Incidence of teicoplanin adverse drug reactions among patients with vancomycin-associated adverse drug reactions and its risk factors

5Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background/Aims: Teicoplanin can be used as an alternative to vancomycin when treating beta-lactam-resistant gram-positive bacterial infections. Both vanco-mycin and teicoplanin are associated with relatively high rates of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), including hypersensitivity reactions. There is limited data on teicoplanin-vancomycin cross-reactivity. This study examined the incidence of teicoplanin ADRs and risk factors for cross-reactivity between vancomycin and teicoplanin. Methods: We analyzed the incidence of teicoplanin ADRs in a retrospective study of 304 newly teicoplanin-exposed, immunocompetent, hospitalized patients at a single Korean Medical Center between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2015. Results: Among 304 patients, 238 (78.3%) experienced vancomycin-associated ADRs prior to their teicoplanin exposure and 58 (19.1%) experienced teico-planin-associated ADRs, which were mostly hypersensitivity reactions without acute kidney injury. The incidence of teicoplanin ADRs was higher in patients who previously experienced vancomycin-related ADRs (23.1% vs. 5.3%, p < 0.001). History of drug allergy was a statistically signif icant risk factor of teicoplanin ADRs. The incidence of teicoplanin ADRs significantly increased in patients with multiple organ involvement in vancomycin hypersensitivity reactions. Conclusions: Teicoplanin should be administered with caution and clinicians must consider the risk factors of cross-reaction when prescribing teicoplanin to individuals with a history of vancomycin hypersensitivity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kim, B. K., Kim, J. H., Sohn, K. H., Kim, J. Y., Chang, Y. S., & Kim, S. H. (2020). Incidence of teicoplanin adverse drug reactions among patients with vancomycin-associated adverse drug reactions and its risk factors. Korean Journal of Internal Medicine, 35(3), 714–722. https://doi.org/10.3904/kjim.2018.404

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free