RESUMEN
Background: Sirolimus is a potent immunosuppressive in renal transplantation. However, its use is limited by some reported side effects. The objective of this study was to determine the side effect profile of sirolimus in renal transplant patients. Materials and Methods: In the present study, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 116 renal transplant patients treated with sirolimus alone or in combination with other immunosuppressive agents at private therapeutic centers in Isfahan, Iran, between March 2009 and February 2020. A checklist was used to collect data on demographic and clinical variables. Data were analyzed with independent samples t-test and Chi-squared test. Results: Our findings indicated that the most prevalent sirolimus-related side effects were edema (42.3%), proteinuria (37.5%), cytopenia (26.9%), abnormal level of liver enzymes (11.7%), and pneumonitis (9.7%). Stratification of side effects by sirolimus dose (<2 mg and ≥2 mg) demonstrated their dose-independent occurrence (P > 0.05). Pneumonitis was the most frequent reason for sirolimus cessation (58.7%). No significant differences were observed between males and females regarding the frequency of reasons for sirolimus cessation (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Edema, proteinuria, cytopenia, abnormal level of liver enzymes, and pneumonitis were the most prevalent sirolimus-related side effects in renal transplant patients. Further prospective cohort studies are warranted to detect underlying mechanisms and determinants of these side effects in renal transplant patients treated with sirolimus.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a common disease in the community, with various complications. An appropriate solution is immunosuppressive drugs, which may lead to weakening of the cellular immune system and body unresponsiveness to tuberculosis (TB). As TB sensitivity is determined by the amount of induration created in the Purified Protein Derivative (PPD) test, this study aims to evaluate the immune response to the PPD test and its booster in RA patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was performed on rheumatoid arthritis patients referred to Alzahra Hospital, Isfahan, treated with <20 mg glucocorticoid daily or 7.5 mg Methotrexate (MTX) weekly. The sampling method was simple and accessible. The PPD test was performed in patients using the Mantoux method after 72 hours, and seven days later, the results were interpreted in 72 hours after the PPD booster injection. Induration ≥5 mm was considered to be positive. The data was analyzed using the SPSS software. RESULTS: Nineteen patients had positive results in the initial and reminder tests and 81 patients had negative results in both tests. Six patients (6.9%) with negative results in the initial test changed to positive in the reminder test. There was no positive result in the initial test and negative result in the reminder one. The frequency distribution of the reminder test, based on the initial test was significant (P < 0.001). Also, the McNemar test showed that the changes in the reminder test based on the initial test had a significant difference (P = 0.031). CONCLUSION: It seems that in the endemic and developing areas, the PPD booster is applicable for diagnosing latent tuberculosis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Some evidence has shown benefits of probiotics in the management of minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE). We evaluated the efficacy of a multistrain probiotic compound, alone and in combination with lactulose, in the treatment of MHE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study has two parts. First, consecutive adult patients with MHE were randomized to receive lactulose (30-60 mL/day) + probiotic (200 million colony forming units of seven bacteria species/day) (Gp-LPr) or lactulose + placebo (Gp-L). In second part, a non-randomized group of patients received probiotic alone (Gp-Pr). Medication duration was for 2 weeks and patients were followed-up for another 8 weeks. Improvement in MHE status was assessed by psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES). Development of overt encephalopathy, hospitalization, and death were considered as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty patients (80% male, mean age 38.4 ± 9.6 years) completed the intervention. PHES significantly improved after medication in all the three groups (Gp-LPr: -3.8 ± 3.9 to -1.6 ± 3.0; Gp-L: -4.8 ± 4.1 to -1.6 ± 2.9; and Gp-Pr: -4.9 ± 3.7 to -2.1 ± 2.5, P < 0.001). After 8 weeks follow-up, improvement was maintained in Gp-LPr and Gp-Pr, but there was deterioration in those who did not receive probiotics (Gp-L: PHES score reversed to -4.8 ± 4.2). Two patients (one each in Gp-L and Gp-Pr) experienced overt encephalopathy. One patient was hospitalized due to worsening of ascites (Gp-LPr) and one due to spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (Gp-L). Side effects were mild and not significantly different among the groups. CONCLUSION: Lactulose and probiotics are effective for the treatment of MHE; however, probiotics, but not lactulose, have long-term effects. More studies are required before suggesting probiotics for the standard treatment of MHE.
