Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
 
box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Rowe, J. M.
space
  arrow  Lazarus, H. M.
space
 arrow  PubMed                        
space

REPLY

Are Protected Environments Necessary for Recipients of Bone Marrow Transplants?

right arrow Jacob M. Rowe, MD, and Hillard M. Lazarus, MD

1 July 1994 | Volume 121 Issue 1 | Page 76


IN RESPONSE:

We appreciate the opportunity to review the issue of protective environments for recipients of bone marrow transplantation. The precise need for protection from airborne organisms is controversial. Most patients are treated in single rooms with some form of protective isolation, which varies from handwashing before entering the room to the use of laminar air flow along with sterile food and gut and skin decontamination. The choice of protective environment is affected by the type of transplantation, the duration of neutropenia and immunosuppression, and the institutional prevalence of Aspergillus species [1]. Concern about infection with Aspergillus is the most important consideration in determining the type of isolation.

Early studies compared patients treated in laminar air-flow rooms and given prophylactic "decontamination" antibiotics with patients treated without a specialized air-handling system and found in the former patients a lower incidence of infection [2], as well as a lower incidence and delayed onset of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) [3]. However, autologous and allogeneic transplantations have also been done in standard single rooms without a specialized air filtration system and without the need for continuous hospitalization. In such cases, rates of infection, GVHD, and overall mortality were within the expected range [4].

For all of these reasons, the following are recommended by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group:

1. Uncomplicated patients receiving autologous bone marrow transplantation can be safely treated in single rooms with strict handwashing as the only protective measure, assuming a rigorous approach to infection control is in place.

2. Patients receiving allogeneic bone marrow transplantation should be treated with an air filtration system (either a high-efficiency particulate air or laminar air-flow system) capable of excluding Aspergillus species. This approach should also be required for the patient receiving autologous bone marrow transplantation in the proximity of construction activity or a known outbreak of Aspergillus infection.


Author and Article Information
space
up arrowTop
dotAuthor & Article Info
down arrowReferences

University of Rochester Medical Center; Rochester, NY 14642
University Hospitals of Cleveland; Cleveland, OH 44106


References
space
up arrowTop
up arrowAuthor & Article Info
dotReferences

1. Sherertz RJ, Belani A, Kramer BS, Elfenbein GJ, Weiner RS, Sullivan ML, et al. Impact of air filtration on nosocomial aspergillus infections: unique risk of bone marrow transplant recipients. Am J Med. 1987; 83:709-18.

2. Bucker CD, Clift RA, Sanders JE, Meyers JD, Counts GW, Farewell VT, et al. Protective environment for marrow transplant recipients. A prospective study. Ann Intern Med. 1978; 89:893-901.

3. Storb R, Prentice RL, Buckner CD, Clift RA, Appelbaum F, Deeg J, et al. Graft-versus-host disease and survival in patients with aplastic anemia in patients treated by marrow grafts by HLA identical siblings. Beneficial effects of a protective environment. N Engl J Med. 1983; 308:302-7.

4. Russell JA, Poon MC, Jones AR, Woodman RC, Ruether BA. Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation without protective isolation in adults with malignant disease. Lancet. 1992; 339:38-40.

About Letters
space

The Editors welcome submissions for possible publication in the Letters section. Authors of letters should:

•Include no more than 300 words of text, three authors, and five references

•Type with double-spacing

•Send three copies of the letter, an authors' form signed by all authors, and a cover letter describing any conflicts of interest related to the contents of the letter.

Letters commenting on an Annals article will be considered if they are received within 6 weeks of the time the article was published. Only some of the letters received can be published. Published letters are edited and may be shortened; tables and figures are included only selectively. Authors will be notified that the letter has been received. If the letter is selected for publication, the author will be notified about 3 weeks before the publication date. Unpublished letters cannot be returned.

Annals welcomes electronically submitted letters.





box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Rowe, J. M.
space
  arrow  Lazarus, H. M.
space
 arrow  PubMed                        
space


 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online