Suppr超能文献

两性霉素B——没那么可怕。

Amphotericin B--not so terrible.

作者信息

Bishara J, Weinberger M, Lin A Y, Pitlik S

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine C, Rabin Medical Center, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Petach Tikva, Israel.

出版信息

Ann Pharmacother. 2001 Mar;35(3):308-10. doi: 10.1345/aph.10240.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To describe a patient who developed adverse reactions to two different lipid formulations of amphotericin B: liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) and amphotericin B colloidal dispersion (ABCD, Amphocil), yet tolerated amphotericin B deoxycholate (Fungizone) despite renal toxicity.

CASE SUMMARY

A 72-year-old woman with acute myelomonocytic leukemia was treated with amphotericin B deoxycholate for suspected pulmonary aspergillosis; the drug was well tolerated but resulted in renal failure. Antifungal therapy was then changed to liposomal amphotericin B. Within 10 minutes of liposomal amphotericin B infusion, the patient developed severe dyspnea, chest pain, and a feeling of imminent death. On the following day, liposomal amphotericin B was switched to amphotericin B colloidal dispersion. Again, within 10 minutes of this infusion, the patient developed fever, chills, hypotension, severe chest pain, dsypnea, and a feeling of imminent death. The patient refused any further treatment with these drugs and insisted on switching back to amphotericin B deoxycholate, which was then administered for 10 days and was well tolerated.

DISCUSSION

Severe adverse reactions, such as anaphylaxis, cardiac toxicity, and respiratory failure, following administration of all three lipid formulations of amphotericin B have been reported. In most reported cases, switching to a different lipid formulation of amphotericin B was well tolerated. This is in contrast to our case, where a severe reaction was repeated when another lipid preparation was given, necessitating switching back to amphotericin B deoxycholate despite its nephrotoxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

In some patients, paradoxically, lipid formulations of amphotericin B may be less tolerable than conventional amphotericin B.

摘要

目的

描述一名对两种不同脂质体剂型的两性霉素B产生不良反应的患者,这两种剂型分别是两性霉素B脂质体(安必素)和两性霉素B胶体分散液(ABCD,两性霉素胶体),尽管存在肾毒性,但该患者对两性霉素B脱氧胆酸盐(两性霉素B)仍能耐受。

病例摘要

一名72岁急性粒单核细胞白血病女性患者因疑似肺曲霉病接受两性霉素B脱氧胆酸盐治疗;该药物耐受性良好,但导致了肾衰竭。随后抗真菌治疗改为两性霉素B脂质体。在输注两性霉素B脂质体的10分钟内,患者出现严重呼吸困难、胸痛和濒死感。次日,两性霉素B脂质体换为两性霉素B胶体分散液。同样,在输注该药物的10分钟内,患者出现发热、寒战、低血压、严重胸痛、呼吸困难和濒死感。患者拒绝使用这些药物进行进一步治疗,并坚持换回两性霉素B脱氧胆酸盐,随后使用了10天,耐受性良好。

讨论

已有报道称,使用所有三种脂质体剂型的两性霉素B后均出现严重不良反应,如过敏反应、心脏毒性和呼吸衰竭。在大多数报道的病例中,换用不同脂质体剂型的两性霉素B耐受性良好。这与我们的病例不同,在我们的病例中,给予另一种脂质体制剂时再次出现严重反应,尽管两性霉素B脱氧胆酸盐有肾毒性,但仍有必要换回该药物。

结论

矛盾的是,在一些患者中,两性霉素B脂质体制剂的耐受性可能不如传统的两性霉素B。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验