Neonatal pain score after use of paracetamol: Is there a relationship with serum trough concentration at steady state in preterm and term neonates?

OBJECTIVE: An easy to establish and patient-friendly biomarker to guide dosing of paracetamol in neonates is currently not available. The aim of this study was to determine the potential association between the serum trough concentration and area under the curve (AUC) of paracetamol at steady state and differences in pain scores in preterm and term neonates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study was performed, using an academic hospital database to identify neonates treated with intravenous or rectal paracetamol for at least 48 hours. At steady state, serum trough concentrations and the 24-hour AUC were determined. Pain was measured by COMFORTneo scores, before the 1st and 6th dose. Linear regression was performed to assess the association between serum trough concentration and 24-hour AUC and differences in pain scores. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients who received paracetamol due to a COMFORTneo score ≥ 14 (group 1) or who received prophylactic paracetamol because of upcoming surgery (group 2). RESULTS: 21 neonates were included. The median (interquartile range (IQR)) serum trough concentration of paracetamol before the 6th dose was 4.5 mg/L (2.7 - 8.5 mg/L). In subgroup 1, the median (IQR) COMFORTneo scores before the 1st and 6th dose were 17 (16.5 - 20) and 12 (11 - 16.5), respectively. In subgroup 2, the median (IQR) scores were 9 (8 - 10) and 11 (9 - 12), respectively. The serum trough concentration and 24-hour AUC were not associated with reduced pain scores (p = 0.12 and p = 0.67, respectively). CONCLUSION: No association was found between the serum trough concentration and 24-hour AUC of paracetamol at steady state and differences in pain scores in preterm and term neonates. Future research is needed to prospectively determine a patient-friendly biomarker to optimize the treatment with paracetamol.

Two patients with fluoropyrimidine overdose successfully managed without uridine triacetate.

INTRODUCTION: In this case report we describe two patients with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) overdose due to an unintentional increased infusion rate in which treatment with uridine triacetate was considered. Where previous case reports focus on the use of uridine triacetate in case of toxicity, this case report shows why it should be considered to abstain from the use of uridine triacetate. CASE REPORTS: The first patient is a 71-year-old woman who received 1200 mg/m2 5-FU in 2 h instead of 23 h. The second patient is a 74-year-old woman who received 2600 mg/m2 5-FU in 13 h instead of 24 h. The DPYD genotype of both patients was tested before the start of therapy and was found to be normal. MANAGEMENT & OUTCOME: Both patients received best supportive care and were admitted to the intensive care unit for monitoring of acute manifestations of toxicity. The first patient did not develop toxicity. The second patient did develop toxicity, but recovered completely. DISCUSSION: The rationale for abstaining from the use of uridine triacetate was the inadequacy of evidence backing its clinical and cost-effectiveness and the fact that uridine triacetate is not registered for the use in the European Union. Comparison of clinical outcomes of the already published open-label cohort with clinical outcomes of a comparable, well-described, best supportive care cohort is required before the added value of uridine triacetate can be determined. In addition, there is a need for a valid predictor of toxicity after fluoropyrimidine overdose.

Assessment of occupational exposure to nebulized isopropyl alcohol as disinfectant during aseptic compounding of parenteral cytotoxic drugs in cleanrooms.

Pharmacy technicians are exposed to volatile organic compounds, like the disinfectant isopropyl alcohol (IPA), during the process of aseptic compounding of parenteral cytotoxic drugs. The occupational exposure to nebulized IPA during aseptic compounding has not been investigated. The aim of this study was to investigate the exposure to IPA during aseptic compounding of parenteral cytotoxic drugs and to assess compliance with legal and regulatory limits. As a secondary endpoint, the difference between two disinfection methods was compared regarding the exposure to IPA. The exposure to IPA was measured during five working shifts of 8 hr and one shift of 4 hr. The concentration IPA was measured by using a six-gas monitor. Total daily exposure was calculated as 8-hr Time Weighted Average (TWA) air concentration in mg/m3 and compared with an Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) value of 500 mg/m3 and incidental peak exposure of 5,000 mg/m3. To assess whether the 8-hr TWA air concentration meets the legal and regulatory limits the Similar Exposure Groups (SEG) compliance test was used. A paired sample t-test was conducted to assess difference in exposure between two disinfection methods. The average 8-hr TWA exposure to IPA during the six measurements varied from 2.6 mg/m3 to 43.9 mg/m3 and the highest momentary concentration measured was 860 mg/m3. The result of the SEG compliance test was 3.392 (Ur value) and was greater than the Ut value of 2.187 which means the exposure to IPA is in compliance with the OEL value. No significant difference in exposure was shown between two disinfection methods (p = 0.49). In conclusion, exposure to IPA during aseptic compounding of parenteral cytotoxic drugs showed compliance to the OEL values with no significant difference in exposure between two disinfection methods.

Examination of Particulate Contamination in Parenteral Injections and Infusions Following Fluid Withdrawal Utilizing Conventional Needles and Filter Needles: Assessment of Compliance and Comparative Analysis.

Particulate contamination, the unintentional presence of particles in parenteral fluids, is associated with potential risks such as phlebitis and thrombophlebitis. Recent guidelines recommend the use of filter needles when withdrawing parenteral fluid from vials with a rubber stopper. However, the literature is limited and lacks clarity regarding the advantages of filter needles over conventional needles. The aim of this study was to assess the compliance of parenteral fluids regarding particulate contamination after withdrawing fluid using both conventional needles and filter needles, following the guidelines of European Pharmacopoeia (Ph. Eur.) and United States Pharmacopoeia (USP). Visible particles were counted through visual inspection and sub-visible particles were quantified utilizing the light obscuration particle count test. Particle counts for both types of needles were compared to Ph. Eur. and USP standards and differences in particle contamination were assessed using a Mann-Whitney U test. Both types of needles demonstrated compliance with Ph. Eur. and USP standards regarding particulate contamination of visible and sub-visible particles. However, filter needles exhibited a significantly higher particle count for particles with a size of ≥25 µm compared to conventional needles (p = 0.0029). In conclusion, both types of needles demonstrate suitability for aspirating fluid from vials featuring rubber stoppers regarding particulate contamination. Nevertheless, non-filter needles are preferred for withdrawing fluid from vials with a rubber stopper over filter needles due to their lower cost.

Container closure integrity testing and process validation of closed system transfer devices for aseptic reconstitution of drug vials connected to fluid bags.

OBJECTIVES: The closure integrity and process validation of closed system transfer devices (CSTDs) should be confirmed before implementation in clinical settings. We aimed to investigate the closure integrity and validate the aseptic procedure of two types of CSTDs by using a combination of the dye ingress test and a media fill test. METHODS: The dye ingress test with methylene blue was used for both CSTDs with 10 samples of drug vials of three brands. A media fill test was performed with both CSTDs (300 samples per CSTD, 150 carried out in a safety cabinet and 150 under non-classified environmental conditions). RESULTS: In all samples of both CSTDs, methylene blue was absent after visual inspection and spectrophotometric analysis. The nutrient media of one sample with CSTD A and none of the CSTD B samples were contaminated when reconstituted in a GMP grade A environment. Under non-classified environmental conditions, one sample of CSTD A and two samples of CSTD B were contaminated. CONCLUSIONS: Both CSTDs connected to the drug vials met the terms of closure integrity by using the dye ingress test. The aseptic procedure of CSTD B was validated with the media fill test when reconstituted in a GMP grade A environment, but failed for CSTD A. Both CSTDs failed the media fill test when reconstituted under non-classified environmental conditions.