Thursday, April 9, 2009

Debat dengam Prof.Vicente F.Corrales-Medina,MD, author of DHF IN Lange, Current Medical Diagnosis & Treatment 2009

From: taufiq mw [mailto:taufiqmw@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sun 2/15/2009 12:02 AM
To: Shandera, Wayne X; Corrales Medina, Vicente Francisco
Subject: New Debate About DHF

I'm buying your book: Lange, Current Medical Diagnosis and Treatment 2009
and I read about Dengue Haemorragic Fever.
I'm very dissapointed about that....
Please click: http://www.dhf-revolution.blogspot.com
I said the pathophisiology and pathogenesis of Dengue Haemorragic Fever is hypersensitive Type III (my research)
C'mon discuss with me...
Leave a comments about that site...
or you can just answer from my email....



From: "Corrales Medina, Vicente Francisco"
To: taufiq mw
Cc: "Shandera, Wayne X"
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 5:53:55 AM
Subject: RE: New Debate About DHF
Dear Dr. Waly:

Thank you for your communication and for trusting CMDT as your source for medical consultation. In regards to our section on DHF, we should emphasize that the goal of our review is to provide our readers with the most useful and updated CLINICAL information about this condition. Although we find both your hypothesis and approach very interesting, we prefer not to comment on pathophysiologic aspects of the disease that are still under investigation or do not have an established clinical application yet. Nevertheless, we will keep a close eye on the development or your line of research and we hope to see it published and discussed in peer review journals in the near future.


Best regards,


Vicente F. Corrales-Medina, M.D.


Dear dr. Medina:

I understands about your reason and I feel grateful because you already read about my research. It's interesting for me that we, as the intellectual to be patient with the basic of pathophysiology and pathogenesis dengue hemorrhagic fever which is not supported with a complete data and couldn't answer my critical question like what I've wrote in my blog. Our stubbornness by just giving fluid on DHF patient with serious thrombocytopenia without giving steroid, I consider it's a very brave action and I'm very sure if it will annoying our deepest heart, as the intelectual people. For the humanity good, every single thing that appear as the benefit for us wherever it exist, we must look for it. For instance: in internet, international journal, domestic journal, or even if it appear in the cave we must admire it, give the comment for it, or propose to take it if it is necessary.

May God always guide us ! Amen...

Diskusi dengan Prof. Paul R. Epstein, M.D., M.P.H Harvard Medical School

At 11:30 AM 2/4/2009, taufiq mw wrote:
> I have research about DHF (Dengue Haemorrhagic Fever), maybe interesting for you...
> I said about possibility new pathogenesis, new pathophysiology, and new treatment for DHF.
> Please see my blog at: Http://www.dhf-revolution.blogspot.com
> Thank you very much...
>
>
> Dr. Taufiq M Waly (Internist)



Thank you, Dr. Taufiq M Waly,

Are you now using steroids routinely for thrombocytopenia in DHF?

Paul


Paul R. Epstein, M.D., M.P.H.
Associate Director
Center for Health and the Global Environment
Harvard Medical School
Landmark Center
401 Park Drive, Second Floor
Boston, MA 02215

Tel. 617-384-8586
Fax. 617-384-8585
Email. paul_epstein@hms.harvard.edu
Website. http://chge. med.harvard.edu



Thank you for your question Mr. Paul.

Because I consider the basic of pathogenesis and pathophysiology in DHF is Hipersensitivity reaction type III that is proven by thrombocyte antibody (in my reserach) so, it has been a must for us to give the steroit to DHF patient. Steroit always be given to DHF patient with fever <5 days if the thrombocytes are <100.000/mm3 or if thrombocyte decreasing so fast in monitoring thrombocyte count. For example, in three times examination, count of thrombocyte decreased from 200.000 to 150.000 and then down to 120.000. For DHF patient with fever 5 days or more steroid should be given if thrombocyte shows a decreation trend in monitoring count of thrombocyte or if the thrombocyte decreasing faster (>50.000/mm3) in monitoring. It is the best if we give the steroit when thromboyte antibody has been proven as positive. Contra indication to give steroid if the patient have gastrointestinal bleeding.


What do you think about that Mr. Paul ?

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Letter to Professor Gubler (The Father of Wild Viral Infection Theory)

Dear Professor Gubler

I think it's time for you to leave your wild virology theory as the basic of DHF. While virology theory cannot answer why DHF mostly attacking South East Asia and West Pacific people not the American even though the American live in South East Asia and in West Pacific which filled with plenty of Aedes Aegeypti mosquito. I have watched it happened directly when I was working in Caltex company in Riau, Indonesia in 1998 and on that year there was an endemic attack in Indonesia. Or wild virulogy theory couldn't answer why a man can getting the light or not serious clinical symptoms although he got infection by the wild dengue virus or so did the opposite. A wild virulogy theory are extremly rare in the later age especially after 60 years old. And the wild virulogy virus couldn't told us why DHF clinical symptoms that happened in the well nutrition patient is more serious (endanger) rather than patient with worst nutrition. Moreover in my resarch patients that given corticosteroit imunosupressif dose with the strongest corcticosteroit (methyl prednisolon) got a not serious clinical symptom more than patient without corticosteroid.
Click www.dhf-revolution.blogspot.com afankelijkheid cirebon, in that blog I have said that the basic of pathophysiology and pathogenesis DHF is hipersensitivity type III reaction (because it has been clearly proven antigen antibody complex in all over human body system), with variation there is an autoimune reaction that has discovered platelet antibody in some patient. So, sensitivity each individual has take part more than wild virulogy virus in pathogenesis DHF. We must pay more attention to viral dengue for it's ability to change it's genetic strucure so dengue virus when in the first time is not sensitive to individual and after that it will be sensitive. Or with some reason the sensitivity of individual was change and then he will be vulnurable to viral dengue. Maybe this is the reason why the American, European and the Australian that is in the first time is not sensitive became sensitive. Moreover until now there is a lot of cases on the American and Australian that got DHF without having dengue infection repeatedly (IgM positive). I believe this is the reason which is causing the epidemic in Cuba or India or maybe in the bigger part of the world in the future (World DHF Attack).
At last Professor Gubler have you researching about long term thrombositopenia (ITP) maybe in whole life of the patient which is happened in some patient with the history of Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever (IgM or IgG positive) ? And nowdays the trend of ITP is increasing in Indonesia I think if we give methylpretnisolon high dose on the first attack in Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever the accident of ITP is decrease or never happened for the patient after DHF disease.

I'm waiting your answer in my blog Mr. Gubler

Letter to Father of Secondary Heterologus Infection Theory

Honorable Professor Halstead

What is your opinion if I said to you genetic or increasing human leucocyte antigen have identical with individual sensitivity or not in viral dengue. In patients which have sensitivity to viral dengue the clinical symptoms become more serious or severe even though the viral is not wild. In the other hand, even the viral is wild but the individual is not sensitive clinical symptom to the patient wiil be light or not severe. I have prove that in my research (click dhf-revolution.blogspot.com afankelijkheid cirebon). I have said about the basic of pathophysiology and pathogenesis of DHF is hipersensitivity type III (it has been clearly proven antigen antibody complex in most of human body system) with variation there is an autoimune reaction with discovered platelet antibody in some patient. High dose (immunosupresif dose) with the strongest corticosteroid (methyl pretnisolon) to DHF patient whose fever less than 5 days gave the satisfying result.

