Safety of Intravenous Iron Following Infusion Reactions.

BACKGROUND: Where an ongoing requirement for intravenous iron replacement exists after an index infusion reaction, current recommendations are limited to expert opinion and isolated case reports. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of recommencing an infusion or subsequent rechallenge following an infusion reaction to intravenous iron. METHODS: Infusion reactions to intravenous iron occurring between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2019, at a metropolitan health network were identified. Patient characteristics, reaction type (mild, moderate, or severe hypersensitivity, delayed, or Fishbane: transient flushing and truncal myalgias), and outcomes of recommencing the index infusion or subsequent rechallenge were examined. RESULTS: Among 13,509 iron infusions, 195 infusion reactions occurred in 195 patients (1.4% of infusions). Recommencement of the index infusion (generally with a reduced infusion rate and premedication) was tolerated in 33 of 33 patients with Fishbane (20 of 20) or mild (9 of 9) and moderate (4 of 4) hypersensitivity reactions. Subsequent rechallenge (generally at standard infusion rates to an alternative formulation, ferric carboxymaltose) was successful in 68 of 69 patients with Fishbane (23 of 23), mild (26 of 26), moderate (16 of 17), and severe (3 of 3) hypersensitivity, or delayed (2 of 2) reactions. All 9 patients rechallenged to the original formulation (iron polymaltose) completed the infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Following an infusion reaction to intravenous iron infusion, recommencement of the index infusion is safe for Fishbane or mild and moderate hypersensitivity reactions. Subsequent rechallenge to an alternative formulation is tolerated, including in severe hypersensitivity reactions (albeit based on limited numbers). Where alternative formulations are not available, rechallenge to the same formulation could be considered, depending on the risk-benefit profile.

A stain on iron therapy.

Iron staining is an unwanted and in some cases permanent adverse effect of intravenous iron administration. Cosmetically unacceptable staining may cause distress and have psychological implications for the patient There should be a suitable indication for parenteral iron therapy. Patients must be advised of the risk of harm and give their informed consent before receiving parenteral iron Strategies to minimise the risks of staining with intravenous iron include appropriate cannulation and close monitoring of the infusion. Stop the infusion if there are signs of extravasation Laser therapy may be a treatment option in cases of persistent discolouration due to iron staining

Drug interaction resources: mind the gaps.

Drug interactions can lead to significant toxicity or loss of clinical effect. The risks increase with the number of drugs the patient takes General and specialised drug interaction resources are available. Access to up-to-date electronic resources is encouraged There are gaps in the information on interactions for new drugs, those with complicated metabolism and drugs with limited use. It may be necessary to use multiple resources to find the information When assessing information about interactions, clinicians should evaluate the relevance for each patient. In high-risk situations, expert advice can be valuable Clinicians should report new or unusual drug interactions to the Therapeutic Goods Administration

Evaluation of NovoRapid infusion as a treatment option in the management of diabetic ketoacidosis.

This study evaluates the clinical efficacy and safety of NovoRapid (insulin aspart) compared to Actrapid™ (human neutral insulin) for diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). In this retrospective study involving 40 patients, no statistically significant differences were observed between biochemical variables, infusion duration or complications in patients treated with insulin aspart or human neutral insulin. These results support the use of insulin aspart as an effective and safe alternative to human neutral insulin in DKA.

Spleen Australia guidelines for the prevention of sepsis in patients with asplenia and hyposplenism in Australia and New Zealand.

People with asplenia/hyposplenism are at increased risk of fulminant sepsis, which carries a high mortality rate. A range of preventive measures is recommended although there is ongoing evidence that knowledge of and adherence to these strategies is poor. There have been significant changes in recommended vaccinations since the previously published recommendations in 2008. We provide current recommendations to help Australian and New Zealand clinicians in the prevention of sepsis in patients with asplenia and hyposplenia. The guideline includes Australian epidemiological data, preferred diagnostic techniques and recommendations for optimal antimicrobial prophylaxis and vaccination protocols.

Postoperative Bleeding After Administration of a Single Dose of Rivaroxaban to a Patient Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy.

A 62-year-old man was admitted to hospital for elective revision of a left total hip arthroplasty. His history was significant for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection for which he was taking the following antiretroviral agents (ARVs): etravirine, ritonavir, darunavir, raltegravir and tenofovir/emtricitabine. Rivaroxaban 10 mg daily was commenced on the second postoperative day for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Approximately 24 h later, the patient developed hypotension and anaemia, accompanied by thigh swelling due to bleeding at the surgical site. Fluid resuscitation was commenced with red cell transfusion. The prothrombin time (PT) was prolonged at 24.3 (10.6-15.3) s, and a rivaroxaban level taken 24 h after administration was 75 ng/mL. Rivaroxaban was ceased, the PT normalised within 24 h of stopping the drug, and the patient made an uneventful recovery. None of the other coadministered drugs are known to interact with rivaroxaban, or are likely to, based on their metabolic pathways. Rivaroxaban, a substrate for cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and P-glycoprotein (P-gp), is contraindicated in patients concomitantly treated with strong inhibitors of both these systems, e.g. protease inhibitors (PIs) such as ritonavir (based on in vitro data and a pharmacokinetic study in healthy volunteers). No published data are available on the PI darunavir, a moderate inhibitor; however, concomitant use with rivaroxaban should also be avoided. A prolonged PT and a rivaroxaban trough level greater than eight times that predicted from pharmacokinetic modelling suggests that bleeding was due to increased exposure to rivaroxaban, probably due to an interaction with ritonavir and darunavir. This is supported by a Drug Interaction Probability Scale (DIPS) score of 8. An interaction between a single dose of rivaroxaban and ARVs may be clinically significant; therefore, the patient's medication history should be extensively evaluated to identify any potential interactions.