Jessica J F Kram1, Danielle M Greer2, Omar Cabrera3, Robert Burlage4, Marie M Forgie5, Danish S Siddiqui6. 1. Aurora University of Wisconsin Medical Group and Center for Urban Population Health, Aurora Sinai Medical Center, Aurora Health Care, Milwaukee, WI, United States. Electronic address: jessica.kram@aurora.org. 2. Aurora University of Wisconsin Medical Group and Center for Urban Population Health, Aurora Sinai Medical Center, Aurora Health Care, Milwaukee, WI, United States. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aurora Sinai Medical Center, Aurora Health Care, Milwaukee, WI, United States; Waco Center for Women's Health, Providence Healthcare Network, Waco, TX, United States. 4. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Concordia University, Mequon, WI, United States. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aurora Sinai Medical Center, Aurora Health Care, Milwaukee, WI, United States. 6. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aurora Sinai Medical Center, Aurora Health Care, Milwaukee, WI, United States; Center for Women's Health, Watertown Regional Medical Center, Watertown, WI, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prophylactic administration of antibiotics preceding cesarean delivery is the most effective measure taken for preventing postpartum infection. While obese women are at greater risk for infection than non-obese women, evidence-based recommendations for modifying dosing in these women are limited. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether obese women undergoing cesarean delivery similarly reach adequate cefazolin concentrations within tissue and blood when weighing <120kg and dosed 2g versus weighing ≥120kg and dosed 3g. STUDY DESIGN: We prospectively studied women ≥18 years old with body mass index ≥30kg/m2 who underwent scheduled cesarean delivery with singleton pregnancy from August 2014 through March 2016. Women were dosed with 2g and 3g of cefazolin for body weights <120kg and ≥120kg, respectively. Samples of subcutaneous adipose tissue (following skin incision and before skin closure), myometrial tissue, fetal cord blood, and maternal blood were collected to assess whether cefazolin concentrations were adequate, i.e., at/above the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Concentrations, based on inhibition zones for Streptococcus sanguinis, were calculated per gram of solid tissue and milliliter of blood. For all sample types, log-transformed concentrations were compared between dosage groups. Using a range of published MICs (1-8μg/mL or μg/g), odds ratios, describing differential odds of falling below the MIC between dosage groups, were also computed. RESULTS: Women who received 2g (n=65) versus 3g (n=19) of cefazolin did not significantly differ by maternal or gestational age, race/ethnicity, pre-operative hemoglobin, estimated blood loss, fluid administration, duration of surgery, or timing of sample collections relative to cefazolin administration (Ps>0.05). Dosage groups also did not differ in cefazolin concentration (median [interquartile range]) within adipose tissue following skin incision (5.30μg/g [3.00-9.60] vs. 6.35μg/g [3.90-8.40]; P=0.551), adipose tissue before skin closure (4.45μg/g [2.78-7.25] vs. 6.90μg/g [2.60-10.6]; P=0.342), myometrial tissue (13.1μg/g [8.60-19.6] vs. 15.7μg/g [10.8-21.7]; P=0.116), or maternal blood (41.6μg/mL [26.3-57.0] vs. 45.3μg/mL [36.7-68.3]; P=0.143). However, cord blood concentrations differed significantly (19.5μg/mL [13.7-28.5] vs. 27.9μg/mL [15.8-39.4]; P=0.032), and, in 3 of 5 sample types, group concentrations differed at the dosing cut-point of 120kg (Ps<0.02). Within the range of MICs considered, differences in the odds of concentration inadequacy were not detected between dosage groups for any sample type. Across all patients, inadequate concentrations in one or more solid tissue types were observed in 1.19%, 17.9%, 59.5%, and 86.9% of patients, given the MICs of 1μg/g, 2μg/g, 4μg/g and 8μg/g, respectively. In adipose tissues, specifically, and both dosage groups, mean concentrations were significantly lower than the MIC of 8μg/g (Ps<0.03). Concentrations in one or both blood sample types were inadequate for only 8.33% of patients, given the 8-μg/mL MIC. CONCLUSIONS: Adequate cefazolin concentrations were achieved in blood for the majority of our patients. However, concentration adequacy was not achieved in solid tissue for a nearly equally large proportion of patients. Larger scale studies for determining modified protocols for dosing and applying MICs are warranted.
