| Literature DB >> 22839761 |
Fekade Bruck Sime1, Michael S Roberts, Sandra L Peake, Jeffrey Lipman, Jason A Roberts.
Abstract
The pharmacokinetics of beta-lactam antibiotics in intensive care patients may be profoundly altered due to the dynamic, unpredictable pathophysiological changes that occur in critical illness. For many drugs, significant increases in the volume of distribution and/or variability in drug clearance are common. When "standard" beta-lactam doses are used, such pharmacokinetic changes can result in subtherapeutic plasma concentrations, treatment failure, and the development of antibiotic resistance. Emerging data support the use of beta-lactam therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) and individualized dosing to ensure the achievement of pharmacodynamic targets associated with rapid bacterial killing and optimal clinical outcomes. The purpose of this work was to describe the pharmacokinetic variability of beta-lactams in the critically ill and to discuss the potential utility of TDM to optimize antibiotic therapy through a structured literature review of all relevant publications between 1946 and October 2011. Only a few studies have reported the utility of TDM as a tool to improve beta-lactam dosing in critically ill patients. Moreover, there is little agreement between studies on the pharmacodynamic targets required to optimize antibiotic therapy. The impact of TDM on important clinical outcomes also remains to be established. Whereas TDM may be theoretically rational, clinical studies to assess utility in the clinical setting are urgently required.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22839761 PMCID: PMC3460787 DOI: 10.1186/2110-5820-2-35
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Intensive Care ISSN: 2110-5820 Impact factor: 6.925
Figure 1Identification, screening, and selection of articles for the systematic review.
Figure 2Number of articles describing pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of selected beta-lactam antibiotics in critically ill patients (relates to Figure1).
Pharmacokinetic parameters of selected beta-lactam antibiotics in critically ill patients without renal dysfunction
| Cefepime | 12 | 2 g q12h | 0.34* | 123 | 3.2 | | 346 | 4 | 77% T > MIC | [ |
| 19 | 2 g q8h | 0.36 | 88.2* | 3.37 | 68 | 310 | 32 | 34% T > 4xMIC | [ | |
| 13 | 2 g q12h | 0.32* | 134 | 2.5 | | 249 | | | [ | |
| 7 | 2 g q12h | 0.47* | 125 | 3.42 | | 305 | 7 | 80% T > MIC90 | [ | |
| 5 | 100% T > MIC90 | |||||||||
| 17 | 2 g q8h | 0.37 | 88.2* | 3.37 | 66.56 | 324.02 | | | [ | |
| Ceftazidime | 15 | 2 g q8h | 0.81* | 151 | 4.75 | | 277.31 | | | [ |
| 12 | 2 g q8h | 0.27* | | 3.48 | 124.4 | 331 | 4 | 92% T > MIC | [ | |
| 17 | 2 g q8h | 0.51 | 63.7* | 6.28 | 61.65 | 523.49 | | | [ | |
| 18 | 2 g q8h | 0.48 | 112* | 5.84 | 63 | 522 | 32 | 45% T > 4xMIC | [ | |
| 10 | 2 g q8h | 0.23 | 112* | 1.98 | | | | | [ | |
| 49 | 2 g q8h or 6 g CI/day | 0.67* | 91.3 | | | | | | [ | |
| Meropenem | 8 | 2 g q8h or | 0.38* | 156.7 | 2.4 | 110.1 | 193.8 | | 100% T > MIC | [ |
| 7 | 2 g LD + 3 g CI/day | 0.37* | 128.3 | | | 117.5 | | 100% T > MIC | ||
| 16 | 1 g q8h | 0.43 | 130.9* | 2.05 | 35 | 132 | 8 | 57% T > 4xMIC | [ | |
| 10 | 1 g q8h or 3 g CI/day | 0.32* | 226.7 | | | | | | [ | |
| 10 | 1 g q8h | 0.39* | 191 | 2.13 | 46.6 | 99.5 | 0.25-1 | 100% T > MIC | [ | |
| Piperacillin | 8 | 12/1.5 g PIP/TAZ CI | 0.33 | 286.7 | | 144 | | | | [ |
| 8 | 4/0.5 PIP/TAZ q6h or q8h | | 266.6 | | | | ||||
| 27 | 4 g q6h | 0.38 | 141.4* | 2.58 | 123 | 469 | 64 | 33% T > 4xMIC | [ | |
| Ceftriaxone | 54 | 2 g qd | 0.28* | 14.7 | 9.6 | | | 8 | 16% T > MIC | [ |
| 10 | 2 g qd | 0.28* | 41.3 | 6.4 | 204.9 | | | | [ | |
| Ertapenem | 17 | 1 g CI/day | 0.21* | 43.2 | 4.15 | 90 | 418 | 2 | 25% T > MIC | [ |
| 8 | 1 g qd | 0.85* | 200.5 | 5.7 | 94.1 | 317.7 | | | [ | |
| Flucloxacillin | 10 | 0.29* | 150.2 | 2.45 | [ |
Vd, volume of distribution; CL, clearance; Cmax, peak serum concentration; AUC, area under the concentration vs. time curve; MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration; CI, continuous infusion; LD, loading dose; PIP, piperacillin; TAZ, tazobactam; *Data were converted considering 70 kg body weight.
