| Literature DB >> 35997793 |
Jason A Roberts1,2,3,4, Rinaldo Bellomo5,6,7,8, Menino O Cotta9, Birgit C P Koch10, Haifa Lyster11,12, Marlies Ostermann13, Claire Roger14,15, Kiran Shekar16,17,18,19, Kevin Watt20,21, Mohd H Abdul-Aziz9.
Abstract
Intensive care unit (ICU) patients with end-organ failure will require specialised machines or extracorporeal therapies to support the failing organs that would otherwise lead to death. ICU patients with severe acute kidney injury may require renal replacement therapy (RRT) to remove fluid and wastes from the body, and patients with severe cardiorespiratory failure will require extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) to maintain adequate oxygen delivery whilst the underlying pathology is evaluated and managed. The presence of ECMO and RRT machines can further augment the existing pharmacokinetic (PK) alterations during critical illness. Significant changes in the apparent volume of distribution (Vd) and drug clearance (CL) for many important drugs have been reported during ECMO and RRT. Conventional antimicrobial dosing regimens rarely consider the impact of these changes and consequently, are unlikely to achieve effective antimicrobial exposures in critically ill patients receiving ECMO and/or RRT. Therefore, an in-depth understanding on potential PK changes during ECMO and/or RRT is required to inform antimicrobial dosing strategies in patients receiving ECMO and/or RRT. In this narrative review, we aim to discuss the potential impact of ECMO and RRT on the PK of antimicrobials and antimicrobial dosing requirements whilst receiving these extracorporeal therapies. The potential benefits of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) and dosing software to facilitate antimicrobial therapy for critically ill patients receiving ECMO and/or RRT are also reviewed and highlighted.Entities:
Keywords: Antimicrobial; Dosing software; Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; Pharmacokinetics; Renal replacement therapy; Therapeutic drug monitoring
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35997793 PMCID: PMC9467945 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-022-06847-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Intensive Care Med ISSN: 0342-4642 Impact factor: 41.787
Relevant factors that can influence antimicrobial pharmacokinetics in patients receiving renal replacement therapy
| Critical illness | |
| CL ↑ or ↓ based on renal function or RRT settings | |
| Residual renal function | CL ↑ compared to anuric patients |
| Hypoalbuminemia | Free drug concentrations ↑ |
| CL ↑ for highly protein bound drugs | |
| Solubility | Hydrophilic drugs more likely to be affected by RRT-related CL |
| Lipophilic drugs potentially affected by membrane adsorption | |
| Molecular weight | CL ↑ for low molecular weight drugs |
| This may not be a major determinant of drug removal due to the use of high flux hemofilters with large pore size | |
| Protein binding | CL ↑ for low protein bound drugs |
| Electric charge | CL ↑ for anionic antibiotics (e.g. cefotaxime and ceftazidime) compared to cationic antibiotics (e.g. aminoglycosides) retained in plasma by negatively charged molecules like albumin (Gibbs–Donnan effect) |
| PK/PD target | RRT-related CL influences maintenance dose for time-dependent antibiotics (e.g. 100% |
| RRT-related CL influences dosing frequency for concentration-dependent antibiotics ( | |
| RRT-related CL influences maintenance dose and/or dosing frequency for time- and concentration-dependent antibiotics (AUC/MIC) | |
| RRT modality: Continuous versus Intermittent | Variable elimination rates depending on intra and inter-dialytic phases for IHD |
| Relatively constant drug CL depending on RRT intensity for CRRT | |
| RRT technique: Convective versus Diffusive | Higher CL of high molecular weight drugs with convection technique |
| Combining convection and diffusion (i.e. CVVHDF) often results in greater drug CL than by convection or diffusion alone at equal RRT doses | |
| Effluent flow rate | Higher CRRT effluent rates resulting in higher CL |
| Blood flow rate | CL ↑ with high blood flow rate |
| Negligible clinical impact for CRRT | |
