Dataset Information

Adverse events of intravenous immunoglobulin infusions: a ten-year retrospective study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is a biological product with adverse effects that appears to vary considerably among different IVIG preparations.

Objectives

To describe the adverse events of patients given intravenous immunoglobulin infusions.

Method

Data was collected on all patients receiving IVIG infusion at a tertiary hospital from January 2001 to December 2010. Descriptive statistics was used.

Results

77 patients (45 males, 32 females) received IVIG infusions. Thirty two percent (n = 25) experienced adverse reactions. The most common indication was Kawasaki disease (85.7%) followed by immunodeficiency disorders (7.8%). Majority of the patients were children, with the highest frequency of infusions among those aged 2 to 8 years old (52%). 36 infusions were associated with occurrence of adverse effects. Fever was the most common adverse event (n = 11, 30.6%), followed by rash (n = 8, 22.2%) and chills (n = 7, 19.4%). Other adverse events were cyanosis (n = 3, 8.3%), hypotension (n = 2, 5.6%), hypothermia (n = 2, 5.6%), irritability (n = 1, 2.8%), vomiting (n = 1, 2.8%), and chest pain (n = 1, 2.8%). Adverse events were observed to occur most frequently within 1 to 6 h from onset of IVIG infusion. Among the various IVIG preparations available locally (Gammagard, Kiovig, Gamimune, Veno-S & IV Globulin S), Gammagard was the brand frequently used (50.7%). It also has the most number of adverse events, with 17 out of 41 (41.5%) infusions resulting in adverse reactions. Most of the reactions occurred with fast infusion rates, and clinical manifestations subsided when the rate of infusion was reduced.

Conclusion

In this study, thirty two percent of patients given IVIG infusions experienced adverse events. Fever was the most common manifestation. Symptoms occurred within 1 to 6 h from onset of infusion, were affected by fast infusion rates, and managed by reducing the rate of infusion.

SUBMITTER: Palabrica FR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3826603 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AbstractAdverse events (AEs) are unfortunate consequences of platelet donation. This study reports the incidence and severity of AEs and the associated risk factors in platelet donation at a major blood donation center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.A review of donation records was conducted between 2014 and 2017. Eligible study participants were 5007 platelet donors who had donated 7969 times. Each donation was accounted for as a single study subject. Participants' characteristics were described and analyzed as potential contributing factors to adverse events.The average age of platelet donors was 30.0±7.3 years. First-time donors comprised (n = 3,100, 61.9%) of the sample, and 1907 (38.1%) were multiple donors (periodic/routine). Their average BMI was 28.6 ± 4.9 kg/m2. Most donors have blood type "O" and Rheo "positive". The range of blood volume processed was 0 to 5273 ml, while the procedure duration ranged from 0 to 90 minutes. The average platelet yield was 3.8 ± 3.5 ∗1011 platelets per unit, and the average collected volume was 257.6 ± 86.1 ml. Incidence of AEs was 4.2%, of which 91.3% were mild and 8.7% were severe. AEs were vascular injuries (65.3%), vasovagal reactions (11.6%), and citrate toxicity (5.3%). AEs were associated with first-time donation, adj.OR (95%CI) = 1.5 (1.1-1.8) and lower BMI, adj. OR (95% CI) = 1.4 (1.1-1.8). Citrate toxicity was present in severe forms, unlike vascular injuries and vasovagal reactions that tended to be milder. Donors with hemoglobin levels above 16 g/dl, adj. OR (95% CI) = 1.3 (1.1-1.7) and platelet levels below 250,000, adj. OR (95% CI) = 1.3 (1.1-1.6) were more likely to contract AEs than others.Reporting adverse events is essential to establish a benchmark for the annual incidence rates to be compared against local and international figures. Blood donor centers should also take notice of blood donors characteristics that are associated with higher incidence and more severe forms of AEs during or after platelet donation.

