Extravasation of systemic hemato-oncological therapies.

Systemic intravenous chemotherapeutic agents can cause multiple emergency situations including acute and chronic local and systemic reactions. Amongst them, drug extravasation is one of the most devastating complications, as many drugs can cause varying degrees of local tissue injury when extravasated. Although it is difficult to give an accurate measurement, the incidence of extravasation of systemic infusional chemotherapeutic agents has been reported to occur in 0.1-6.5% of cases. Since most extravasations can be prevented with the systematic implementation of careful administration techniques, guidelines have been published for the administration of vesicant drugs. The proper maintenance of intravenous lines, application of local cooling or warming for certain extravasations, and the use of antidotes to prevent the local toxic action of the extravasated drugs are the basis of medical management. The specific antidotes for certain chemotherapeutic agents are also discussed in this article.

Use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation: what is the optimal timing?

Administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation accelerates neutrophil recovery and decreases hospitalization time. The optimal timing for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor infusion remains unknown. In this retrospective, case-controlled, two-armed study, we reviewed our experience at Hahnemann University Hospital to determine whether initiating granulocyte colony-stimulating factor infusions on posttransplant day 0 versus day 8 affects neutrophil recovery time, posttransplant discharge date, total hospital days after high-dose chemotherapy, and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. All patients hospitalized between 1994 and 1998 at Hahnemann University Hospital, Bone Marrow Transplantation Unit with breast cancer or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, who underwent high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation and received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor either on posttransplant day 0 (16 patients) or day 8 (16 patients). The day 0 and day 8 groups had no statistically significant differences in age, sex, weight, height, body surface area, disease characteristics, pretransplant harvesting or conditioning regimens, or transplant CD34+ cell counts. Our main outcome measure was the mean time to reach absolute neutrophil count greater than or equal to 0.5 x 10(9)/l, the number of hospital days after transplant, and the total hospital days. The mean days to neutrophil recovery (10.56 versus 9.68, p = 0.48), posttransplant hospital days (13.62 versus 12.81, p = 0.39), and total hospital days (20.25 versus 20.25, p = 1.00) were not significantly different between day 8 and day 0 groups, respectively. No significant effects on neutrophil recovery time, posttransplant hospital days, or total hospital days were observed with the initial granulocyte colony-stimulating factor infusion on day 0 versus day 8 after transplant. Delayed administration may allow substantial cost savings (US$200 x 8 approximately equal to US $1,600 per patient) without affecting clinical outcome. More studies are needed to determine whether greater delay is feasible.

Efficacy of carbamazepine compared with other agents: a clinical practice survey.

BACKGROUND: To gain an impression of the experience with and efficacy of carbamazepine relative to other agents and relative to its use in treating psychiatric and neurologic disorders in general clinical practice, a survey was distributed in 1988 to psychiatrists practicing in the United States. METHOD: The survey was mailed to 9030 members of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) who had expressed an interest in the study and treatment of affective disorders in a 1982 APA survey. The survey sampled clinicians' experience of the efficacy and side effects of carbamazepine in a number of psychiatric and neurologic conditions. Each clinician also provided global impression ratings of the efficacy of a variety of traditional and novel treatments. RESULTS: Completed surveys were returned by 2543 (28%) physicians. Carbamazepine was reported to be moderately to markedly effective in the following percentage of patients: partial complex seizures, 85.2%; generalized seizures, 82.9%; trigeminal neuralgia, 81.5%; mania prophylaxis, 72.9%; acute bipolar depression, 67.5%; intermittent explosive disorder, 65.2%; acute mania, 62.2%; schizoaffective disorder, 58.8%; other pain syndromes, 51.2%; posttraumatic stress disorder, 48.1%; borderline personality disorder, 43.0%; unipolar depression, 32.2%; schizophrenia, 25.7%; and alcohol withdrawal, 15.9%. About 4.4% of the patients reported were withdrawn from carbamazepine because of side effects. CONCLUSION: Carbamazepine was widely used to treat a variety of psychiatric conditions in 1988 and found to be of use in the acute and long-term treatment of bipolar illness. It was rated slightly less effective than lithium, electroconvulsive therapy, or neuroleptics, but more effective than several other agents. The results of the survey highlight many areas in need of further systematic investigation.