I'm waiting for your comment in my blog. Thank you very much.

Saturday, March 14, 2009

RINGKASAN PENELITIAN PERAN SUMSUM TULANG DAN ANTIBODI TROMBOSIT PADA PENDERITA DBD DEWASA DENGAN TROMBOSITOPENIA








href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CUser%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml">



Table 2. Hasil Pemeriksaan Sumsum Tulang



Table 3. Hasil Pemeriksaan Darah Tepi



Table 4. Hasil Pemeriksaan Fisik, Antibodi Trombosid, D-Dimer, isolasi virus dan pemberian steroid




Tabel 5. Lama Trombositopenia pada kelompok demam / sakit 2-4 hari dan kelompok demam/sakit 5-d 7 hari.



LT = Lama Trombositopenia, AbTr = Antibodi Trombosit, str = Steroid

LT of 27 patients

1. Rata-rata
2. AbTr (+), Str (+)
3. AbTr (-), Str (-)
4. Abtr (-), Str (+)
5. AbTr (+), Str (-)

2-4 day fever group

6. Rata-rata
7. AbTr (+), Str (+)
8. Abtr (-), Str (-)
9. Abtr (-), Str (+)
10. Abtr (+), Str (-)

5-7 day fever group

11. Rata-rata
12. AbTr (+), Str (+)
13. Abtr (-), Str (-)
14. Abtr (-), Str (+)
15. Abtr (+), Str (-)


IV. KESIMPULAN
1. Proses perifer adalah penyebab utama trombositopenia pada semua fase DBD.
2. Urutan kekuatan pengaruh DBD <5 hari antibody trombosit, DIC tak terkompensasi perdarahan, penekanan sumsum tulang.
3. Urutan kekuatan pengaruh DBD ≥5 hari adalah aktivitas RES, DIC tak terkompensasi, antibody trombosit.
4. Steroid dosis imunosupresif pada DBD <5 hari, mempercepat normalnya trombosit.
5. Steroid dosis imunosupresif pada DBD ≥5 hari hanya mencegah penurunan tajam dari jumlah trombosit.
6. Reaksi hipersensitivitas tipe III perlu dipertimbangkan sebagai dasar patofisiologi DBD.

KETERANGAN : Hasil itu semua didapatkan dengan analisa statistic yaitu Regresi multiple,uji Kai kuadrat, Risiko relatif berdasarkan Spss, WR 6.0

Friday, December 12, 2008

MEDICAL JOURNAL OF INDONESIA

Volume 7, Number 4, October-November 1998, ISSN 0853-1773
The role of platelet antibody and bone marrow in adult denguehemorrhagie fever with thrombocytopenia
Taufiq M. Waly*, Karmel L. Tambunan+, R.H.H. nelwan#, Hediman T.P.#, Hendarwanto#, Muljono++, Iskandar Zulkarnain#.

Abstrak


Kasus demam berdarah dengue (DBD) dewasa terus meningkat pada saat ini, Dilain pihak penelitian yang dilaporkan terutama terjadi pada anak – anak. Selain itu, patofisiologi dan penatalaksanaan DBD pun masih kontroversional dan sering diperdebatkan. Telah dilakukan pemeriksaan aspirasi susmsum tulang, antibodi trombosit dan D – Dimer pada 29 pasien DBD dewasa (≥16 tahun). Diagnosis DBD ditegakkan berdasarkan kriteria klinis WHO, pemeriksaan imunokromatolografi cepat dan diperkuat dengan pemeriksaan test IH, untuk memperjelas patogenesis trombositopenia dan patofisiologi DBD dewasa. Selain itu, dilakukan pemberian steroid dengan dosis imunosupresif selama 5 hari berturut – turut pada pasien tertentu secara double blind. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa pada demam / sakit < 5 hari, proses di perifer lebih berpengaruh untuk menyebabkan trombocytopenia daripada penekanan sumsum tulang, dengan antibodi trombosit sebagai faktor yang paling berpengaruh (P=0,0112). Sedangkan pada demam atau sakit lebih ≥ 5 hari tidak didapatkan variable yang berpengaruh secara statistik. Untuk steroid, bila diberikan pada demam / sakit <5 hari ternyata dapat mengurangi lama trombositopenia (<0,05), sedangkan pada demam /sakit ≥ 5 hari ternyata hanya untuk mencegah penurunan tajam dari jumlah trombosit (P<0,01). Kesimpulan: trombositopenia pada orang dewasa terutama disebabkan oleh karena proses perifer ketimbang penekanan megakariosit sumsum tulang. Pada demam/sakit <5 hari, steroid memperpendek lama trombositopenia dan mencegah penurunan tajam dari jumlah trombosit. Akan tetapi pada demam/sakit ≥5 hari steroid hanya mencegah penurunan tajam dari jumlah trombosit.

Abstract


Adult dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF) cases are increasing rapidly, while most of the studies reported chidren cases. Controversies in DHF pathophysiology and treatment are still a matter of debate. In this study, bone marrow puncture, platelet antibody and D-Dimer examination were caried out in 29 adult DHF patientes (more than 16 years). The diagnosis of DHF was confirmed clinically using the WHO criteria, rapid immunochromatolographic examination supported by hemagglutination inhibilition (HI) test to clarify the pathogenesis of trombocytopenia and the pathophysiology of DHF in adult patient. Besides that, steroid was given in immunosuppressive dose during 5 days to selected patients (on double blind basis). The cross sectional study, cohort study and double blind trial were the methods used in this study. The results showed that peripheral processes apparently were more affected than bone narrow supression in causing thrombocytopenia, in less than 5 days fever group, with platelet antibody as a leading factor (P= 0.0112). While, in the more than 5-day fever group, there are no significant variables. If steroid was given, in the less than 5-day fever group, apparently the length of trombocythopenia could be decreased (P <0,05), while thrombocyte level could be kept from lowering too fast, in the more than 5 day fever group(P<0,1). Conclusion: Most of thrombocytopenia was caused by periferal process than bone marrow suppression. In the less than five day fever group, the steroid could decrease the length of thrombocytopenia and keep the thrombocyte level from lowering too fast. However, in the more than 5 day group it only kept the thrombocyte level from lowering too fast.

Keywords : Reticulo endothelial system, steroid, immunologic reaction



* Departement of internal medicine, Faculty of Medicine University Of Indonesia / Cipto
Mangunkusumo Hospital
+ Division of Hematology- Medical OncologyDepartement of internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Indonesia / Cipto mangunkusumo Hospital
# Division of tropical and Infectious Diseases, Departement of internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Universityof Indonesia /Cipto MangunkusumoHospital.
++ Departement of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine University of Indonesia/ Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital.


Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever (DHF) is still an endemic illness in Indonesia. Today, DHF is endemics 26 provinces (except Bengkulu).1 In one of the surveys done by the Health Departement of the Republic of Indonesia at nine cities, it was showed that Aedes Aegypty was present in one third af the houses or public places investigated.2 The lates data from the health Departement of the Republic af Indonesia, Aedes Aegypty was found in more than 10 % of the houses and buildings in 27 provinces.1 Althougt national DHFmortality rate is suppressed until 2.5%. mortality rate in hospitals caused by DHF mortality rate is still high (5.7%).1 In the other hand, the mordibity rate of adult DHF patients apparently was increased from 4.3% in 1968 to 40.56% in1996.1
Thrombocytopenia is a central issue in the oathogenesis of DHF and bone marrow plays a role to cause that. It is supposed thet suppression of bone marrow, especially the megakariocytes can cause thrombocytopenia in DHF patients with less than 5-day fever. While in patients with more than 5-day fever thrombocytopenia is caused by peripheral process.3.4 The spread of virus or viral antibody complex to bone marrow, was proved by rothwell et al.5 Bone marrow assessment data in adult DHF patient (more than 16 years) is still lacking. Most of bone marrow studies were carried out in children (less than 16 years).6.7.8.9.10.Nelson and Bierman carried out bone marrow axaminations in adult patients with hemorrhagic faver (not just dengue), but they did not explain whether the results were similar to DHF or not.11 Clinical symptoms in children DHF patients are more dangerous than in adults, thrombocytopenia was found only in 53,9% and shock in 14 % of patients.12 However, in adult, thrombocytopenia was found in 82 % and shock in 14 % of patients.13 in 1995, the mortality rate for DHF at Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital showed the same feature, i.e. 3.6 % in children and 0,8 % in adult. Furthermore, there is no statistical analysis to determine the decrease of megakariocytes in bone marrow as a main cause of trombocytopenia. Other causes of thrombocyte destruction in the periphery are disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), reticuloendotherial system (RES) activity, viral activity and immunologic reaction to destory the immune complex that was adhered to the thormbocyte. Buthep and friends explained thet endothelium destruction was a main cause of thrombocytopenia and leucopenia.14 Funahara said that there were three leading peripheral factors to cause thormbocytopenia I.e. virus that destroyed the thrombocyte directly, endothelium destruction / comsumtive coagulopathy and antigen antibody complex that destroyed the thrombocyte. 15 Radiosotope technology proved that RES activity was also a leading factor to cause thrombocytopenia.16
Platelet antibody can be positive in a DHF patien and played a rol in causing thrombocytopenia. This is due to the increase of stimulation in autoreactive lymphocytes which is always present in human causing autoimmune reaction to thrombocyte. IN the normal situation. Body immununoregulator system always succeeds to prevent autoreactive lymphocythes in causing autoimmune reaction (normal immunology homeostasis mechanism) lsarangkura and Tuchinda proved that thrombocyte transfusion to DHF patients with severe thrombocytopenia showed no significan result.17
Until now. it is supposed that the thrombocytes are not the target cell of dengue virus.The target cells of dengue virus are monocytes macrophages and Kupffer cells. 18 Therefore, the adhesion of immune complex (virus antibody complex) to endothelial wall, thrombocytes, and kidnay cells cells, event o brain and pancreas cells was more likely to be body over reaction.19.20 Halsted, sthe leader of the secondary heterologous infection theory, changed his option to genetic theory to explain the severe clinical sympptom that could happen in primary infection, occurred in Eourope, United States and Australia. 21,22 Myomin and Futrakul gave steroid to dangue shock syndrome (DSS) patients and got a good result, but Sumarmo in his two studies (1973 and 1978) did not find a significant result.23,24
In this study, we tired to give steoroid to the patients. This is according to aa assumption that in an adult DHF patient the bone marrow was less affected to the peripheral process (immunologic reaction). Besides that, the possibility of positive platelet antibody and hypersensitivity reaction stage III as DHF basic pathophisiology still needs a consideration.


METHODS


Sudy design


1. Cross sectional study. This design is useful to find out the role of bone marrow and the influence of the other variables in causing low thrombocyte count at the time of admission.
2. Cohort study. This is useful to evaluate thrombocytopenia until it reaches the normal level and the influence of platelet antibody and steroid on thrombocyte count.
3. Double blind test. This is useful to know the effect of steroid on thrombocyte count.
Inclusion criteria to his study

Patients over 16 years which were clinically proved as DHF, according to the WHO criteria, except the increase in hematrocrit value. In the WHO criteria,²⁵ the increase in hematocrit value is based on the increase above the normal value according to age, sex and population. In Indonesia, there is no data about that.
The Inclusion criteria are: fever (or history of acute fever) less than 8 days (2 – 7 days), thrombocyte level <100.000/mm3, hemorrhagic tendencies (minimally rumple Leede) and other criteria to prevent bias thrombocytopenia i.e. normal spleen (physical finding), chest x-ray, and urine analysis
The patients were divided into 2 groups, the group with fever less than 5 days and the group with fever more than 5 days.

Exclusion criteria for this study

All patients with negative IgG or IgM on rapid immunocchromatography, or patients whose second hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test level did not increase four times compared to the first HI test or whose HI test was not more than 1/2560 (presumptive positive) are excluded from this study.

Double blind test grouping

We divided all samples into two groups, i.e. the group of patients receiving steroid and fluid treatment(10 patients) and patients receiving steroid and placebo. Then we analyzed the results in the group receiving steroid compared to the group receiving placebo, in the less than 5-day and more than 5-day fever groups.

Exclusion criteria for steroid administration

The patients with gastrointestinal bleeding and whose thrombocyte level is lowered to 20.000 / mm3 in a routine examination was excluded from receiving steroid.


Investigation procedure

The Patients were subjected to bone marrow puncture and blood collection for haematologic, serologic and D-Dimer investigation and viral isolation. Some patients were subjected to steroid administration scheme.
The increase of trombocyte level in all patients was observed day by day. The patient was sent home if the thrombocyte level was more than 100.000/mm3 in two subsequent days; but before that, the blood sample should be taken for the second HI test. For a patient with positive D-Dimer, the blood sample would be taken everyday until we found negative D-Dimer.

Laboratory procedures

Rapid immunochromatography

The principal is to know if there is any antibody to dengue virus types 1,2,3,4 in the patient. We used the patients serum (from 3ml of venous blood) and applied it on nitrocellulose paper containing dengue virus antigen. Positive rapid immunochromatography test showed the change of color of control IgG and/ or IgM box. The instrument was adjusted to the WHO criteria based on positive III test for IgG and IgM. Therefore, a secondary infection showed changes of color in the IgG and IgM boxes.

Assessment of bone marrow cell

The bone marrow puncture (BMP) was carried out as fast as possible, in 24 hours or more, and before the administration of steroid. The bone marrow megakariocytes were calculated and its morphology were analyzed. The number of megakariocytes is considered normal when we found 12 – 50 megakariocytes/50 low magnification field. This is the normal value used in the Division of Hematology, Departement of internal Medicine, CiptoMangunkusumo Hospital. According to other investigators the bottom limits are 0 or 11 and the upper limits are 27 or 38.²⁶⁻³⁰ Besides that, the differential counts of 200 bone marrow cells were done.

Hematologic investigation

We took 2 1/2ml of venous blood and added 2mg of EDTA. The sample was sent for complete blood count I.e. Hb, Ht, and leucocyte and thrombocyte count, immediately to the clinical pathology Laboratory, Cipto mangunkusumo / Persahabatan Hospital (for patients who came at night) or to the hematology Laboratory, Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital for patients who came in the morning. The instruments used were Coulter Max M (Clinical Pathology Laboratory) and Micro Coba S (Hematology Laboratory).