| Dilution mode | CL ↓ in pre-dilution mode |
| Negligible clinical impact | |
| Membrane type/adsorption | Polyacrylonitrile membranes more likely to be associated with drug adsorption (e.g. amikacin, levofloxacin, echinocandins in particular) |
| Saturable effect | |
| Hemofilter life span | CL ↓ over time unless circuit components are replaced regularly |
| Down time | CL ↓ if prolonged circuit downtime |
AUC area under the concentration–time curve, CL clearance, C maximal drug concentration during a dosing interval, CRRT continuous renal replacement therapy, CVVHDF continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration, IHD intermittent hemodialysis, MIC minimum inhibitory concentration, RRT renal replacement therapy, PK/PD pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics, V volume of distribution
Example doses of antimicrobial drugs according to renal replacement therapy modality
| Free fraction (%) | CVVH | CVVHDF | CVVHD | PIRRT | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ultrafiltration rate | Ultrafiltration rate | Effluent flow rate | Effluent flow rate | Dialysate flow rate | Dialysate flow rate | |||
| Amoxicillin/Clavulanate | 80 | ND | ND | ND | ND | |||
| Cefazolin | 15–20 | 2 g q12h | ND | ND | ND | |||
| Cefepime | 80 | LD: 2 g | LD: 2 g | LD: 2 g | ND | 1.75 g q8h | 2 g q8h | LD: 2 g |
| MD:1.5 g q8h | MD: 1.75 g q 8 h | MD: 1.75 g q8h | MD: 1 g q6h | |||||
| Cefiderocol | 40 | 1.5 g q8–12 h | 1.5 g q8–12 ha | 1.5 g q8–12 ha | ND | |||
| Cefotaxime | 60–80 | LD: 2 g MD: CI 4 g q24h | ND | ND | ND | |||
| Ceftaroline | 80 | 0.6 g q12h | ND | ND | ND | |||
| Ceftazidime | 90 | ND | LD: 2 g MD: CI 4 g/24 h | ND | 2 g q12h | |||
| Ceftazidime/Avibactam | 90 | ND | 2.5 g q8h | ND | ND | |||
| Ceftolozane/Tazobactam | 80 | 1.5–3 g q8hb | ND | 1.5–3 g q8hb | 3 g q8h | 1.5–3 g q8hb | ND | |
| Ceftriaxone | 10 | 2 g q24h or 1 g q12h | 2 g q24h | 2 g q24h | 2 g q24h | |||
| Imipenem | 80 | ND | 0.5 g q8h | 1 g q8h | ND | 0.5 g q6h | ||
| Meropenem | 100 | LD: 1 g MD:0.75 g q8h | LD: 1 g MD:1 g q8h | LD: 1 g MD: 1 g q12h | LD: 1 g MD: 0.75 g q8h | LD: 1 g MD: 1 g q8h | 1 g q12h | |
| Oxacillin | 10 | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | |||
| Piperacillin/Tazobactam | 70/80 | LD: 4 g MD: CI 12 g q24h | LD: 4 g MD: CI 12 g q24h | LD: 4 g MD: CI 16 g q24h | 4 g q8h or 4 g q12h following 2 g replacement dose post PIRRT | |||
| Aztreonam | 45 | 1 g q8h | ND | 2 g q8h | ND | |||
| Amikacin | > 95 | 25 mg/kg ABW q48h | 25 mg/kg ABW | 25 mg/kg ABW | ND | |||
| Gentamicin | > 95 | 8 mg/kg ABW | 8 mg/kg ABW | 8 mg/kg ABW | 6–8 mg/kg ABW 1 h before PIRRT session | |||
| Tobramycin | 90–100 | 8 mg/kg ABW | 8 mg/kg ABW | 8 mg/kg ABW | 6–8 mg/kg ABW 1 h before PIRRT session | |||
| Vancomycin | 50 | ND | LD: 30 mg/kg MD: 10 mg/kg q24h | ND | 20–25 mg/kg followed by TDM | |||
| Teicoplanin | 10–40 | LD: 1200 mg MD: 600–1800 mg | ND | ND | ND | |||
| Linezolid | 70 | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | |||
| Tedizolid | 10–30 | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | |||
| Ciprofloxacin | 60–80 | 400 mg q8h | 400 mg q8h | 200 mg q8h | ND | |||
| Levofloxacin | 60–75 | 250 mg/24 h | 500 mg/24 h | ND | Consider alternative | 250 mg q24h | ||
| Tigecycline | 10–30 | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | |||
| Colistin | 60–75 | LD: 9 MUI | LD: 6–9 MUI MD: 1.5–2 MUI q8h | 6 MUI q12h | 3 MUI q8h | |||
MD: 3 MUI q8h | MD: 4.5 MUI q8h | |||||||
| TMP-SMX | 5 mg/kg q12h | ND | 5 mg/kg q12h | 15 mg/kg/24 h in 4 divided doses | ||||
| Daptomycin | 20 | ND | 6–8 mg/kg q24h | 6–8 mg/kg q24h | 6 mg/kg q24h | |||
| Fluconazole | 90 | ND | LD: 800 mg MD: 400 mg q12h | ND | 400 mg q12h | |||
| Voriconazole | 40 | 4 mg/kg q12h | 4 mg/kg q12h | 4 mg/kg q12h | ND | |||
| Preferable oral route | Preferable oral route | Preferable oral route | ||||||
| Isavuconazole | < 1 | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | |||
| Caspofungin | 3 | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | |||
| Micafungin | < 1 | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | |||
| Amphotericin B | 10 | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | No adjustment | |||
