The Annals Summaries of the Latest Medical Research!
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 29, No. 12, pp. 1197-1201.
© 1995 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pascual, B
Right arrow Articles by Lopez, A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pascual, B
Right arrow Articles by Lopez, A


Research Articles

Administration of lipid-emulsion versus conventional amphotericin B in patients with neutropenia

B Pascual, A Ayestaran, JB Montoro, J Oliveras, A Estibalez, A Julia, and A Lopez

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usefulness of a 20% lipid emulsion as a delivery system for amphotericin B (1 mg/mL) administered over 1 hour to patients with neutropenia with hematologic malignancies compared with amphotericin B (0.1 mg/mL) administered in dextrose 5% solution over the same time. DESIGN: A prospective, comparative, randomized, labeled study. SETTING: Hematology unit, pharmacy service, university general hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty patients with neutropenia with hematologic malignancies and proven or suspected fungal infections, 10 in the fat emulsion group (group 1) and 10 in the dextrose 5% group (group 2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical tolerance (i.e., fever, shaking chills, nausea, blood pressure, pulse rate) and biologic tolerance (i.e., urea, creatinine, sodium, potassium). RESULTS: Clinical tolerance was comparable in both groups although amphotericin B in fat emulsion was better tolerated. Medication for symptoms related to the administration of amphotericin B was given in 6 cases in group 1 and in 8 cases in group 2. There was a statistically significant difference in the urea concentrations between the 2 groups (p = 0.023); there was an observed increase between the initial and the final serum urea (56.8 mg/d in group 1, 79.8 mg/dL in group 2). Statistically significant differences in creatinine serum concentrations (84.9 mumol/L in group 1, 123.8 mumol/L in group 2) (p = 0.047) were found. No differences were found in the antifungal efficacy of the treatment. However, as amphotericin B was started in the majority of cases (75%) as empiric treatment for fever unresponsive to antibiotic therapy, it is difficult to compare the efficacy of both preparations. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical tolerance of lipid-emulsion infusions is similar to that of conventionally administered amphotericin B therapy. Renal toxicity appears to be decreased when the drug is administered in a fat emulsion. This type of preparation permits the reduction of the volume and the time of administration for amphotericin B therapy.





homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 1995 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.