Serologic Investigation

1. Inhibition hemagglutination test. This test Was based on the fact that dengue virus had the ability to agglutinate red blood cells, and the specific antibody in the patients serum would inhibit the agglutination process. We took 3ml of venous blood, put it in vucatainer tube and sent the samples immediately (within 4 hours) to the Health Research and development Institution of NAMRU – 2 Laboratory. The HI test were conducted when the patients came and leaved the hospital. The positive result was shown by a four – time increase in HI level.
2. Platelet antibody examination was carried out by immunofluorescent method.

D-Dimer Investigation

We took 4,5 ml of venous blood, added 1 ml of 3.8% sodium citrate and the samples were centrifuged (using Rcsorval 3 type centrifuge) at 4’C and 2000 x g for 10 minutes. The plasm was put into chromotimer Behring. This investigation was carried out at the Hematology laboratory Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital.

Viral isolation

Viral isolation of dengue virus was carried out at NAMRU – 2 or the Microbiology Laboratory. University of Indonesia. The Procedure was: patients serum inoculation to the intrathorax of female/ male Aedes aegypty, incubation between 10 – 13 days at 30’ C with relative humidity, and detection of dengue antigen. The detection of dengue antigen was done at the end of incubation time, I.e. the mosquito was killed and the head of the mosquito was reacted againts anti – dengue antibody which was conjugated to a fluorescence dye (isotiocyanat) and the screened using fluorescence microscopy. The presence of the virus grow could be seen as green-yellow flourecent particle.
To isolate the dengue virus, we took 3 ml of venous blood and put in into a vacutainer tube and sent it to the lab in less than 4 hours. Viral isolation was stopped if most of the results from 30 patients were negative.

Steroid administration scheme

The steroid used was Medixon® (metil prednisolon) in immunosuppressive dose, 1.2 – 1.5 mg / kg body weight/day, during 5 days.

Statistical analysis methods

Statistical analysis (chi-square, thrombocytopenia relative risk and multiple regression analysis) was performed using SPSS program for Windows (6.0)

RESULTS

There were 33 cases from May through July 1997, whish were collected in Cipto Mangunkusumo and persahabatan General Hospital, and 29 of them were included in the study. The entire result of this study is shown in Tables 1,2,3,and Figure 1

Table 1. The result of bone marrow assessment

Table 2. Result of hematologic investigation



Table 3. The result of physical finding, serologic and D-Dimer investigations, viral isolation, and steroid administration


DIC = Disseminated intravascular coagulation
DIC NOT Com = decompensated DIC





Figure 1. The length of throbocytopenia in the 2-4 day fever and 5-7 – day fever group

LT = the length of thrombocytopenia, AbTr = platelet antibody, str = steroid
Figure information :

LT of 27 patients

1. Average
2. AbTr (+), Str (+)
3. AbTr (-), Str (-)
4. Abtr (-), Str (+)
5. AbTr (+), Str (-)

2-4 day fever group

6. Average
7. AbTr (+), Str (+)
8. Abtr (-), Str (-)
9. Abtr (-), Str (+)
10. Abtr (+), Str (-)

5-7 day fever group

11. Average
12. AbTr (+), Str (+)
13. Abtr (-), Str (-)
14. Abtr (-), Str (+)
15. Abtr (+), Str (-)

The thrombocyte count decreased exessively in four patients with positive platelet antibody, after they achieved 100.000/mm3. Those four patients did not get steroid. They represented 40% 0f the 10 patients with positive platelet antibody and without steroid administration.
There were four patients with trombocytopenia that lacked variable causing thrombocyteopenia (negative platelet antibody, normal megakariocyte in bone marrow assessment, no fever or viremia, no bleeding, and negative DIC).


Statistical Analysis

Multiple Regression Analysis
Multiple regression analysis was used to analyze the variables influencing the first thrombocyte count (TR 0). In the less than 5-day fever group, all variables (platelet antibody, decrease in bone marrow megakariocytes, decompensated DIC, and real bleeding) showed significant influence (P <0,05) on TR 0, with platelet antibody as a leading factor (P=0.0112). The order of the influencing variable platelet antibody, decompensated DIC, real bleeding and decrease in bone marrow megakariocytes. However, multiple regression analysis to analyze the variable influencing TR 0 in the more than 5 day fever group show that no variable had significant influence. Furthermore 1 way multiple regression analysis on the entire patient (29 cases) show that apparently only platelet antibody had significant influence on TR 0 (P=0,09)

Trombocytopenia relative risk analysis.

The relative risk of thrombocytopenia in patient with platelet antibody (+) was increased 1,5 , 1,06 , and 1,75 times (confidence limits 95%) in the less than 5 days fever group, more than 5 day fever group and in entire patient respectively compared to the patient with negative platelet antibody.

Chi-square analysis
Chi-square analysis show a significant difference in the duration between patient with and without steroid administration (P<0,05), in the less than 5 day fever group. While in the more than 5 day fever group there was no significant difference between patient with and without steroid administration. One way chi-square analysis show that platelet antibody might be the cause of the fast decrease in thrombocyte level (P=0,0568). Furthermore, one way chi-square analysis show that steroid administration to patient with positive platelet antibody in the two groups might keep the thrombocyte level from lowering too fast (P= 0.07364).

DISCUSSION

In the less than 5-day fever group, positive platelet antibody was found in 62.5 % of the cases and the quite high influence of decompensated DIC to cause early thrombocytopenia, lead to the conclusion that positive platelet antibody and decompensated DIC could be regarded as a leading factor in causing thromboytopenia. Furthermore, by seeing the strength of positive platelet antibody influence to cause early thrombocytopenia in the less than 5-day fever group (P= 0.00012) and the higher relative risk in developing thrombocytopenia in this group (1,5 times). We concluded that the bone marrow suppression was not the main cause of thrombocytopenia.
The role of steroid administration in the less than 5-day fever group to decrease the duration of trombocytopenia was evaluated, even it was only given in two patients. Actually, there were four patients who received the steroid in this group, but two patients were excluded from the study, because the result of rapid immunochromatographic and HI tests were negative, even, obviously the clinical symptoms were DHF. The negative serology in those two patients needed further consideration beause steroid administration was given too early (in the first and second day of the illness). This condition could inhibit the formation of IgG and IgM, resulting in negative serology. Steroid administration decrease the length of thrombocytopenia significantly (P=0,01850.
In the more than 5-day fever group, there were no variables that influence the first thrombocyte count (the number of thrombocytes at the time before BMP). However, RES activity needed to be considered as the cause early thrombocytopenia in this group. This was based on the four patients who developed thrombocytopenia without influencing variables causing thrombocytopenia. The average thrombocyte count in those four patients was 33.000. The occurrence of increased RES activity to destroy the thrombocytes that were invested by immune complex was already proved by radioisotope. On the other hand, the low relative risk of the patients with positive platelet antibody compared to negative platelet antibody to develop thrombocytopenia, was due to the immunoregulator that secceeded to neutralize the autoreactive lymphocytes, after 5 days. The decreased of autoreactive lymphocytes was caused by the decrease of the stimulation caused by the immune complex, because a lot of immune complex were destroyed. Furthermore, the condition of positive platelet antibody became negative, as a consequence of the decrease in autoimmune reaction.
In the more than 5-day fever group, steroid had no effect on the duration of thrombocytopenia. Steroid administration only slowed down the lowering of trombocyte level. This was due to the inhibition effect of steroid in the immunoregulator system. Steroid inhibited autoreactive lymphocytes, i.e, T helper cell (Th) to give wrong impulse to B lymphocytes. Time was needed to take over the regulation of Th lymphocyte (autoreactive lymphocyte) by the steroid, so that duration of trombocytopenia was not decreased. In the other hand, steroid was statistically proved to keep the thrombocyte level from lowering too fast which was caused by presence of platelet antibody.