Project description:BackgroundSerious cardiovascular adverse events (SCAEs) associated with intravenous sedatives remain poorly characterized.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare SCAE incidence, types, and mortality between intravenous benzodiazepines (i.e., diazepam, lorazepam, and midazolam), dexmedetomidine, and propofol in the USA over 8 years regardless of the clinical setting where it was administered.MethodsThe Food and Drug Administration's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting System was searched between 2004 and 2011 using the Evidex® platform from Advera Health Analytics, Inc. to identify all reports that included one or more of ten different SCAEs (package insert incidence???1%) and where an intravenous benzodiazepine, dexmedetomidine, or propofol was the primary suspected drug.ResultsAmong the 2326 Food and Drug Administration's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting System cases reported, 394 (16.9%) were related to a SCAE. The presence of a SCAE (vs. a non-SCAE) is associated with higher mortality (34 vs. 8%, p?<?0.001). The percentage of cases with one or more SCAE, the case mortality rate (%), and the incidence of each SCAE (per 106 days of sedative exposure), respectively, were benzodiazepines (14, 26, 13) [diazepam (13, 23, 31); lorazepam (15, 43, 14); midazolam (14, 20, 11)]; dexmedetomidine (40, 15, 13); and propofol (17, 39, 7). Propofol (vs. either a benzodiazepine or dexmedetomidine) was associated with more total SCAEs (268 vs. 126, p?<?0.001) but a lower incidence (per 106 days of sedative exposure) of SCAE (7 vs. 13, p?=?0.0001) and cardiac arrest [6.3 (benzodiazepine) vs. 6.7 (dexmedetomidine) vs. 1.4 (propofol), p?<?0.0001].ConclusionsSerious cardiac adverse events account for nearly one-fifth of intravenous sedative Food and Drug Administration's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting System reports. These SCAEs appear to be associated with greater mortality than non-cardiac serious adverse events. Serious cardiac events may be more prevalent with either benzodiazepines or dexmedetomidine than propofol.

Project description:ImportanceInfusion reactions occur in 7% to 20% of patients receiving biologics. Home infusions are convenient and incur lower costs but may be associated with more adverse events; the safety of receiving biologic infusions for immune-mediated diseases at home remains unclear.ObjectiveTo assess whether patients receiving home biologic infusions have increased adverse events requiring emergency department (ED) or hospital admission compared with patients receiving facility infusions.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used administrative claims data from a large national insurer for adult patients who received biologic infusions for immune-mediated disease between January 2007 and December 2017. Patients with hematologic malignant neoplasms or bone marrow transplantation were excluded. Data were analyzed from August 2019 to October 2020.Main outcomes and measuresED or hospital admission on the same or next day after administration of a biologic infusion at home vs at a facility; secondary outcomes included discontinuation of the biologic after an ED or hospital admission and postinfusion mortality.ResultsOf a total of 57 220 patients (mean [SD] age, 50.1 [14.8] years; 512 314 [68.1%] women) who received 752 150 biologic infusions (34 078 home infusions [4.5%] to 3954 patients and 718 072 facility infusions [95.5%] to 54 770 patients), patients who received home infusions were younger (mean [SD] age, 43.2 [13.2] vs 51.3 [14.8] years), more likely to be men (14 031 [41.2%] vs 225 668 [31.4%]), and had a lower Charlson comorbidity score compared with patients who received facility infusions (mean [SD] score, 0.5 [1.0] vs 1.1 [1.3]). Home infusions were associated with 25% increased odds of ED or hospital admission on the same or next day after the infusion (odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09-1.44; P = .002) and 28% increased odds of discontinuation of the biologic after the ED or hospital admission (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.08-1.51; P = .005). There was no difference in postinfusion mortality between home or facility infusions. The rates of adverse events were highest with home infusions of tocilizumab (48 of 481 infusions [10.0%]), vedolizumab (150 of 2681 infusions [5.6%]), and infliximab (1085 of 20 653 infusions [5.3%]), although the number of tocilizumab and vedolizumab infusions was low.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, biologic infusions administered at home, compared with those administered at a facility, were associated with increased adverse events requiring escalation of care. Because the number of home infusions has increased and is expected to continue to rise, the safety implications of administering biologic infusions at home needs to be further assessed.