Volume 56, Issue 4 pp. 526-529
Original Article

Effect of meropenem with or without immunoglobulin as second-line therapy for pediatric febrile neutropenia

Ryoji Kobayashi

Corresponding Author

Ryoji Kobayashi

Department of Pediatrics, Sapporo Hokuyu Hospital, Sapporo, Japan

Correspondence: Ryoji Kobayashi, MD, Department of Pediatrics, Sapporo Hokuyu Hospital, Higashi-Sapporo 6-6, Shiroishiku, Sapporo 003-0006, Japan. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
Daisuke Suzuki

Daisuke Suzuki

Department of Pediatrics, Sapporo Hokuyu Hospital, Sapporo, Japan

Search for more papers by this author
Hirozumi Sano

Hirozumi Sano

Department of Pediatrics, Sapporo Hokuyu Hospital, Sapporo, Japan

Search for more papers by this author
Kenji Kishimoto

Kenji Kishimoto

Department of Pediatrics, Sapporo Hokuyu Hospital, Sapporo, Japan

Search for more papers by this author
Kazue Yasuda

Kazue Yasuda

Department of Pediatrics, Sapporo Hokuyu Hospital, Sapporo, Japan

Search for more papers by this author
Kunihiko Kobayashi

Kunihiko Kobayashi

Department of Pediatrics, Sapporo Hokuyu Hospital, Sapporo, Japan

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 24 December 2013
Citations: 4

Abstract

Background

Meropenem (MEPM) is widely used for treatment of febrile neutropenia. There have been many reports on MEPM for pediatric febrile neutropenia showing success rates of approximately 50–75%. Although i.v. immunoglobulin (IVIG) is widely used for treatment of infection with antibiotics, there has been no report on the efficacy of IVIG for pediatric febrile neutropenia. This prospective randomized study was therefore carried out to clarify the usefulness of MEPM with or without IVIG as second line-therapy for pediatric febrile neutropenia.

Methods

A total of 61 pediatric patients with 146 episodes were judged to have failure of first-line therapy (August 2008–April 2010: cefozopran vs cefepime; April 2010–April 2012: cefepime vs piperacillin/tazobactam) for febrile neutropenia, and were randomized to MEPM and MEPM + IVIG groups.

Results

MEPM with or without IVIG as second-line therapy was effective in 68.1% of a total of 144 episodes. Success rates in the MEPM and MEPM + IVIG groups were 66.3% and 70.5%, respectively. Furthermore, success rates for patients with IgG <500 mg/dL were 62.5% in the MEPM group and 81.3% in the MEPM + IVIG group. This result, however, was not statistically significant, possibly because of the small sample size.

Conclusions

MEPM is effective and safe for second-line treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic pediatric patients. Moreover, IVIG is effective for patients with low serum IgG.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.