Vancomycin flushing reaction after intraperitoneal vancomycin: A case report.

Vancomycin has been reported to cause vancomycin flushing reaction (VFR), a hypersensitivity reaction that mostly occurs after intravenous administration. The incidence of VFR in a patient receiving intraperitoneal vancomycin is rare. We report a case of a female peritoneal dialysis (PD) patient with a PD-related peritonitis who developed VFR after intraperitoneal administration of 2000 mg vancomycin. Seventy-five minutes after instillation, she developed flushing, a pruritic erythema on the upper body and swelling of the lips. Blood results revealed a vancomycin plasma concentration of 54.8 mg/L and a normal tryptase level. During a relapse of her PD-related peritonitis, vancomycin was successfully reintroduced in a 50% reduced dose. No symptoms of VFR developed, and the corresponding vancomycin plasma concentration was 33.6 mg/L. Intraperitoneal treatment was continued with 500 mg vancomycin every 2-3 days with frequently measured, adequate trough levels ranging from 15-22 mg/L. This case illustrates the risk factors for the development of VFR after intraperitoneal administration of vancomycin, namely a high and concentrated loading dose together with a low body weight, a fast peritoneal transport state and peritonitis. Reintroduction of vancomycin after occurrence of VFR is safe, but a lower loading dose or a slower instillation rate is recommended.

Continuous infusion of cefiderocol in a critically ill patient with continuous venovenous haemofiltration.

Cefiderocol is a broad-spectrum cephalosporin antibiotic and is indicated in patients with difficult-to-treat Gram-negative bacterial infections. Cefiderocol is applied as a 2-4-times daily prolonged 3-h infusion. The therapeutic target of cefiderocol suggests that continuous infusion (CI) may be advantageous, since it is more likely to achieve 100% of time of the unbound concentration above the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC). However, limited information on cefiderocol as CI has been assessed. We present a case of a critically ill 37-year-old woman with continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) treated with a CI of cefiderocol for multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. She received 4 g per 24 h, in accordance with the recommendations for the total daily dose during CVVH with an effluent flow rate of 2.1-3 L/h. We evaluated intraperitoneal, plasma arterial pre- and postfilter and ultrafiltrate (urine) total cefiderocol concentrations and discussed the pharmacokinetics in respect to the CVVH settings. The predicted unbound plasma concentrations during CI resulted in 6.8-9.5-fold higher concentrations than the adopted MIC of 2 mg/L for cefiderocol against P. aeruginosa. The optimal time of the unbound concentration >MIC target of cefiderocol was met during the sampling period, suggesting adequate exposure during the total treatment period. The obtained intraperitoneal concentration indicated adequate cefiderocol exposure at the site of infection. Continuous infusion of 4 g cefiderocol per 24 h led to sufficient plasma concentrations in our anuric critically ill patient treated with CVVH. This case is supportive to the use of cefiderocol as continuous infusion.

The potential for deprescribing in a palliative oncology patient population: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The use of preventive medication in palliative oncology patients may be inappropriate due to limited life expectancy. Deprescribing tools are available but time-consuming and not always tailored to this specific population. Our primary goal was to identify potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in palliative oncology patients with a life expectancy of up to 2 years using an adapted deprescribing tool. Our secondary aim was to identify patient characteristics associated with the presence of PIMs. METHODS: Oncology patients with a life expectancy of up to 2 years were included cross-sectionally. An adapted deprescribing tool was developed to identify PIMs. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with having PIMs. RESULTS: A total of 218 patients were included in this study of which 56% had at least one PIM with a population mean of 1.1 PIM per patient. Most frequently defined PIMs were antihypertensive drugs and gastric acid inhibitors. Identification of PIMs by review took an estimated 5-10 min per patient. Polypharmacy, age >65 years and inpatient/outpatient status were found to be associated with having at least one PIM. CONCLUSIONS: Deprescribing is possible in more than half of palliative oncology patients with a life expectancy of up to 2 years. The adapted deprescribing tool used is non-time consuming and suitable for palliative oncology patients, regardless of age.