Hydration Methods for Cisplatin Containing Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity (CIN) can be prevented by fluid hydration, electrolyte supplementation, or forced diuresis; however, the best way to prevent CIN is still unknown. The aim of this study was to provide objective evidence on the optimal design of hydration schemes to prevent CIN based on an update of the literature. METHODS: A Pubmed and Embase search were conducted in December 2021 and repeated in April 2022 and March 2023. Two independent reviewers screened the articles. The included articles were categorized and reviewed per category. RESULTS: Twenty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. The included studies varied widely. Four out of seven studies investigating diuretics found a protective effect of adding mannitol to the hydration scheme. All six studies investigating duration and amount of volume of hydration found that a short-hydration scheme resulted in less CIN than a longer hydration scheme. Seven out of nine articles evaluating the role of electrolytes found that magnesium supplementation reduced the risk of nephrotoxicity. Three studies investigated the safety of oral hydration and concluded that nephrotoxicity did not occur more frequently after oral hydration. CONCLUSION: The hydration scheme of cisplatin should be short and consist of a relatively small amount of volume. The scheme should include mannitol and magnesium supplementation. Head-to-head studies are needed to investigate the safety of furosemide compared with mannitol and the dose of mannitol and magnesium.

Meta-análise Cochrane: teicoplanina versus vancomicina para infecções suspeitas ou confirmadas / Cochrane meta-analysis: teicoplanin versus vancomycin for proven or suspected infection

Objective: To compare efficacy and safety of vancomycin versus teicoplanin in patients with proven or suspected infection. Methods: Data Sources: Cochrane Renal Group's Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, nephrology textbooks and review articles. Inclusion criteria: Randomized controlled trials in any language comparing teicoplanin to vancomycin for patients with proven or suspected infection. Data extraction: Two authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted data. Study investigators were contacted for unpublished information. A random effect model was used to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: A total of 24 studies (2,610 patients) were included. The drugs had similar rates of clinical cure (RR: 1.03; 95%CI: 0.98-1.08), microbiological cure (RR: 0.98; 95%CI: 0.93-1.03) and mortality (RR: 1.02; 95%CI: 0.79-1.30). Teicoplanin had lower rates of skin rash (RR: 0.57; 95%CI: 0.35-0.92), red man syndrome (RR: 0.21; 95%CI: 0.08-0.59) and total adverse events (RR: 0.73; 95%CI: 0.53-1.00). Teicoplanin reduced the risk of nephrotoxicity (RR: 0.66; 95%CI: 0.48-0.90). This effect was consistent for patients receiving aminoglycosides (RR: 0.51; 95%CI: 0.30-0.88) or having vancomycin doses corrected by serum levels (RR: 0.22; 95%CI: 0.10-0.52). There were no cases of acute kidney injury needing dialysis. Limitations: Studies lacked a standardized definition for nephrotoxicity. Conclusions: Teicoplanin and vancomycin are equally effective; however the incidence of nephrotoxicity and other adverse events was lower with teicoplanin. It may be reasonable to consider teicoplanin for patients at higher risk for acute kidney injury.

Objetivo: Comparar eficácia e toxicidade da teicoplanina e da vancomicina em pacientes com infecção suspeita ou confirmada. Métodos: Fontes de dados: Cochrane Renal Group's Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, livros de referência e artigos de revisão. Critérios de inclusão: Ensaios clínicos controlados randomizados em qualquer idioma, comparando teicoplanina e vancomicina em pacientes com infecção suspeita ou confirmada. Extração de dados: Dois autores avaliaram a qualidade metodológica dos estudos e extraíram os dados de forma independente. Tentou-se obter dados não publicados diretamente com os autores de cada trabalho. Usou-se um modelo de efeito aleatório para estimar a razão de risco (RR) combinada, com um intervalo de confiança (IC) de 95%. Resultados: Foram incluídos 24 estudos (2.610 pacientes). As drogas tiveram taxas semelhantes de cura clínica (RR: 1,03; IC95%: 0,98-1,08), cura microbiológica (RR: 0,98; IC95%: 0,93-1,03) e mortalidade (RR: 1,02; IC95%: 0,79-1,30). A teicoplanina apresentou menores incidências de rash cutâneo (RR: 0,57; IC95%: 0,35-0,92), síndrome do homem vermelho (RR: 0,21; IC95%: 0,08-0,59) e eventos adversos em geral (RR: 0,73; IC95%: 0,53-1,00). A teicoplanina reduziu o risco de nefrotoxicidade (RR: 0,66; IC95%: 0,48-0,90). Esse efeito foi consistente em todos os subgrupos, inclusive aqueles com pacientes recebendo aminoglicosídeos concomitantes (RR: 0,51; IC95%: 0,30-0,88) oucom dosagens de vancomicina corrigidas pelo nível sérico (RR: 0,22; IC95%: 0,10-0,52). Não foi encontrado nenhum caso de injúria renal que necessitasse de diálise. Limitações: Os estudos não seguiram uma definição padrão de nefrotoxicidade. Conclusões: Teicoplanina e vancomicina têm eficácia semelhante; no entanto, o risco de nefrotoxicidade e outros eventos adversos foi menor com teicoplanina. É razoável considerar o uso de teicoplanina para pacientes em risco de desenvolver injúria renal aguda.