Pharmacokinetic parameters of selected beta-lactam antibiotics in critically ill patients undergoing CRRT
| Cefepime | 4 | 2 g q8h | CVVH or CVVHD | PAN or PS | 140-250 | 16.7-35 | 500-1000 | 100.5 l | 4.6 | 0.6 | | 111.5 | 27.2 | 0.76 | [ |
| 5 | 1-4 g q12h or q24h | CVVH | PAN | 150 | 16 | | 44.6 - 94.9 | 12.9 | 0.46 | 834.7 -1,677.8 | 35.9 | 13 | 0.86 | [ | |
| 7 | 1-4 g q12h or q24h | CVVHDF | PAN | 150 | 17 | 857-1020 | 25.7 -90.8 | 8.6 | 0.34 | 344.9 -1,306.8 | 46.8 | 26 | 0.78 | ||
| 8 | 2 g q12h | CVVH or CVVHDF | AN69 | 150 | 25.7* | 1610* | 43 | 6.17 | 0.55 | 379 | 72.8* | | | [ | |
| Ceftazidime | 12 | 2 g q8h | CVVH | PS | 143 | 47 | | 58.2 | 4.3 | 0.52* | 344 | 98.7 | 32.1 | 0.69 | [ |
| 7 | 3 g q24h | CVVDHF | AN69 | 150 | 25 | 1000 | | 4 | 0.27* | 2514 | 62 | 33.6 | 0.81 | [ | |
| 4 | 1-2 g q6h | CVVH or CVVHDF | AN69 or PS | 130-140 | 25 | 500-1000 | 53.9-112 | 6.4 | 0.67 | | 35.5-333.8 | 5-65.6 | 0.93 | [ | |
| 12 | 2 g q12h | CVVH or CVVHDF | AN69 | 150 | 25.7* | 1610* | 78 | 7.74 | 0.37 | 536 | 36.4* | | | [ | |
| Meropenem | 8 | 500 mg q12h | CVVH | AN69 | 10 | 26.7 | | 39.5 | 3.63 | | 105.3 | 82.94 | 24.42 | 0.91 | [ |
| 5 | 1 g q12h | CVVH | AN69 | 150 | 16.7–33.3 | | | 5.16 | 0.39* | 246 | 4.3 | 1.96 | 0.93 | [ | |
| 5 | 1 g q12h | CVVDHF | AN69 | 150 | 16.7 – 25 | 1000-1500 | |||||||||
| 10 | 1 g q8h | High volume CVVH | AN69 | 250 | 66.7-100 | | 56.6 | 4.3 | 0.2 | 166.5 | 100 | 58.3 | 0.93 | [ | |
| 15 | 0.5-1 g q8h or q12h | CVVHDF | AN 69 | 90-150 | 0.17-4.5 | 600-1500 | | 5.1 | 0.47* | | 75 | 26.7 | 0.65 | [ | |
| 5 | 0.5 g q12h | CVVH | PAN | 200 | 25-30 | | 24.5 | 6.37 | 0.37 | 129.5 | 4.57 | 1.03 | 0.63 | [ | |
| 9 | 0.5 g q8h or q12h | CVVH | AN69 | 150-170 | 1.7-2.5 | | 38.9 | 8.7 | 0.17* | | 52 | 22 | 1.17 | [ | |
| 9 | 1 g Stat | CVVH | PS | 150 | 45.8 | | 28.1 | | 0.37* | 118 | 143.7 | 49.7 | 0.24 | [ | |
| Piperacillin/ tazobactam | 6 | 4 g q12h/0.5 g q12h | CVVH | PS | 100 | 13.3 | | | 7.7/13.9 | | | 64.8/40.3 | | | [ |
| CVVHDF | 1000 | | 6.7/11.6 | | | 84.3/52.2 | | | | ||||||
| 2000 | | 6.1/9.4 | | | 91.3/62.5 | | | ||||||||
| 8 | 2 g/0.25 g or 4 g/0.5 g | CVVHD | AN69 | 150 | 1.3-3.3 | 1500 | | 4.3/5.6 | 0.31/0.24 | | 47/29.5 | 22/17 | 0.87/0.64 | [ | |
| Ceftriaxone | 6 | 2-4 g q24h | CVVH | PA | 100-150 | 20-30 | | | 10.8 | 0.45* | | | 16.6 | 0.69 | [ |
| Flucloxacillin | 10 | 4 g q8h | CVVH | PA | 169 | 57 | 139.1-179.7 | 4.9 | 0.69* | 568 | 117.2 | 0.21 | [ | ||
QB, blood flow rate; QUF, ultrafiltration rate; QDF, dialysate flow rate; RRT, renal replacement therapy; Sc, sieving coefficient; Sa, saturation coefficient; Vd, volume of distribution; CL, clearance; Cmax, peak serum concentration; tH, half-life; AUC, area under the concentration vs time curve; CVVH, continuous venovenous hemofiltration; CVVHD, continuous venovenous hemodialysis; CVVHDF, continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration; PAN, polyacrylonitrile; PS, polysulfone; PA, polyamide; *Data were converted considering 70 kg body weight.
Characteristics of drugs traditionally considered to require TDM[92,93]
| 1 | Narrow therapeutic range/index |
| 2 | Drug toxicity may lead to hospitalization, irreversible organ damage, and even death |
| 3 | No clearly defined clinical parameter that allows dose adjustments |
| 4 | Correlation exists between serum concentration and efficacy as well as toxicity |
| 5 | Unpredictable relationship between dose and clinical outcome |
| 6 | Difficult to predict pharmacokinetics (e.g. non-linear pharmacokinetics) |