CONCLUSION

1. Peripheral process was more affected that bone marrow suppression to cause thrombocytopenia in the less than 5-day fever group, with platelet antibody as a leading factor.
2. In the more than 5-day fever group, the influence of RES activity as a cause of thrombocytopenia needs to be considered.
3. Steroid administration in the less than 5-day fever group could shorten the duration of thrombocytopenia, but in the more than 5-day fever group, the effect was only to keep thrombocyte level from lowering too fast.


REFERENCES
  • Health Department Republic of Indonesia. Data Program Pemberantasan Penyakit demam berdarah dengue tahun 1966. Jakarta : Dirjen PPM & PLP DepKes RI : 1996
  • Suroso T. The development of dengue hemorrhagic fever in Indonesia, In : Tumbelaka A. Harun S.R. Wuryadi. Editors. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Demam Berdarah Dengue. 1991 June 8 ; Jakarta, Indonesia. Jakarta : Pkoja DBD, Puslitkes LPUI ; 1991.p. 1 – 9.
  • Mitrakul C. Bleeding problem in dengue hemorrhagic fever platelet and coagulation changes, South East Asian J Trop Med Pub Hlth 1987 ; 18:407-12
  • Sri Rezeki H. Endotoksemia analysis during dengue hemorrhagic fever series. (Dissertation). Jakarta : Faculty of Medicine University of Indonesia ; 1996.
  • Ritwell S, Putnak R, Russa. Dengue-2 virus infection of human bone marrow : Characterization of dengue-2 antigen positive stromal cells. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1996 ; 54 (5):503-10.
  • Huthirat, Isangkura P, Srichakul, Suvatte V, Mitrakul C. Abnormal hemostasis in dengue hemorrhagic fever. South East Asian J. Trop Med Pub Hlth.
  • Isangkura P, Pongpanich, Pintadet P, Panichaykam, Valyasevi A. Hemostatic derangement in dengue hemorrhagic fever, South East Asian J. Trop Med Pub Hlth 1987 ; 18:331-9.
  • Lin SF, Liu HW, Chang C, Yen JH, Chen TP, Hematological aspects of dengue fever. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 1989; 5:12.
  • Na-Nakorn S, Samdurong A, Potrakul, Bhamarapravati. Bone Marrow studies in Thai hemorrhagic fever. Bull WHO 1966;35:54.
  • Nelson ER. Hemorrhagic fever in children in Thailand. J Pediat 1960; 56: 10-7.
  • Bierman H, Nelson ER. Hematodepressive virus disease of Thailand. Ann Intern Med 1965 : 62:867-84.
  • Sumarmo, Palelogo Punjabi, Harun S, Bartz, Edman et al. Dengue hemorrhagic fever in pediatrics patients in Jakarta, Indonesia. In : Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever Symposium. 1986 July 26 ; Jakarta, Indonesia. Jakarta : Pokja DHF ; 1986.
  • Hendarwanto. Adult DHF in Persahabatan Hospital Jakarta. 1987 – 1997. DHF News. Jakarta : University of Indonesia Research Institution; 1994 Aug. Report No. IX.
  • Bhutep P, Bunyaratve, Bramapravati. Dengue virus and endhothelial cell : A related phenomenon to thrombocytopenia and granulocytopenia in DHF. South East Asian J Trop Med Pub Hlth 1993 : 24 Suppl 1:246-9.
  • Funahara, Ogawa, Fujita, Okuno, Three possible trigger to induce thrombocytopenia in dengue virus infection. South East Asian J Trop Med Pub Hlth 1987 : 18 : 351 – 5.
  • Hendarwanto. Dengue. In: Sjaifullah Noer, editor. Internal Medicine Textbook. Jakarta: Faculty of Medicine University of Indonesia Publisher ; 1997. p. 417-26.
  • Isangkura, Tuchinda. The behavior of transfused platelets in DHF. South East Asian J Trop Med Pub Hlth 1993 ; 24 Suppl 1:220-4.
  • Halstead SB. Pathophysiology and pathogenesis of DHF. In: Thongchareon, editor. Monograph on DHF. Regional Publication no. 22. New Delhi: WHO Regional Office for South East Asia; 1993. p.80-103.
  • Patey L, Ollivaud, Breuil, Lafaix. Unusual neurologic manifestations occurring during dengue fever infection. Am J Trop Med Hyg : 48 (6): 793-802.
  • Nelwan RHH. Acute pancreatitis complicating primary dengue hemorrhagic fever : A case report in : Nelwan RHH. Editor. Proceeding of the 3rd Western Pacific on Chemotheraqpy and Infectious Diseases. 1992 Dec 6-9: Bali, Indonesia. Jakarta: Acta Medica Indonesiana; 1992. p.219-22.
  • Halstead. The XXth century dengue pandemics need surveillance and research. World Health stat Q 1992;45 (2 – 3): 292-8.
  • Devine, Curzabbo. A. Rapid immunochromatographic test for the diagnosis of dengue infection. Brisbane: Panbio Australia; 1997.
  • Futrakul, Posyachinda, Mitrakul, Kwakpetoon, Unchumchoke, Chantana, et al. Hemodynamic response to highdose methyl prednisolone and mannitol in severe dengue shock patients unresponsive to fluid replacement, South east Asian J Trop Med Pub Hlth 1987; 18:351-5.
  • Sumarno, The role of Steroid in dengue shock syndrome. South East Asian J Trop Med Pub Hlth 1987; 18:383-9.
  • WHO. DHF Diagnosis, treatment, prevention and control. 2nd ed. Geneva. WHO; 1997.


  • Sunday, December 7, 2008

    TINJAUAN TERHADAP PENYATUAN PROTOKOL TERAPI

    1. PENDAHULUAN

    Ada beberapa hal yang menarik minat para dokter ahli penyakit dalam/anak untuk lebih mendalami DBD, yaitu :
    1. Kompleksitas dari penyakit DBD yang memerlukan penguasan ilmu yang baik dan disiplin ilmu yang berada di bagian penyakit dalam ataupun baian kesehatan anak.
    2. Masih tingginya kasus DBD di Indonesia, terutama pada saat – saat epidemic.
    3. Masih belum jelasnya patogenesis, dan terapi DBD, sehingga masih terbuka kemungkinan untuk penelitian lebih lanjut dan sekaligus dapat pula memberikan peluang keragu – raguan dalam melakukan terapi.
    Dilain pihak, para penentu kebijaksanaan kesehataan di negeri ini (DepKes RI) juga dipaksa untuk memberikan perhatian berlebih terhadap DBD ini. Masih tingginya kasus DBD dengan akibat tingginya jumlah kematian(walaupun secara prosentasikecil, hanya 1,9 %) membuat para penentu kebijaksanaan tersebut perlu membuat strategi – strategi penanggulangan DBD. Salah satunya adalah membuat ptrotokol terapi DBD. Sehingga diharapkan angka kematian dapat ditekan lagi, sekaligus mengurangi keresahan masyarakat serta keresahan atau keraguan dokter dalam memberika terapi. Bahkan untuk lebih memantapkan para dokter, perlu diberikan training 3 hari untuk mendiskusikan DBD dan protokol DBD tersebut.
    Masalahnya adalah bagi para dokter yang terlalu banyak membaca DBD keresahan dan keraguan akan terapi DBD tidaklah teratasi dengan training tersebut. Malah menjadi lebih ragu dan lebih resah lagi. Terebih – lebih melihat kenyataan bahwa jumlah mereka tidaklah kecil. Kemana mereka akan bertanya? Apakah cukup bagi mereka dengan menunjukan buku protokol DBD apabila timbul pertanyaan dari masyarakat ?
    Berdasarkan alasan itulah, maka saya memberanikan diri untuk membuat tulisan ini dan mengirimkannya ke Instansi yang berwenang serta orang – orang yang saya anggap pakar DBD. Sehingga diharapkan dapat terjadi diskusi terbuka untuk lebih memantapkan kita semua dalam maslah DBD ini.

