Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2024 Aug;30(8):741-745.
doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2024.02.010. Epub 2024 Feb 12.

Comparison of the safety and cost-effectiveness of nebulized liposomal amphotericin B and amphotericin B deoxycholate for antifungal prophylaxis after lung transplantation

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of the safety and cost-effectiveness of nebulized liposomal amphotericin B and amphotericin B deoxycholate for antifungal prophylaxis after lung transplantation

Keisuke Umemura et al. J Infect Chemother. 2024 Aug.

Abstract

Introduction: Fungal infection after lung transplantation can lead to poor clinical outcome, for which lung transplant recipients require prophylaxis. One of the antifungal agents used after lung transplantation is nebulized amphotericin B (AMB). Nebulized AMB causes adverse events such as dyspnea and airway irritation, and long-term use leads to high economic costs. So far, prophylactic regimens employing AMB deoxycholate (AMB-d) and liposomal AMB (L-AMB) have been developed. This study compared the efficacy, safety, and cost of AMB-d and L-AMB.

Patients and methods: Patients who underwent lung transplantation at Kyoto University Hospital from January 2021 to May 2023 were included in this study. Thirty-three patients received nebulized AMB-d, whereas 29 received nebulized L-AMB.

Results: Both regimens maintained comparable prophylactic efficacy regarding the development of fungal infection in the AMB-d and L-AMB groups (3.0% vs. 3.4%, P = 0.877). Patients treated with nebulized L-AMB experienced fewer respiratory-related adverse reactions than those treated with nebulized AMB-d (6.9% vs. 30.3%, P < 0.05), leading to a longer treatment duration with L-AMB than with AMB-d. Additionally, the daily cost of administering L-AMB was lower than that of administering AMB-d (3609 Japanese yen vs. 1792.3 Japanese yen, P < 0.05).

Discussion: These results suggest that nebulized L-AMB is safer and more cost-effective than nebulized AMB-d, with comparable efficacy.

Keywords: Fungal prophylaxis; Lung transplantation; Nebulized amphotericin B deoxycholate; Nebulized liposomal amphotericin B; Pharmacoeconomics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources