Neutropenic FeverEdit

Neutropenic fever is a medical emergency that arises when a person has a significantly reduced number of neutrophils and develops a fever. It most commonly occurs in patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy for cancer or after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, but it can also follow other therapies or illnesses that suppress the immune system. Because neutropenia impairs the body’s ability to mount an inflammatory response, infections can progress rapidly and without the usual warning signs, making prompt recognition and treatment essential.

Defining terms and clinical picture Neutropenia refers to an abnormally low level of neutrophils, a type of white blood cell crucial for fighting bacterial infections. In clinical practice, “neutropenia” is typically defined by an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of less than 1500 cells per microliter, with higher risk of infection as ANC falls below 500 cells/μL or is expected to fall below that level within 48 hours. When a patient with neutropenia develops fever—commonly defined as a single oral temperature of 38.3°C (101°F) or a sustained temperature of 38.0°C (100.4°F) for at least an hour—the condition is termed neutropenia or febrile neutropenia in many clinical guidelines. The combination of fever and neutropenia signals a potential infection that requires rapid assessment and empiric treatment.

Epidemiology and risk factors Neutropenic fever most often affects individuals with malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, or certain targeted therapies that suppress bone marrow function. Risk is influenced by the depth and duration of neutropenia, the patient’s comorbidities, prior infections, mucosal barrier injury from chemotherapy, and hospital exposure. In immunocompromised patients, bacterial infections—particularly lower respiratory tract infections and bacteremia—are among the most common causes, though fungal and viral etiologies also contribute, especially in prolonged neutropenia or after prolonged hospital stays. Racial and socioeconomic factors can influence access to care, time to treatment, and outcomes in some settings, which is a reminder of the broader health care context in which these medical decisions are made.

Pathophysiology at a glance The risk of infection during neutropenia is driven by two main factors: reduced neutrophil-mediated microbial killing and disruption of barrier defenses (notably the mucosa of the gut and oropharynx) from chemotherapy or disease. Neutropenic patients may not mount typical inflammatory responses, so fever may be one of the first or only signs of infection. As a result, clinicians rely on a combination of rapid clinical assessment, laboratory testing, and targeted imaging to locate sources of infection and guide therapy.

Evaluation and initial management Initial assessment - Obtain a focused history and physical examination, with attention to signs of sepsis, pulmonary symptoms, abdominal pain, indwelling devices (such as central venous catheters), and recent exposures. - Obtain cultures before antibiotics when feasible: blood cultures from at least two separate sites, urine cultures if indicated, respiratory specimens if there is cough or dyspnea, and cultures from any suspected infection site. - Laboratory testing typically includes a complete blood count with differential, basic metabolic panel, liver tests, lactate, and inflammatory markers as appropriate. - Baseline imaging is guided by symptoms, with chest radiography or chest computed tomography (CT) often used to evaluate for pulmonary infection; imaging may extend to sinuses or abdomen if clinically indicated. - Review current medications and vaccination history, and assess for potential drug interactions and drug allergies.

Empiric antimicrobial therapy - For high-risk, profoundly neutropenic patients, initiate broad-spectrum IV antibiotics as soon as possible, ideally within 60 minutes of presentation, without waiting for culture results. - Standard empiric regimens cover common gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria with activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Common choices include an anti-pseudomonal beta-lactam such as piperacillin-tazobactam, cefepime, or a carbapenem (e.g., meropenem). In settings with high resistance or severe illness, a combination like a beta-lactam plus an aminoglycoside or a different broad agent may be used, at least initially, with de-escalation later guided by cultures. - If the patient is hemodynamically unstable or there are signs of septic shock, escalate care promptly and consider adding MRSA coverage (e.g., vancomycin or linezolid) based on local epidemiology and risk factors such as colonization, skin/soft tissue infection, catheter-related infection, or pneumonia. - Instructive practice includes reassessment within 48–72 hours with culture results to narrow therapy (antibiotic stewardship).

Risk stratification and disposition - Some patients with neutropenic fever are low risk and may be candidates for outpatient management with oral antibiotics and close follow-up; others require inpatient admission and IV therapy. - Tools such as the MASCC score are used to help identify low-risk patients, though decisions also depend on clinical judgment and local resources. - Patients with high-risk features (e.g., prolonged or severe neutropenia, comorbid conditions, hemodynamic instability, organ dysfunction, or inability to attend reliable follow-up) should remain inpatient.

Antifungal therapy and persistent fever - If fever persists after 4–7 days of broad-spectrum antibacterial therapy without an identified source, or if there are signs suggestive of fungal infection, consider adding antifungal therapy. Empiric antifungal coverage (e.g., an echinocandin or a mold-active azole, depending on risk) is guided by the clinical setting and local epidemiology. - Prolonged fever in neutropenia warrants reassessment for occult sources such as fungal infections, invasive aspergillosis, catheter-related infections, or intra-abdominal sources, with targeted imaging and consultation as needed.

Prophylaxis and infection prevention - In patients at high risk for infection due to prolonged neutropenia, preventive strategies may include antibacterial prophylaxis (commonly a fluoroquinolone in certain high-risk groups) and antifungal prophylaxis (e.g., mold-active agents for defined high-risk populations). - Antiviral prophylaxis may be used in specific settings, particularly in patients with prior herpesvirus infections or in certain transplant populations. - Infection prevention measures, including proper hand hygiene, catheter care, and isolation practices when needed, are essential components of patient safety.

Supportive care and adjunctive therapies - Growth factors that stimulate neutrophil production (e.g., granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, G-CSF) can shorten the duration of neutropenia in some patients, but routine use for all neutropenic fever cases is not universally recommended. Use is typically individualized based on cancer type, chemotherapy intensity, expected duration of neutropenia, and patient risk of complications. - Vaccinations, when appropriate, and management of anemia, nutrition, and other comorbidities are part of comprehensive care.

Controversies and debates - Timing and intensity of empiric therapy: Most guidelines support rapid IV antibiotics within an hour for high-risk patients, but debates continue about balancing speed with antibiotic stewardship and selecting the most appropriate agents in a given setting. - MRSA coverage in initial therapy: Some clinicians favor broader initial coverage to guard against MRSA, particularly in patients with risk factors, while others argue for reserving MRSA agents until MRSA infection is suspected or confirmed to avoid promoting resistance. - Use of vancomycin and similar drugs: Routine use of vancomycin for all neutropenic fever patients is not supported by all guidelines due to resistance concerns and potential nephrotoxicity, but it remains reasonable in specific scenarios (e.g., catheter-related infection, hemodynamic instability, known colonization with MRSA, or soft-tissue infection). - G-CSF for neutropenic fever: While G-CSF can reduce the duration of neutropenia, evidence on mortality benefit is mixed, and cost and potential adverse effects must be weighed. Some guidelines restrict routine use to select high-risk populations. - Antifungal prophylaxis: In resource-limited settings or lower-risk patients, routine antifungal prophylaxis may not be justified, whereas high-risk patients (such as those with anticipated prolonged neutropenia) may benefit from mold-active prophylaxis. The choice of agent and duration is a topic of ongoing discussion. - Outpatient management: Safe outpatient treatment hinges on reliable follow-up, rapid access to care, and robust patient education. Critics point to disparities in access to outpatient resources, while proponents highlight cost savings and patient comfort for appropriately selected low-risk individuals.

Rightsta: The Right Way to Search and Wiki

Search - Wiki

Neutropenic FeverEdit

Your Feedback is Important