Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 11487456

Tuberculosis Meningitis.

Abstract

Treatment of tuberculous meningitis should begin with an anti-tuberculous regimen of at least three drugs: isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and rifampin. Early in the course of therapy, ethambutol or streptomycin may be of some added benefit. If the local incidence of drug resistance to Mycobacterium tuberculosis is greater than 4%, or is unknown, then a fourth drug (ethambutol or streptomycin) should be added. If the patient is from an area with organisms resistant to multiple drugs, or is likely to be infected with a multiply resistant organism for any reason, then the patient should be on enough drugs to insure that at least two active anti-tubercular drugs are included in the therapy. An expert should be consulted Length of therapy is not standardized. For sensitive organisms, a regimen of three drugs daily for 2 months, followed by two-drug therapy (isoniazid and rifampin) has been recommended. The American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have recommended a minimum of 12 months of therapy for tuberculous meningitis. If cultures remain positive for extended periods, or signs or symptoms respond slowly, therapy should be extended to 18 months. Patients with HIV also may need longer courses of therapy. The severity of tuberculous meningitis can be classified based on a system devised by the British Medical Research Council. Stage I patients are fully conscious, rational, and do not have neurologic signs. Stage II patients are confused or have neurologic signs such as cranial nerve palsy or hemiparesis. Stage III patients are comatose or stuporous with more severe neurologic signs. Corticosteroids are recommended if the patient is mentally confused, has neurologic signs, or is comatose (Stages II and III). In patients with moderate disease (Stage II), corticosteroids appear to improve neurologic sequelae and survival. Dexamethasone 6 to 12 mg per day and prednisone 60 to 80 mg per day tapered over 4 to 8 weeks has been used. Symptoms of central nervous system (CNS) inflammation may recur if the corticosteroid taper is implemented too soon or too fast. Steroids and diuretics such as furosemide and acetazolamide are sometimes used to treat hydrocephalus. Ventriculoperitoneal or ventriculoatrial shunting may be required to relieve signs and symptoms of hydrocephalus.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Thomas Byrd, Phil Zinser. 2001. Tuberculosis Meningitis.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-001-0030-9

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