International journal of antimicrobial agents
-
Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents · May 2017
Randomized Controlled TrialAssociation between augmented renal clearance and clinical outcomes in patients receiving β-lactam antibiotic therapy by continuous or intermittent infusion: a nested cohort study of the BLING-II randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial.
Augmented renal clearance (ARC) is known to influence β-lactam antibiotic pharmacokinetics. This substudy of the BLING-II trial aimed to explore the association between ARC and patient outcomes in a large randomised clinical trial. BLING-II enrolled 432 participants with severe sepsis randomised to receive β-lactam therapy by continuous or intermittent infusion. ⋯ No difference was noted in 90-day mortality. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes in ARC patients according to the dosing strategy employed. In this substudy of a large clinical trial of β-lactam antibiotics in severe sepsis, ARC was not associated with any differences in outcomes, regardless of dosing strategy.
-
Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents · Jul 2015
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative StudyPharmacokinetics of piperacillin in critically ill patients receiving continuous venovenous haemofiltration: A randomised controlled trial of continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus administration.
Here we describe the pharmacokinetics of piperacillin administered by continuous infusion (CI) versus intermittent bolus (IB) dosing in critically ill patients receiving continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) and compare the frequency of pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic (PK/PD) target attainment with each dosing strategy. This was a prospective pharmacokinetic trial in 16 critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock undergoing CVVH and randomised to receive either CI or IB administration of a standard daily dose of piperacillin/tazobactam (11.25g/day on Day 1 followed by 9g/day). Serial blood samples were measured on two occasions. ⋯ Total clearance and clearance not mediated by CVVH were significantly higher with CI administration [median (interquartile range), 1.0 (0.7-1.1) and 0.8 (0.6-1.0)mL/kg/min; P=0.001 and 0.001, respectively]. The estimated unbound piperacillin concentrations were four times above the target susceptibility breakpoint (16mg/L) for the entire dosing interval (100%fT>4xMIC) in 87.5% of patients receiving CI administration (sampling occasion 1), compared with 62.5% of IB patients achieving the desired target (50%fT>4xMIC). Compared with IB dosing, and despite similar CVVH settings, CI administration of piperacillin results in a pharmacokinetic profile that may optimise outcomes for less susceptible pathogens.
-
Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents · May 2015
Randomized Controlled TrialPharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis of an intensified regimen containing rifampicin and moxifloxacin for tuberculous meningitis.
Recent data suggest that intensified antimicrobial treatment may improve the outcome of tuberculous meningitis (TBM). Considering that drug exposure is the intermediate link between dose and effect, we examined the concentration-response relationship for rifampicin and moxifloxacin in TBM patients. In an open-label, phase 2 clinical trial performed in Indonesia (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01158755), 60 TBM patients were randomised to receive standard-dose (450mg oral) or high-dose rifampicin (600mg intravenous) plus either oral moxifloxacin (400mg or 800mg) or ethambutol (750mg). ⋯ From exposure-response curves, a rifampicin plasma AUC0-6h of ∼70mg·h/L (AUC0-24h of ∼116mgh/L) and a Cmax of ∼22mg/L were deduced as minimum target values for treatment. A strong concentration-effect relationship was found, with higher rifampicin exposure leading to better TBM survival. The current treatment dose of rifampicin is suboptimal; higher doses of rifampicin should be evaluated.
-
Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents · Jan 2015
Randomized Controlled TrialPharmacokinetics of meropenem in critically ill patients receiving continuous venovenous haemofiltration: a randomised controlled trial of continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus administration.
The objective of this study was to describe the pharmacokinetics of meropenem, administered by continuous infusion (CI) or intermittent bolus (IB), in critically ill patients receiving continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) and to evaluate the frequency of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment with each dosing strategy. This was a prospective, randomised controlled trial in critically ill patients receiving CVVH and administered meropenem by CI or IB. Serial meropenem concentrations in plasma and ultrafiltrate were measured after administration of a standard total daily dose (4 g/day on Day 1, followed by 3g/day thereafter) on two occasions during antibiotic therapy. ⋯ CVVH contributed to ca. 50% of meropenem total clearance in these patients. The administered meropenem doses resulted in plasma drug concentrations that were >4× the targeted susceptibility breakpoint (2mg/L) for 100% of the dosing interval, for both groups, on both occasions. CI could be an alternative to IB for meropenem administration in critically ill patients receiving CVVH.
-
Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents · Oct 2014
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative StudyPharmacokinetics of imipenem in critically ill patients during empirical treatment of nosocomial pneumonia: a comparison of 0.5-h and 3-h infusions.
In critically ill patients, pathophysiological changes alter the pharmacokinetics of antibiotics. Imipenem exhibits primarily time-dependent killing. Its administration by prolonged infusion may increase the time for which its plasma concentration exceeds the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of suspected pathogens. ⋯ The study included 22 patients. Whilst no significant differences were found between both groups for %fT>MIC, %fT>4×MIC was 87.4±12.19%, 68.6±15.08%, 47.31±6.64% and 27.81±9.52% of the 8-h interval in the short infusion group for MICs of 0.5, 1, 2 and 4mg/L, respectively, and 85.15±17.57%, 53.14±27.27%, 13.55±24.47% and 0±0% of the 6-h interval for the extended infusion group. In conclusion, administration of 0.5g of imipenem by a 3-h infusion every 6h does not provide sufficient drug concentrations to treat infections caused by pathogens with a MIC of ≥2mg/L.