    II. PATOGENESIS DAN PATOFISIOLOGI DBD

    Secara garis besar dua teori yang dianggap merupakan patogenesis DBD sampai dengan saat ini :
    a. Teori Virulensi Virus
    b. Teori Imunopatologi dengan makanismesecondary heterologous infection atau dengan mekanisme infection enhancing antibody. Sedangkan teori – teori lain seperti endotoksin. Teori apoptosis, teori mediator, teori antigen antibody kompleks, teori trombosit endotel menunjukan dasar –dasar patofisiologi DBD yang disebabkan oleh karena teori virulensi (apabila dia percaya teori virulensi) atau teori infection enhancing antibody (kalau dia percaya teori tersebut). Semua dasar patofisiologi tersebut sdapat saja terjadi. Tetapi ada sedikit keberatanpada teoriendotoksin berdasarkan alasan – alasan sebagai berikut :
    1. Teori Endotoksin tidak dapat dipakai untuk menerangkan patofisiologi DBD biasa n/ DBD tanpa syok / DBD tanpa kerusakan usus
    2. Sebagian besar endotoksin secara teori seharusnya dapat dikurangi efeknya disirkulasi. Hal ini karena sebagian besar endotoksin akan diikat oleh plasma protein seperti transferin, ADP dan plasma protein lain. Jadi menyatakan bahwa permeabilitas kapiler yang meningkat disebabkan oleh adanya endotoksin pada dinding kapiler tersebut perlulah dipertanyakan. Sehingga belum tentu endotoksin tersebut yang menyebabkan timbulnya aktifitas makrofag (naiknya TNF, IL1) dan mengaktifkan limpositT (IL6). Kemungkinan besar penghancuran kompleks limun di dinding sirkulasilah yang menyebabkan terjadinya hal tersebut.
    Dengan alasan itu pula kita tidak dapat menyatakan bahwa perdarahan akan lebih berat terjadi pada pasien – pasien dengan kadar endotoksin yang tinggi atau dapat pula dikatakan kadar endotoksin yang meningkat pada syok belum tentu mempunyai makna Sebagai bahan perbandingan, di RSCM pernah dibuktikan bahwa angka mortalitas dan saat morbiditas tidak berbeda bermakna pada pasien kanker dengan sepsis dsan endotoksin yang tinggi apabila dibandingkan dngan pasien kanker dengan sepsis dan kadar endotoksin yang rendah .
    Kembali kepada dua patogenis di atas yaitu teori virulensi virus dan teori secondary heterologous infection. Pada saat ini sebagian besar ahli DBD telah menolak teori virulensi virus ini. Hal ini berdasarkan tidak dapatnya teori virulensi menjawab pertanyaan kenapa pada orang – orang dengan status gizi buruk, gejala klinik DBD yang terjadi justru ringan. Hampir tidak pernah ditemukan pasien DBD yang dirawat dengan umur >45 tahun. Pada umumnya, infeksi sekunder oleh virus dengue yang dianggap tidak ganas ( Dengue 1,2,4) memberikan gejala klinik yang lebih berat jika dibandingkan dengan infeksi primer dari virus dengue yang dianggap ganas ( virus dengue 3). Penekanan pembentukan antibodi dengan memberikan steroid dosis imunorepresifpada pasien – pasien DBD dan demam <5 hari memberikan hasil yang bermakna (P < 0,05 / 100%). Dan secara perhitungan diatas kertas (Likelihood Ratio) akan memberikan hasil yang sama apabila diberikan kepada sampel yang lebih besar (P = 0,01850).
    Sedangkan teori secondary heterologous inection atau infection enhancing antibody tidak dapat menerangkan kenapa terjadi gejala klinik pada orang – orang yang hanya membentuk IgM saja pada antibodinya atau pada orang – orang dengan infeksi primer. Sebab pada kepustakaan disebutkan antibodi non-neutralizing yang menyebabkan sakit itu adalah IgG. Kasus DBD dengan IgM ini banyak ditemukan pada – orang Eropa. Amerika dan Australia. Atau teori secondary heterologous ini tidak dapat menerangkan kenapa DBD terutama terdapat di Asia Tenggara dan pasifik Barat. Atau kenapa pada orang – orang di suatu daerah pegunungan tertentu yang banyak nyamuk Aedes aegyptinya tidak terkena DBD.
    Oleh karena itu, Halstead, yang notabene adalah bapak teori secondary heterologous infection, telah berubah ke teori genetik (1992) untuk menerngkan pertanyaan – pertanyaan di atas. Dan saya setuju denmgan pendapat Halstead tersebut. Dimana menurut saya, arti genetik tersebut adalah reaksi hipersinsitivitas (reaksi alergi). Jadi reaksi imun yang berlebihan terhadap virus dengue inilah yang menyebabkan seseorang dapat terkena DBD. Perubahan gen virus dengue atau berubahan gen individu juga dapat menyebabkan terjadinya epidemi DBD di Kuba 1991 atau epidemi di India Tahun 1997, Dan bahkan bukan tidak mungkin pada suatu nanti epidemi DBD akan menyerang bagian dunia yang lebih luas lagi.
    Sedangkan dasar patosifiologi DBD menurut saya adalah reaksi terhadap hipersensitif tipe III (Tipe Kompleks Imun) dengan variasi terjadinya reaksi autoimun terhadap trombosit (terbentuknya antibodi trombosit). Dasar untuk menyatakan bahwa patosifiologi DBD adalah hipersensitivitas tipe II karena telah dibuktikan tersebarnya kompleks imun ke hampir seluruh jaringan tubuh (dinding pembuluh darah, ginjal, otak, pankreas, sendi, sum-sum tulang, trombosit). Padahal secara teori setelah antigen (virus) tersbut diikat oleh antibodi, sel Makrofag dengan cepat menghancurkan seluruh kompleks antigen antibodi tersebut sehingga, tidak ada kompleks imun yang menyebar dan mengendap ke jaringan – jaringan tubuh. Antibodi diberikan Tuhan kepada manusia untuk menangkap benda asing dan kemudian dihancurkan (jadi adalah suatu kejanggalan dengan menyatakan bahwa setelah terbentuk antibodi IgG.non-neutralizing antibody justru virus dipacu untuk bereplikasi seperti diterangkan oleh teori infection enhancing antibody). Kompleks Imun tidak dapat dihancurkan apabila terjadi defek / disfungsi sistem sel fagosit (manosit, makrofag). Dan sampai sekarang diakui memang sel taraget virus dengue untuk hidup adalah monosit makrofag dan sel Kupffer (bukan trombosit). Jadi logis apabila terjadi penyebaran kompleks imun ataua terjadi reaksi hipersensitivitas tipe III. Reaksi hipersisnsitivitas tipe III ini dapat terjadi baik pada individu yang membentuk IgM saja (infeksi primer) atau IgG (Infeksi sekunder). Yang penting harus terjadi defek / disfungsi di sel – sel makrofag. Dan setelah makrofag kembali pada fungsinya semula/ terbentuknya sel – sel makrofag baru , barulah terjadi penghancuran kompleks – kompleks imun tersebut sehingga terjadi kerusakan jaringan tubuh. Virus sendiri didalam sel targetnya dapat dihancurkan oleh sel T sitotoksik (seperti teori apoptosis) dan sel K dengan mekanisme ADCC.
    Teori HS tipe III bertambah kuat apabila dapat ditemukan juga terjadinya reaksi autoimun. Reaksi autoimun ini ternyata dapat ditemukan pada pasien DBD dengan terbentuknya antibodi trombosit (antibodi trombosit +) pada 63 % sampel, yang terbukti sebagai peneybab utama trombositopenia. Secara teori, pada setiap individu terdapat limposit autoreaktif yang mempunyai respon autoantigen. Tidak terjadinya reaksi autoimun pada manusia karena adanya sistem imunoregulator untuk mempertahankan homeostasis. Banyaknya kompleks imun yang menempel pada trombosit memberikan rangsang yang kuat kepada limposit autoreaktif dan mempersulit sistem imunoregulator. Sehingga terbentuklah antibodi trombosit secara sementara waktu sampai dengan sistem imunoregulator berhasil mengontrol homeostasis kembali (antibodi trombosit menjadi negative kembali). Adanya antibodi trombosit akan menyebabkan trombosit – trombosit normal pun dihancurkan,. Sehingga logis walaupun sumsum tulang menunjukan hiperselular dan jumlah megakariosit meningkat, trombosit yang terhitung diperifer tetap rendah atau malah menurun tajam pada fase akhir DBD, untuk kemudian meningkat lagi dengan cepat (Seperti terlihat pada pasien – pasien DBD tertentu). Padahal Suplai trombosit dari sumsum tulang pada keadaan trombositopenia berat dapat berjumlah 240.000/mm3.
    Teori HS tipe III pun dapat bertambah kuat pula bila pemberian steroid memberikan efek yang baik, ada 4 hal yang menyebabkan kegagalan pemberian steroid, yaitu :
    1. Dosis yang digunakan bukan dosis imunorepresif dan tipe steroid yang diberikan bukan golongan steroid kuat tetapi steroid lemah seperti hidrokortison.
    2. Pemberian steroid sudah terlambat seperti sudah terjadi syok atau DBD > 5 Hari.
    3. Steroid jangan diberikan kepada pasien yang terbukti terjadi perdarahan gastrointestinal(melena).
    4. Steroid akan kurang berefek bila diberikan kepada DBD > 5 hari dengan antibodi trombosit (-).
    Catatan : Secara sepintas Roit Tahun 1997 dalam Essential Immunology menyatakan kemungkinan HS tipe III sebagai dasar patosifiologi DSS (Roit,I.M : Roit’s Essential Immunology, 9th Edition, Blackwell Science, 1997 : 351).
    Satu hal lagi yang menurut saya juga memperkuat teori HS tipe III adalah suatu penelitian yang menunjukan bahwa trombositopenia akibat penghancuran diperifer lebih berperan daripada trombositopenia akibat penekanan sumsum tulang, baik pada fase demam < 5 hari atau ≥ 5 hari (bandingkan dengan teori yang sampai saat ini dianut yang menyatakan bahwa trombositopenia pada demam < 5 hari oleh karena penekanan sumsum tulang dan > 5 hari oleh karena kehancuran trombosit diperifer).

