PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Burke A. Cunha

Publications and source records attributed to Burke A. Cunha.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Intravenous to oral antibiotic switch therapy.

I.v.-to-p.o. switch therapy has become the mainstay of antibiotic therapy for the majority of patients. I.v.-to-p.o. switch therapy is inappropriate for critically ill patients who require i.v. antibiotic therapy and should not be considered in patients who have the inability to absorb drugs. These exceptions constitute a very small percentage of hospitalized patients for which i.v.-to-p.o. switch therapy is ideal. I.v.-to-p.o. switch therapy is best achieved with antibiotics that have high bioavailability that result in the same blood and tissue concentrations of antibiotic as their intravenous counterpart and have few gastrointestinal side effects. Antibiotics ideal for i.v.-to-p.o. switch programs include chloramphenicol, clindamycin, metronidazole, TMP-SMX, fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, doxycycline, minocycline, levofloxacin, gatifloxacin, moxifloxacin and linezolid. Antibiotics that may be used in i.v.-to-p.o. switch programs that have lower bioavailability but are effective include beta-lactams and macrolides. For antibiotics with no oral formulation, e.g., carbapenems, equivalent coverage must be provided with an oral antibiotic from an unrelated class. Excluding gastrointestinal malabsorptive disorders, disease state is not a determinant of suitability for i.v.-to-p.o. switch programs. I.v.-to-p.o. switch programs should be used in patients with any infectious disease disorder for which there is effective oral therapy and is not limited to certain infectious diseases. Oral absorption of antibiotics is near normal in all but the most critically ill patients. Therefore, even in sick, hospitalized individuals, p.o. therapy is appropriate. I.v-to-p.o. switch therapy has several important advantages including decreasing drug cost (i.v. vs. p.o.), decreasing length of stay permitting earlier discharge and optimal reimbursement and decreasing or eliminating i.v. line phlebitis and sepsis with its cost implications. Clinicians should consider all patients, except the most critically ill or those unable to absorb oral medications, as candidates for treatment for most or all of their antibiotic treatment with oral antibiotics. (c) 2001 Prous Science. All rights reserved.

Journal Article↗

Antimicrobial selection in the penicillin-allergic patient.

Patients frequently state that they have a penicillin allergy that often presents a therapeutic problem in treating a variety of infectious disorders. Penicillin and beta-lactam allergic reactions should be determined by a careful history. Many patients who say they have a penicillin allergy, in fact do not. If it is determined that the patient has a penicillin allergy, then the clinician should determine whether it is of an anaphylactic or nonanaphylactic variety. Most reactions to beta-lactams are of the nonanaphylactic variety and are usually manifested clinically as a mild maculopapular rash or drug fever. Uncommonly, penicillin allergies are clinically manifested as anaphylactic reactions, e.g., bronchospasm, laryngospasm, hypotension or hives. Patients' hypersensitivity reactions tend to be stereotyped on rechallenge, which make the reactions predictable. Patients who have a questionable penicillin allergy, or have had only fever or rash, may be safely given beta-lactam antibiotics without fear of anaphylaxis. Patients with a documented history of anaphylactic reactions should receive non-beta-lactam antibiotics. Although monobactams and carbapenems are structurally related to beta-lactams, they are unrelated in terms of allergic potential. There is no cross-reactivity between mono-bactams or carbapenems with beta-lactams, and these drugs may be used safely in patients with anaphylactic reactions to beta-lactams. Because so many antibiotics are available that are allergically unrelated to beta-lactams, beta-lactam desensitization procedures are rarely necessary. (c) 2001 Prous Science. All rights reserved.

Journal Article↗