixime hydrate, cefepime dihydrochloride hydrate, cefozopran hydrochloride, cefotiam hydrochloride (intravenous injections), cefcapene pivoxil hydrochloride hydrate, cefditoren pivoxil, cefdinir, ceftazidime hydrate, cefteram pivoxil, ceftriaxone sodium hydrate, cefpodoxime proxetil, cefroxadine hydrate, cefuroxime axetil, tebipenem pivoxil, doripenem hydrate, bacampicillin hydrochloride, panipenem/betamipron, faropenem sodium hydrate, flomoxef sodium, fosfomycin calcium hydrate, meropenem hydrate, chloramphenicol sodium succinate,
    [Show full text]
  • European Surveillance of Healthcare-Associated Infections in Intensive Care Units
    TECHNICAL DOCUMENT European surveillance of healthcare-associated infections in intensive care units HAI-Net ICU protocol Protocol version 1.02 www.ecdc.europa.eu ECDC TECHNICAL DOCUMENT European surveillance of healthcare- associated infections in intensive care units HAI-Net ICU protocol, version 1.02 This technical document of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) was coordinated by Carl Suetens. In accordance with the Staff Regulations for Officials and Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union and the ECDC Independence Policy, ECDC staff members shall not, in the performance of their duties, deal with a matter in which, directly or indirectly, they have any personal interest such as to impair their independence. This is version 1.02 of the HAI-Net ICU protocol. Differences between versions 1.01 (December 2010) and 1.02 are purely editorial. Suggested citation: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. European surveillance of healthcare- associated infections in intensive care units – HAI-Net ICU protocol, version 1.02. Stockholm: ECDC; 2015. Stockholm, March 2015 ISBN 978-92-9193-627-4 doi 10.2900/371526 Catalogue number TQ-04-15-186-EN-N © European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, 2015 Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged. TECHNICAL DOCUMENT HAI-Net ICU protocol, version 1.02 Table of contents Abbreviations ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Update on the Management of Antibiotic Allergy Bernard Yu-Hor Thong*
    Review Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2010 April;2(2):77-86. doi: 10.4168/aair.2010.2.2.77 pISSN 2092-7355 • eISSN 2092-7363 Update on the Management of Antibiotic Allergy Bernard Yu-Hor Thong* Department of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Drug allergy to antibiotics may occur in the form of immediate or non-immediate (delayed) hypersensitivity reactions. Immediate reactions are usual- ly IgE-mediated whereas non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions are usually non-IgE or T-cell mediated. The clinical manifestations of antibiotic allergy may be cutaneous, organ-specific (e.g., blood dyscracias, hepatitis, interstitial nephritis), systemic (e.g., anaphylaxis, drug induced hypersen- sitivity syndrome) or various combinations of these. Severe cutaneous adverse reactions manifesting as Stevens Johnson syndrome or toxic epider- mal necrolysis (TEN) may be potentially life-threatening. The management of antibiotic allergy begins with the identification of the putative antibiot- ic from a detailed and accurate drug history, complemented by validated in-vivo and in-vitro allergological tests. This will facilitate avoidance of the putative antibiotic through patient education, use of drug alert cards, and electronic medical records with in-built drug allergy/adverse drug reaction prescription and dispensing checks. Knowledge of the evidence for specific antibiotic cross-reactivities is also important in patient education. Apart from withdrawal of the putative antibiotic, immunomodulatory agents like high-dose intravenous immunoglobulins may have a role in TEN.
    [Show full text]
  • E-Table 1. Drug Classification Category Name Generic Name
    BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance Supplemental material placed on this supplemental material which has been supplied by the author(s) Thorax e-Table 1. Drug classification Category Name Generic Name Antiplatelets clopidogrel, cilostazol, ticlopidine2, beraprost, beraprost–long acting, complavin Anticoagulants 2,3 dabigatran Statins1,2,3 atorvastatin2, simvastatin, pitavastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, amlodipine/atorvastatin Sodium channel blockers4,5† mexiletine, aprindine, cibenzoline Beta blocker acebutolol2 Class III antiarrhythmic drugs amiodarone1–6 Calcium channel blockers bepridil1, amlodipine/atorvastatin, telmisartan/amlodipine, valsartan/amlodipine, valsartan/cilnidipine, candesartan/amlodipine Angiotensin/converting enzyme enalapril inhibitor2‡ Thiazides trichlormethiazide, hydrochlorothiazide3,5, benzylhydrochlorothiazide/reserpine/carbazochrome, mefruside, telmisartan/hydrochlorothiazide, valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide, candesartan/hydrochlorothiazide, candesartan/trichlormethiazide, losartan/hydrochlorothiazide NSAIDs diclofenac2, celecoxib, loxoprofen, etodolac, nabumetone, pranoprofen Anti-rheumatics actarit, iguratimod, tofacitinib, penicillamine2–5, leflunomide1,3, sodium aurothiomalate2–6#, bucillamine Leukotriene receptor antagonist2* pranlukast 5-ASA mesalazine, salazosulfapyridine5 Tricyclic antidepressant Imipramine5, cromipramine, maprotiline Antiepileptics valproate, phenytoin2,3,5, ethotoin, carbamazepine2–5, zonisamide Interferon1,2,3
    [Show full text]
  • Vs. Long-Course Antibiotic Treatment for Acute Streptococcal Pharyngitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    antibiotics Review Short- vs. Long-Course Antibiotic Treatment for Acute Streptococcal Pharyngitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Anna Engell Holm * , Carl Llor, Lars Bjerrum and Gloria Cordoba Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, Øster Farimagsgade 5, 1014 Copenhagen, Denmark; [email protected] (C.L.); [email protected] (L.B.); [email protected] (G.C.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +45-261-110-54 Received: 9 September 2020; Accepted: 21 October 2020; Published: 26 October 2020 Abstract: BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of short courses of antibiotic therapy for patients with acute streptococcal pharyngitis. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials comparing short-course antibiotic therapy ( 5 days) with long-course antibiotic therapy ( 7 days) for patients with ≤ ≥ streptococcal pharyngitis were included. Two primary outcomes: early clinical cure and early bacterial eradication. RESULTS: Fifty randomized clinical trials were included. Overall, short-course antibiotic treatment was as effective as long-course antibiotic treatment for early clinical cure (odds ratio (OR) 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.15). Subgroup analysis showed that short-course penicillin was less effective for early clinical cure (OR 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.82) and bacteriological eradication (OR 0.34; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.61) in comparison to long-course penicillin. Short-course macrolides were equally effective, compared to long-course penicillin. Finally, short-course cephalosporin was more effective for early clinical cure (OR 1.48; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.96) and early microbiological cure (OR 1.60; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.27) in comparison to long-course penicillin.
    [Show full text]