Premium
Role of glycopeptide antibiotics in the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients
Author(s) -
Smith S. R.,
Cheesbrough J.,
Harding I.,
Davies J. M.
Publication year - 1990
Publication title -
british journal of haematology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.907
H-Index - 186
eISSN - 1365-2141
pISSN - 0007-1048
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2141.1990.tb07938.x
Subject(s) - teicoplanin , antibiotics , medicine , vancomycin , glycopeptide , neutropenia , glycopeptide antibiotic , febrile neutropenia , empirical treatment , intensive care medicine , microbiology and biotechnology , chemotherapy , biology , staphylococcus aureus , bacteria , genetics
S ummary The exact timing of the introduction of the glycopeptide antibiotics teicoplanin and vancomycin in the management of the febrile neutropenic patient continues to be controversial. However, there are certain firm criteria now emerging. Bacteraemia can be eradicated with a success rate approaching 100% in cases where the organism can be identified and shown to be sensitive. Approximately 6 5% of cases of soft‐tissue infection, usually occurring with the use of a Hickman or equivalent indwelling catheter, are associated with the presence on culture of Gram‐positive organisms of presumed skin origin. Such infection is an indication for the early use of antibiotics with proven activity against coagulase‐negative staphylococci and diptheroids. Resolution of fever in up to 50% of cases may result from using‘planned progressive therapy’: the introduction of specific Gram‐positive cover in patients who have failed to respond at 48–72 h to regimens such as a ureidopenicillin or a third‐generation cephalosporin with or without an amino glycoside. This approach reduces the number of patients who go on to receive empirical amphotericin B intravenously for presumed fungal infection. Using teicoplanin or vancomycin as first‐line agents in the empirical treatment of first fever in febrile neutropenic patients is perhaps more controversial. Recent developments which include using quinolone‐based prophylaxis more widely and introducing cytokines to reduce the period of neutropenia may increase the likelihood that a neutropenic patient's febrile episode will be due to a Gram‐positive organism. The dilemma of choosing broad‐spectrum monotherapy or targeted combination therapy in this situation remains unresolved. Current studies, however, should help to clarify this situation. Finally, other current studies of teicoplanin and vancomycin as prophylactic agents administered either orally or systemically, may provide additional indications for their use in the neutropenic patient.