On the diagnosis of polycythaemia vera as assessed in the health and medical care in the Västra Götaland region, Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to assess how the diagnosis of polycythaemia vera (PV) was established and to study to which extent the classic Polycythemia Vera Study Group (PVSG) criteria and the revised criteria for the diagnosis of PV as proposed by Pearson and Messinezy in 1996 (PM criteria) were fulfilled when the diagnosis of PV was made. DESIGN AND SETTING: A questionnaire was sent to physicians in charge of haematological patients at the departments of medicine in 12 hospitals in the Health and Medical Care in the Västra Götaland Region (VGR), Sweden, with a population of 1.5 million inhabitants; they were asked to provide reports as regards all patients with an unequivocal diagnosis of PV during a 5-year period from January 1994 to December 1998. SUBJECTS: Full reports were obtained from six hospitals, which serve about 1.1 million inhabitants. The results from a total of 129 PV patients, 62 from two university hospitals (UHs) and 67 from four county hospitals (CHs), were the subject of the present analysis. Results. It was shown that measurement of the red cell mass (RCM) had been carried out in 61 of 62 (98%) patients in UHs compared with 24 of 67 (36%) patients at CHs (P < 0.01). By using ultrasound imaging and/or scintigraphy the spleen size had been determined in 55 of 62 (89%) patients at UHs and in 24 of 67 (36%) patients at CHs (P < 0.01). At the UHs, arterial oxygen saturation had been measured in 32 of 62 (52%) patients; the corresponding figure for the CH patients was 22 of 67 (33%). Plasma or serum erythropoietin (EPO) concentrations had been measured in 44 of 62 (71%) of PV patients at UHs and in 31 of 67 (46%) of patients at CHs; in all these cases the EPO concentrations were subnormal or not measurable. CONCLUSIONS: At the UHs only 37% of the PV patients fulfilled the PVSG criteria for the diagnosis of PV whereas the corresponding figure for CHs was 4% (P < 0.01). The adherence to PM criteria was, however, 71% at UHs compared with 16% at CHs (P < 0.01).

Empiric monotherapy for febrile neutropenia--a randomized study comparing meropenem with ceftazidime.

In this Swedish multicentre study we compared the efficacy of meropenem with ceftazidime for treatment of febrile neutropenia. 192 patients were randomized and the number of evaluable patients was 92 in the meropenem group and 95 in the ceftazidime group. 40 (43%) patients in the meropenem arm and 49 (52%) in the ceftazidime arm had acute leukaemia. 56 (61%) and 52 (55%) patients respectively had a neutrophil count of < 0.1 x 10(9)/l at randomization and the median duration of neutropenia was 6.5 and 8 d, respectively. Thirty-one (34%) and 28 (29%) patients had a microbiologically defined infection, 14 (15%) and 17 (18%) a clinically defined infection and the remaining 47 (51%) and 50 (53%) had unexplained fever. After 72 h of treatment, 46 (50%) patients in the meropenem arm and 53 (56%) patients in the ceftazidime arm were alive on unmodified monotherapy. 42 (46%) and 47 (49%) of these completed the study on monotherapy alone. Only 2 patients (2%) in each arm had to stop treatment owing to allergic reactions. None of the observed differences were statistically significant and we therefore conclude that meropenem was an effective and safe alternative to ceftazidime for empiric treatment of fever during neutropenia.