meropenem and Vomiting

The purpose of this article is to review the safety and tolerance of two carbapenems (imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem) in order to establish their possible use in different clinical settings. The tolerance and safety profile of both carbapemens in intravenous and intramuscular formulation is good. With imipenem/cilastatin, nausea and vomiting can constitute a practical problem requiring prolonged times of perfusion and high dilutions. The possibility of administering meropenem in intravenous infusion or bolus injection with lower volumes of fluid, without increasing the incidence of these adverse reactions, may have practical advantages in special situations. The possible neurotoxicity of the imipenem/cilastatin presents limitations of the use in high risk circumstances such as meningitis, previous alterations of CNS, renal insufficiency and concomitant administration of other drugs with neurotoxic profiles and when high doses of administration are needed. The meropenem, by the contrary, can be used in patients with infections of the CNS and other risk factors, at high doses, without increased risk of seizures.

Topics: Animals; Cilastatin; Drug Interactions; Epilepsy; Humans; Imipenem; Injections, Intramuscular; Kidney; Meropenem; Nausea; Opportunistic Infections; Thienamycins; Vomiting

To determine which carbapenem (imipenem/cilastatin or meropenem) was the preferable empiric antibiotic monotherapy in pre-engrafted pediatric bone marrow transplant (BMT) patients in terms of patient tolerance, therapeutic efficacy, and cost.. We prospectively analyzed 16 pediatric BMT patients who received meropenem, and retrospectively analyzed 16 matched patients who had received imipenem/cilastatin for BMT procedures during the prior 2-year period. We evaluated the patients for evidence of bacterial infection, necessity for concurrent antibiotics, vomiting episodes, duration of concurrent total parenteral nutrition (TPN), and cost of therapy.. We found no differences in the number of culture proven or clinically suspected breakthrough bacterial infections or the need for concurrent additional antibiotics between the groups. Our analysis found that patients who received meropenem experienced significantly less vomiting than those in the imipenem/cilastatin cohort. Our data showed both direct and indirect cost savings for the meropenem group. The statistical and clinical differences in the number of vomiting episodes between these groups impacted other aspects of patient care, antiemetic use, and TPN duration.. By switching to meropenem, we reduced the cost of antiemetic therapy per patient treatment course, and also showed a trend toward reduced duration of TPN. We found that meropenem provided both clinical and fiscal advantages over imipenem/cilastatin as empiric antibiotic monotherapy in neutropenic pediatric BMT patients.

Topics: Adolescent; Bacterial Infections; Bone Marrow Transplantation; Carbapenems; Child; Child, Preschool; Cilastatin; Drug Costs; Female; Humans; Imipenem; Male; Meropenem; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Protease Inhibitors; Thienamycins; Vomiting

Cystic fibrosis patients (children and young adults) with Pseudomonas spp. chest infections were treated with meropenem or ceftazidime. This study was the first to investigate the use of meropenem in cystic fibrosis. Meropenem was well tolerated with only transient elevations of serum transaminases. No patient experienced nausea and vomiting, even when meropenem was administered as a bolus injection. This allowed home therapy to be used. Meropenem appeared to be at least as active as ceftazidime even at the low doses used. Patients showed a greater improvement in respiratory function on meropenem than ceftazidime. Only one patient (out of 60 courses) failed to respond to meropenem (98% success rate) compared with two failures out of 21 episodes with ceftazidime (90% success rate). There was little emergence of resistance to meropenem even though some patients were treated up to eight times over a 2 year period.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Carbapenems; Ceftazidime; Cephalosporins; Child, Preschool; Cystic Fibrosis; Drug Tolerance; Humans; Liver; Meropenem; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Nausea; Pseudomonas Infections; Spirometry; Sputum; Thienamycins; Transaminases; Treatment Outcome; Vomiting

Distributive shock is a hyperdynamic process resulting from excessive vasodilatation. Impaired blood flow causes inadequate tissue perfusion, which can lead to end-organ damage. Although the most common etiology is septic shock, anaphylactic and other etiologies should be considered.. We report the case of a 30-year-old female who presented to the emergency department with nonspecific symptoms and hypotension after a viral upper respiratory infection. Her physical examination revealed mild edema and rebound tenderness in the right upper and bilateral lower quadrants. She also presented with hypotension concomitant with hypoperfusion symptoms, which were manifested by the loss of consciousness in the hour after her presentation. Neither etiologic agent nor drug use history was provided at the presentation; these may have caused anaphylaxis; however, she later reported that she took a propolis extract 1 day earlier. The hypotensive state was refractory to large amount of crystalloid infusion and a series of examinations were performed to determine the shock etiology. Computed tomography images showed pneumonic infiltrates in the lower zone of the right lung, an enlarged liver, a thickened gallbladder wall, and an extensive amount of free fluid in the perihepatic and retroperitoneal areas. All radiologic changes were thought to be due to a secondary condition that triggers them, none were considered as septic focus. Capillary leak syndrome was considered in differential diagnosis and 3 days after her presentation, her hypotension improved and she was discharged in a healthy state. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Capillary leak syndrome is a variant of distributive shock. After assessing other etiologies for this condition, emergency physicians should focus on a triggering event that may have caused hypoalbuminemia and a fluid shift.

Topics: Adult; Anaphylaxis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Capillary Leak Syndrome; Diagnosis, Differential; Emergency Service, Hospital; Female; Headache; Humans; Hypotension; Meropenem; Myalgia; Norepinephrine; Sepsis; Shock; Thienamycins; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Vasodilation; Vasodilator Agents; Vomiting