    III. MASALAH PROTOKOL TERAPI

    Protokol terapi yang ditetapkan DepKes tidak menjadi masalah bagi penganut teori virulensi virus maupun teori secondary heterologous infection. Tetapi protokol terapi ini dapat menjadi masalah besar bagi penganut teori hipersensitivitas tipe III dengan antibodi trombositnya.
    Bagan 6 (Protokol 1)
    a. Pasien tersangka DBD datang ke RS / Puskesmas dengan Hb/Ht/Trombosit normal kemudian langsung dipulangkan dengan nasihat minum banyak – banyak dan harus kontrol keesokan harinya.
    * Masalah
    Dalam tempo satu hari itu segala hal yang buruk dari DBD (Perdarahan otak, perdarahan massif, syok, trombositopenia berat) dapat saja terjadi. Dan kemungkinannya menurut saya ± 60% apabila demam < 5 hari dan ± 10% apabila demam ≥ 5 hari. Air dapat banyak menunda syok akibat perdarahan hanya untuk sementara waktu saja. Jatuhnya jumlah trombosit sampai menjadi < 20.000/mm3 dapat tanpa perdarahan tetapi merupakan faktor resiko untuk terjadinya perdarahan spontan termasuk perdarahan otak. Belum lagi kalau pasien terkena trauma dirumah. Trauma yang terjadi dirumah seperti menggaruk – garuk hidung, benturan, banyak bergerak, aspirin dan sebagainya lebih besar peranannya dalam memicu terjadinya perdarahan spontan ketimbang jumlah trombosit. Minum air banyak – banyak tidak dapat menahan jatuhnya jumlah trombosit secara tajam atau meningkatkan jumlah trombosi. DBD yang terjadi pada orang dewasa dengan mudah akan mencari air secara otomatis karena adanya rangsangan haus. Oleh karena itu pada suatu penelitian DBD dewasa didapatkan hanya ± 30 % DBD dewasa yang menunjukan homokosentrasi meningkat. Bahkan yang lebih fantastis adalah apa yang dilakukan oleh kalayanarooj dan kawan – kawan pada anak – anak Thailand berumur 1/2 sampai dengan 14 Tahun. Ternyata hematokrit meningkat hanya terjadi pada 15,7 % dari 189 sampel. Hilangnya darah, elektrolit, jumlah trombosit dan gangguan keseimbangan asam basa lebih memegang peranan penting. Dan ini juga tak dapat diatasi dengan minum air banyak – banyak.