BACKGROUND: Prophylactic administration of antibiotics preceding cesarean delivery is the most effective measure taken for preventing postpartum infection. While obesewomen are at greater risk for infection than non-obesewomen, evidence-based recommendations for modifying dosing in these women are limited. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether obesewomen undergoing cesarean delivery similarly reach adequate cefazolin concentrations within tissue and blood when weighing <120kg and dosed 2g versus weighing ≥120kg and dosed 3g. STUDY DESIGN: We prospectively studied women ≥18 years old with body mass index ≥30kg/m2 who underwent scheduled cesarean delivery with singleton pregnancy from August 2014 through March 2016. Women were dosed with 2g and 3g of cefazolin for body weights <120kg and ≥120kg, respectively. Samples of subcutaneous adipose tissue (following skin incision and before skin closure), myometrial tissue, fetal cord blood, and maternal blood were collected to assess whether cefazolin concentrations were adequate, i.e., at/above the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Concentrations, based on inhibition zones for Streptococcus sanguinis, were calculated per gram of solid tissue and milliliter of blood. For all sample types, log-transformed concentrations were compared between dosage groups. Using a range of published MICs (1-8μg/mL or μg/g), odds ratios, describing differential odds of falling below the MIC between dosage groups, were also computed. RESULTS:Women who received 2g (n=65) versus 3g (n=19) of cefazolin did not significantly differ by maternal or gestational age, race/ethnicity, pre-operative hemoglobin, estimated blood loss, fluid administration, duration of surgery, or timing of sample collections relative to cefazolin administration (Ps>0.05). Dosage groups also did not differ in cefazolin concentration (median [interquartile range]) within adipose tissue following skin incision (5.30μg/g [3.00-9.60] vs. 6.35μg/g [3.90-8.40]; P=0.551), adipose tissue before skin closure (4.45μg/g [2.78-7.25] vs. 6.90μg/g [2.60-10.6]; P=0.342), myometrial tissue (13.1μg/g [8.60-19.6] vs. 15.7μg/g [10.8-21.7]; P=0.116), or maternal blood (41.6μg/mL [26.3-57.0] vs. 45.3μg/mL [36.7-68.3]; P=0.143). However, cord blood concentrations differed significantly (19.5μg/mL [13.7-28.5] vs. 27.9μg/mL [15.8-39.4]; P=0.032), and, in 3 of 5 sample types, group concentrations differed at the dosing cut-point of 120kg (Ps<0.02). Within the range of MICs considered, differences in the odds of concentration inadequacy were not detected between dosage groups for any sample type. Across all patients, inadequate concentrations in one or more solid tissue types were observed in 1.19%, 17.9%, 59.5%, and 86.9% of patients, given the MICs of 1μg/g, 2μg/g, 4μg/g and 8μg/g, respectively. In adipose tissues, specifically, and both dosage groups, mean concentrations were significantly lower than the MIC of 8μg/g (Ps<0.03). Concentrations in one or both blood sample types were inadequate for only 8.33% of patients, given the 8-μg/mL MIC. CONCLUSIONS: Adequate cefazolin concentrations were achieved in blood for the majority of our patients. However, concentration adequacy was not achieved in solid tissue for a nearly equally large proportion of patients. Larger scale studies for determining modified protocols for dosing and applying MICs are warranted.
Authors: Hanadi H Alrammaal; Khaled Abduljalil; Victoria Hodgetts Morton; R Katie Morris; John F Marriott; Hsu P Chong; Hannah K Batchelor Journal: Pharmaceutics Date: 2022-05-30 Impact factor: 6.525
Authors: Nathan A Pinner; Natalie G Tapley; Katie E Barber; Kayla R Stover; Jamie L Wagner Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 3.835
Authors: Claudia A M Löwik; Wierd P Zijlstra; Bas A S Knobben; Joris J W Ploegmakers; Baukje Dijkstra; Astrid J de Vries; Greetje A Kampinga; Glen Mithoe; Aziz Al Moujahid; Paul C Jutte; Marjan Wouthuyzen-Bakker Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Hanadi H Alrammaal; Hannah K Batchelor; Hsu P Chong; Victoria Hodgetts Morton; R Katie Morris Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2021-02-18
Authors: B Rodríguez de Castro; C Martínez-Múgica Barbosa; R Pampín Sánchez; B Fernández González; F J Barbazán Vázquez; C Aparicio Carreño Journal: Rev Esp Quimioter Date: 2020-04-15 Impact factor: 1.553