Efectos de la suplementación con glutamina sobre el sistema antioxidante y la peroxidación lipídica en pacientes críticos con nutrición parenteral

INTRODUCTION In the critically ill patient, there is a continuous production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) that need to be neutralized to prevent oxidative stress (OS). Quantitatively speaking, the glutathione system (GSH) is the most important anti-oxidant endogenous defense. To increase it, glutamine supplementation has been shown to be effective by protecting against the oxidative damage and reducing the morbimortality. OBJECTIVE To assess the effect of adding an alanylglutamine dipeptide to PN on lipid peroxidation lipidica and glutathione metabolism, as well as its relationship with morbidity in critically ill patients. METHODS Determination through spectrophotometry techniques of glutathione peroxidase, glutathione reductase, total glutathione, and maloniladdehyde at admission adn after seven days of hospitalization at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in 20 patients older than 18 years on parenteral nutrition therapy. RESULTS The group of patients receiving parenteral nutrition with glutamine supplementation had significant increases in total glutathione (42.35+/-13 vs 55.29+/-12 micromol/l; p<0.05) and the enzymatic activity of glutathione peroxidasa (470+/-195 vs 705+/-214 micromol/l; p<0.05) within one week of nutritional therapy, whereas the group on conventional parenteral nutrition did not show significant changes of any of the parameters studied (p>0.05). However, both mortality and ICU stay were not different between the study group, whereas the severity (assessed by the SOFA score) was lower in the group of patients receiving glutamine (SOFA 5+/-2 vs 8+/-1.8; p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Glutamine intake in critically ill patients improves the antioxidant defenses, which leads to lower lipid peroxidation and lower morbidity during admission at the ICU.

Anaphylaxis caused by imported red fire ant stings in Málaga, Spain.

A 27-year-old woman suffered from anaphylaxis after being stung by Solenopsis invicta ants while she was handling wood from South America. The patient reported no previous adverse reactions to stings by other hymenopteran species. Intradermal skin tests with hymenoptera venom (Vespula vulgaris, Polistes species, Apis melifera) were negative. Serum specific immunoglobulin (Ig) E yielded positive results for S invicta (5.28 kU/L) and negative results for A melifera, Ves v 5 and Pol a 5. Immunodetection assays showed the presence of serum IgE against the Sol i 2 allergen. The patient had probably been stung previously although inadvertently by red fire ants while she handled infested wood from South America, and precautionary measures are thus advisable when this material is to be handled. To our knowledge this is the first case of anaphylaxis from red fire ant stings reported in Europe.