    Ø Saran
    o Apabila mampu, periksalah antibodi trombosit (AbTr)
    Apabila AbTr positif dan demam < 5 hari, pasien dirawat serta berikan steroid dosis imunosupresif.
    Apabila ABTr Negative dan demam < 5 hari,pasien dipulangkan dan diberikan steroid dosis imunosupresif. Demam ≥ 5 hari dan AbTr (+), pasien dirawat dan berikan steroid dosis imunosupresif. Apabila ≥ 5 hari dab AbTr (-), pulangkan tanpa steroid.
    o Apabila kurang mampu, AbTr tidak diperiksa
    Apabila demam < 5 hari, pasien dipulangkan dengan steroid dosis imunosupresif.Apabila demam ≥ 5 hari, pasien dipulangkan tanpa steroid.
    Catatan : Pasien yang dipulangkan tidak harus kontrol keesokan
    harinya, kecuali terjadi perburukan bintik – bintik merah yang bertambah banyak, mimisan dan sebagainya.
    b. Hb↑, Ht↑, trombosit normal
    Tentukan dalam tempo 4 jam (observasi) dengan pemerikan cairan infuse R1. 4 jam / Kolf. Apakah pasien akan dipulangkan atau dirawat. Apabila pulang. Kontrol keesokan harinya.
    Ø Masalah
    Setuju dengan protokol, tetapi dengan masalah 1a.
    Ø Saran
    Sama dengan 1a.
    c. Hb, Ht normal, trombosit antaran 100.000 – 150.000/mm3.
    Tentukan dalam tempo maksimal 8 jam (obsevasi) dengan pemberian cairan infuse RL 4 jam/kolf, apakah pasien akan dipulangkan atau dirawat. Apabila pulang, kontrol keesokan harinya.
    Ø Masalah
    Secara patofisiologi dalam keadaan pasien seperti 1c, sebenarnya tidak jelas bagaimana pemberian cairan RL 1000cc dapat menaikkan jumlah trombosit, Pasien seperti itu sebaiknya dipulangkan saja tanpa harus observasi.
    Masalah – masalah lain sama dengan 1a.
    Ø Saran
    Pasien seperti 1c dipulangkan saja.
    Saran – saran lain sama dengan 1a.
    Indikasi Perawatan
    A. Dalam protokol disebutkan bahwa indikasi pasien DBD dirawat bila didapatkan :
    a.DBD tanpa perdarahan masif dengan : 1.HB, Ht normal, trombosit ≤ 100.000/mm3
    2.Hb↑,Ht↑,trombosit ≤ 150.000/mm3
    b. DBD dengan perdarahan masif, dengan atau tanpa syok.
    c.DBD dengan syok, dengan atau tanpa perdarahan.
    B. Bila berdasarkan teori hipersensitivitas tipe III, indikasi rawat ialah . 1. DBD dengan perdarahan nyata misalnya mimisan, perdarahan gusi dan sebagainya.
    2. DBD dengan syok
    3. DBD tanpa syok dan tanpa perdarahan nyata
    a. Mampu memeriksa AbTr
    1. AbTr (+)
    2. AbTr (-)
    Baru dirawat bila : - trombosit ≤ 100.000/mm3
    Hb↑,Ht↑,(setelah observasi)
    b. Kurang mampu memeriksa AbTr
    Trombosit ≤ 100.000/mm3
    Hb↑ , Ht↑ , (Setelah observasi)

    Indikasi Pulang
    A. Dalam protokol disebutkan1. 1.KU, Kesadaran, hemodinamik baik, Bebas demam, Hb, Ht, trombosit normal minimal 1 x 24 jam.
    2.Trombosit dapat belum normal (≥ 50.000/mm3) asalkan kontrol lagi keesokan harinya
    Catatan (dalam protokol) : Bila Pasien pulang sebelum hari ke – 7 sakit, harus kontrol keesokan hariny Bila pasien pulang dan kemudian KU memburuk, kontrol lagi keesokan harinya.
    B. Berdasarkan teori hipersensitivitas tipe III
    1. KU, Kesadaran, hemodinamik baik, Bebas demam, Hb, Ht, Trombosit normal minimal 1 x 24 jam tetapi AbTr harus negative (apabila mampu memeriksanya).
    2. AbTr (+) dapat dipulangkan asalkan jumlah trombosit 2 x 24 jam > 100.000/mm3
    3. Bila tidak mampu periksa antibodi trombosit, pasien baru dipulangkan bila trombosit > 100.000/mm3 selama 2 x 24 jam berturut – turut, Hb, Ht, normal dan bebas demam.
    Catatan : pasien kontrol keesokan harinya apabil kemudian KU memburuk.
    Masalah Terapi
    A. Dalam Protokol :
    - Tak ada indikasi pemberian steroid.
    - Transfusi trombosit hanya bila ada perdarahan masif dan jumlah trombosit < 100.000/mm3
    B. Berdasarkan teori hipersensitif tipe III :
    o Steroid dosis imunosupresif selalu diberikan kepada DBD < 5 hari.
    o Steroid dosis imunosupresif hanya diberikan kepada DBD ≥ 5 hari bila AbTr (+) dengan jumlah trombosit 50.000/mm3 – 150.000/mm3. Baik dengan perdarahan ataupun tidak. Sebab fungsi steroid pada DBD > 5 hari dengan AbTr (+) hanya untuk mencegah penurunan tajam jumlah trombosit (mencegah jangan sampai trombosit turun secara mendadak menjadi < 20.000/mm3).
    Kontra indikasi pemberian steroid :
    · Perdarahan gastrointestinal
    · DBD > 5 hari dengan AbTr (-)
    · Transfusi Trombosit
    Transfusi trombosit dapat diberikan pada pasien dengan jumlah trombosit < 100.000/mm3, AbTr harus negative walaupun tanpa perdarahn masif.
    Transfusi darah juga dapat diberikan pada pasien dengan AbTr (+) hanya apabila ada perdarahan masif dan jumlah trombosit < 30.000/mm3. Serta harus mendapatkan perlindungan steroid.
    Catatan : Steroid dosis imunosupresif adalah steroid dengan dosis setara setara dengan metilprednisolone > 1 mg/kg bb/hari dan diberikan tidak lebih daripada 5 hari.
    IV. PENUTUP
    Demikian telah dicoba suatu usaha untuk mendiskusikan kembali protokol Terapi DBD Dewasa di Indonesia.
    Pada akhirnya, hanya Allah-lah yang Maha Pintar dan tempat kita bertanya serta memohon untuk selalu ditunjukan pada jalan-Nya yang lurus.
    Semoga ada manfaatnya bagi kita semua.
    Amin, ya robbal ’alamin

    Wasalam,


    Dr. TAUFIQ M. WALY Sp.P.D







    BAGAN 6
    PROTOKOL 1 TERSANGKA DEMAM BERDARAH DENGUE DEWASA :
    OBSERVASI & PEMBERIAN CAIRAN DI RUANG OBSERVASI

















    Sumber : Tata laksana Demam Dengue / Demam Berdarah Dengue : Departemen Kesehatan Republik Indonesia, Direktorat Jenderal Pemberantasan Penyakit menular dan Penyehatan Lingkungan Pemukiman, 1999




    Tulisan ini dikirimkan kepada:
    1. Menteri kesehatan Republik Indonesia
    2. Menterri Pendidikan Nasional
    3. Kepala Direktorat PPBB Direktorat Jenderal PPM & PLP, Departemen Kesehatan Republik Indolesia
    4, Kanwil Departemen kesehatan.Jawa Barat
    5. Rektor Universitas Indonesia
    6. Dekan Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Indonesia
    7. Prof.D r. dr. Sumarmo P.SudarmoS. p.A.( K.)
    8. Dr.dr.Sri Rezeki S Hadinegoro.Sp .A(. K.)
    9. ProfDrd. r.k armeLl . TampuboloSn.p .P.l).K. IIOM
    10. dr.Zubairi Djoreban,Sp.P.D., KHOM
    ll. dr.Iskandar Zulkarnain Sp .P.D. KPTI
    12 d.R.H.H. Nelwan,Sp.P.D. KPTI
    13. dr.Herdiman T . Pohan, Sp.P.D. KPTI
    14. dr.Djoko Widodo.S p.P.D. KPTl
    15. Prof.Dr.dr.Eddy Soewandojo, Sp..P.D.
    16. Dr.dr. Sutaryo, Sp.A.( K.)
    17. Prof. dr.Agus Sjahrurachman, Sp.Mik.