Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Ther ; 24(5): e588-e591, 2017.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28816711

RESUMEN

CLINICAL FEATURES: The term multiple drug intolerance (MDI) is attributed to patients who experience adverse drug reactions to more than 3 different classes of medication without a known immunological mechanism. A special attention should be given to multiple drug-intolerant hypertension (MDI-HTN) that is a cause of drop out from treatment and consequent poor blood pressure control. Patients with MDIs account for 2%-5% of all population. The patient we present is a 63-year-old man with third-degree hypertension identified with intolerance to drugs from 4 major classes of antihypertensive medication. THERAPEUTIC CHALLENGE: Patients with MDIs are difficult to treat. They frequently also have numerous comorbidities and high cardiovascular risk. It is recognized that guidelines for the management of hypertension do not include an algorithm of action in situations of MDIs to medication. SOLUTION: We chose to use a recently proposed four-step algorithm for the management of MDI-HTN. A 1-month follow-up program was established. Weekly visits were scheduled to elicit about side effects and measure blood pressure . Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed after a month. The strategy was first to reuse medication from classes the patient was intolerant to, but in smaller doses and in combinations. Among same class members, we have chosen those with less adverse effects. Not all steps within the algorithm were followed since our patient did not need alternative formulation as liquid or transdermal ones. Anxiety medication was prescribed as nonlicensed antihypertensive medication. At the end of the follow-up month, blood pressure control was satisfactory, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was 135.5/83.0 mm Hg, and the patient did not claim any adverse drug reactions.


Asunto(s)
Ansiolíticos/uso terapéutico , Antihipertensivos/efectos adversos , Sustitución de Medicamentos/normas , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Antihipertensivos/administración & dosificación , Presión Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Monitoreo Ambulatorio de la Presión Arterial , Comorbilidad , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Sustitución de Medicamentos/métodos , Quimioterapia Combinada/métodos , Quimioterapia Combinada/normas , Excipientes/administración & dosificación , Excipientes/efectos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Uso Fuera de lo Indicado/normas , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto
2.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 13(3): 649-660, 2017 03 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27541270

RESUMEN

Prophylactic paracetamol administration impacts vaccine immune response; this study ( www.clinicaltrials.gov : NCT01235949) is the first to assess PHiD-CV immunogenicity following prophylactic ibuprofen administration. In this phase IV, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority study in Romania (November 2010-December 2012), healthy infants were randomized 3:3:3:1:1:1 to prophylactically receive immediate, delayed or no ibuprofen (IIBU, DIBU, NIBU) or paracetamol (IPARA, DPARA, NPARA) after each of 3 primary doses (PHiD-CV at age 3/4/5 months co-administered with DTPa-HBV-IPV/Hib at 3/5 and DTPa-IPV/Hib at 4 months) or booster dose (PHiD-CV and DTPa-HBV-IPV/Hib; 12-15 months). Non-inferiority of immune response one month post-primary vaccination in terms of percentage of infants with anti-pneumococcal antibody concentrations ≥0.2 µg/mL (primary objective) was demonstrated if the upper limit (UL) of the 98.25% confidence interval of difference between groups (NIBU vs IIBU, NIBU vs DIBU) was <10% for ≥7/10 serotypes. Immunogenicity and reactogenicity/safety were evaluated, including confirmatory analysis of difference in fever incidences post-primary vaccination in IBU or DIBU group compared to NIBU. Of 850 infants randomized, 812 were included in the total vaccinated cohort. Non-inferiority was demonstrated for both comparisons (UL was <10% for 9/10 vaccine serotypes; exceptions: 6B [NIBU], 23F [IIBU]). However, fever incidence post-primary vaccination in the IIBU and DIBU groups did not indicate a statistically significant reduction. Prophylactic administration (immediate or delayed) of paracetamol decreased fever incidence but seemed to reduce immune response to PHiD-CV, except when given only at booster. Twenty-seven serious adverse events were reported for 15 children; all resolved and were not vaccination-related.


Asunto(s)
Acetaminofén/administración & dosificación , Antipiréticos/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina Acelular/efectos adversos , Vacunas contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina Acelular/inmunología , Ibuprofeno/administración & dosificación , Vacunas Neumococicas/efectos adversos , Vacunas Neumococicas/inmunología , Anticuerpos Antibacterianos/sangre , Vacunas contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina Acelular/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Fiebre/epidemiología , Voluntarios Sanos , Humanos , Incidencia , Lactante , Masculino , Vacunas Neumococicas/administración & dosificación , Rumanía , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA