ABSTRACT
The consumption of quinolones as first-line treatment has increased in recent years, leading to an increase in the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to this antibiotic group. Both diagnosis and management of HSRs to quinolones are complex and controversial. These practical guidelines aim to provide recommendations for effective clinical practice. The recommendations were drafted by an expert panel that reviewed the literature regarding HSRs to quinolones and analyzed controversies in this area. Most HSRs to quinolones are immediate and severe. The risk for HSRs is higher in patients who report allergy to ß-lactams, moxifloxacininduced anaphylaxis, and immediate reactions than in patients who report reactions to quinolones inducing other symptoms. The usefulness of skin tests in diagnosing HSRs to quinolones is controversial, with sensitivity and specificity varying between studies. Most in vitro tests are produced in-house, with no validated commercial options. The basophil activation test has proven useful for diagnosing immediate reactions, albeit with diverse results regarding sensitivity. Drug provocation testing is currently the gold standard for confirming or excluding the diagnosis and for finding safe alternatives, although it is contraindicated in patients with severe reactions. Cross-reactivity between quinolones has proven controversial in several studies, with the lowest cross-reactivity reported for levofloxacin. Desensitization may be considered in allergy to quinolones when no other alternatives are available.
Subject(s)
Allergens/adverse effects , Anti-Allergic Agents/adverse effects , Desensitization, Immunologic/methods , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/diagnosis , Quinolones/adverse effects , Allergens/immunology , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Basophil Degranulation Test , Cross Reactions , Drug Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , Drug Hypersensitivity/etiology , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/drug therapy , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Quinolones/therapeutic use , Skin TestsABSTRACT
The consumption of quinolones as first-line treatment has increased in recent years, leading to an increase in the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to this antibiotic group. Both diagnosis and management of HSRs to quinolones are complex and controversial. These practical guidelines aim to provide recommendations for effective clinical practice. The recommendations were drafted by an expert panel that reviewed the literature regarding HSRs to quinolones and analyzed controversies in this area. Most HSRs to quinolones are immediate and severe. The risk for HSRs is higher in patients who report allergy to ß-lactams, moxifloxacininduced anaphylaxis, and immediate reactions than in patients who report reactions to quinolones inducing other symptoms. The usefulness of skin tests in diagnosing HSRs to quinolones is controversial, with sensitivity and specificity varying between studies. Most in vitro tests are produced in-house, with no validated commercial options. The basophil activation test has proven useful for diagnosing immediate reactions, albeit with diverse results regarding sensitivity. Drug provocation testing is currently the gold standard for confirming or excluding the diagnosis and for finding safe alternatives, although it is contraindicated in patients with severe reactions. Cross-reactivity between quinolones has proven controversial in several studies, with the lowest cross-reactivity reported for levofloxacin. Desensitization may be considered in allergy to quinolones when no other alternatives are available (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Desensitization, Immunologic/methods , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , Basophil Degranulation Test , Cross Reactions , Skin TestsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the presence of endotoxin, bacteria, and potential humoral and cellular mediators in thoracic duct lymph and peripheral blood in patients with severe refractory multiple organ dysfunction. DESIGN: Convenience sample. SETTING: General intensive care unit of a university hospital. PATIENTS: Two men and 2 women were studied after a mean of 7.25 days (range, 6-9 days) of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. The primary injury was thoracic in 1 patient and abdominal in 3 patients. INTERVENTION: The thoracic duct was cannulated with a 7F catheter and samples of lymph and peripheral blood were obtained. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Simultaneous lymph and serum levels of lipopolysaccharide, tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin-1 beta, and interleukin-6, and activation markers on T lymphocytes. RESULTS: Lipopolysaccharide and cytokine levels were low in lymph and serum, except for a mean lymph-to-serum ratio of 53.4 for interleukin-1 beta. There was phenotypical evidence of intense polyclonal T-lymphocyte activation in both lymph and peripheral blood with increased lymph-to-peripheral blood ratios. Increased percentages in lymph of CD45RA + CD45RO + lymphocytes were observed. In 1 patient, Proteus mirabilis grew simultaneously in lymph, pancreatic necrosis fluid, and a central venous catheter tip. All simultaneous blood cultures were negative. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide evidence of the participation of the gut-associated lymphatic tissue in the pathogenesis of the multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, suggesting that T-cell activation and cytokine production occur at the gut level. Future studies are needed to confirm and extend our findings.