| Acyclovir | 70–90 | 5–7.5 mg/kg q24h | 5–7.5 mg/kg q24h | 5–7.5 mg/kg q24h | ND | |||
| Ganciclovir | 98 | ND | ND | 5 mg/kg q48h | ND | |||
| Oseltamivir | 97 | ND | 75 mg q12h | ND | ND | |||
ABW adjusted body weight; CVVH continuous veno-venous hemofiltration, CVVHDF continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration, ND no data, LD loading dose, MD maintenance dose, PIRRT prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy, TMP-SMX trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole
As a general rule, the “loading dose” of a drug, is strictly dependent on Vd and does not require any adjustment in patients with renal failure, including those undergoing RRT for AKI. RRT intensity may influence maintenance doses as reported in Table 1 and suggestions were derived from the references listed in the Supplementary Materials and from the main guidelines for antimicrobial therapy during RRT
aExtrapolated from cefepime data
bConsider higher dosing regimens for deep seated infections or less susceptible isolates
The interrelationship of lipophilicity, hydrophilicity and protein binding and the impact of critical illness, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and renal replacement therapy (RRT) on drug pharmacokinetics
| Lipophilic | Hydrophilic | Protein bound (PB) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| General pharmacokinetics | High | Low | Low |
| Critical illness | ↑ | ||
| CL ↑or↓ based on hepatic function | CL ↑ or ↓based on renal function | ||
| ECMO | ↑ | Low or slightly ↑ | ↑ or low Vd for lipophilicity + PB drugs |
| CL ↑or↓ based on hepatic function | CL ↑ or ↓based on renal function | CL ↓or ↑ based on renal or hepatic function | |
| RRT | ↓CL as high | ↓CL as low | ↓ CL—if less free drug |
| Critical illness + ECMO + RRT | ↑↑Vd & ↓↓CL | ↑ | ↑ |
| ↓↓CL CRRT as ↑↑ Vd | ↓CL CRRT as ↑ | ||
| Hepatic dysfunction can ↓ CL | ↓ CL if renal function ↓ | ||
| Examples | Fluoroquinolones | Aminoglycosides beta-lactams | Ceftriaxone |
| Lincosamides | Colistin | ||
| Macrolides | Glycopeptides | Clindamycin | |
| Tigecycline | Linezolid |
ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, CL drug clearance, PB protein binding, CRRT continuous renal replacement therapy, RRT renal replacement therapy, V apparent volume of distribution
Potential pharmacokinetic changes in adult critically patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for commonly used antimicrobials
| Drug | Log | Protein binding (%) | Volume of distribution | Expected ECMO sequestration effect | General dosing guidance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meropenem | − 0.69 | 2 | 0.25 L/kg | Minimal circuit loss | Dosing similar to critically ill not on ECMO TDM-guided dosing |
| Piperacillin/tazobactam | 0.67 | 30 | 0.243 L/kg | Minimal circuit loss | Dosing similar to critically ill not on ECMO TDM-guided dosing |
| Vancomycin | − 4.4 | 50 | 0.4–1 L/kg | Minimal circuit loss | Dosing similar to critically ill not on ECMO TDM-guided dosing |
| Aminoglycosides: gentamicin, tobramycin, amikacin | < 0 | < 30 | 0.2–0.3 L/kg | Minimal circuit loss CL: decreased | Insufficient data TDM-guided dosing |
| Fluconazole | 0.56 | 12 | Approx. to total body water | Minimal circuit loss | Insufficient adult data May require increased LD |
| Voriconazole | 2.56 | 58 | 4.6 L/kg | Moderate to significant circuit loss | Conflicting data Dosing similar to critically ill not on ECMO TDM-guided dosing |
| Caspofungin | − 2.8 | 97 | NA | Moderate circuit loss | Insufficient and conflicting data |
ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, CL drug clearance, LD loading dose, NA not available, V volume of distribution
Fig. 1Future approach to therapeutic drug monitoring and use of dosing software in the ICU
| Extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and renal replacement therapy (RRT) machines can further exacerbate existing pharmacokinetic alterations observed during critical illness complicating drug dosing, particularly for antimicrobials. Effective pharmacotherapy during ECMO and/or RRT can be achieved with the support of therapeutic drug monitoring and dosing software. |