| Literature DB >> 36015211 |
Maria Sanz Codina1, Milo Gatti2,3, Carla Troisi2, Giacomo Fornaro4, Zeno Pasquini4, Filippo Trapani4, Andrea Zanoni5, Fabio Caramelli6, Pierluigi Viale2,4, Federico Pea2,3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to explore the relationship between pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment of continuous-infusion (CI) meropenem and microbiological outcome in critical COVID-19 patients with documented Gram-negative superinfections.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Gram-negative superinfections; PK/PD target attainment; critically ill patients; meropenem; microbiological failure
Year: 2022 PMID: 36015211 PMCID: PMC9412264 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14081585
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.525
Figure 1Flowchart of patient inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Demographics and clinical characteristics of patients included in the PK/PD analysis classified according to the administration of monotherapy or combination therapy with meropenem.
| Overall | Monotherapy | Combination Therapy | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Demographics | |||
| Age | 59.0 ± 13.8 | 63.1 ± 12.6 | 56.3 ± 13.7 |
| Gender (m/f) | 26/17 | 10/7 | 16/10 |
| BMI | 30.7 ± 14.9 | 29.8 ± 7.8 | 31.2 ± 17.8 |
| Baseline eGFR | 84.4 ± 39.3 | 72.6 ± 42.8 | 92.6 ± 36.7 |
| Severity of infection | |||
| SOFA score | 9 (7–11) | 8 (6–11) | 9.5 (7–11.75) |
| Mechanical ventilation | 43 (100.0%) | 17 (100.0%) | 26 (100.0%) |
| Vasopressors | 35 (81.4%) | 12 (70.5%) | 23 (88.5%) |
| Continuous renal replacement therapy | 17 (39.5%) | 6 (35.3%) | 11 (42.3%) |
| Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation | 8 (18.6%) | 2 (11.8%) | 6 (23.1%) |
| Site of infection | |||
| VAP | 38 (88.4%) | 15 (88.2%) | 23 (88.5%) |
| BSI | 13 (30.2%) | 7 (41.2%) | 6 (23.1%) |
| UTI | 4 (23.5%) | 4 (23.5%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| Isolates (resistant) | 47 (28) | 21 (7) | 26 (21) |
|
| 4 (0) | 4 (0) | 0 (0) |
|
| 7 (3) | 5 (1) | 2 (2) |
|
| 14 (9) | 5 (2) | 9 (7) |
|
| 10 (9) | 2 (1) | 8 (8) |
|
| 2 (1) | 2 (1) | 0 (0) |
|
| 1 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (0) |
|
| 3 (1) | 0 (0) | 3 (1) |
|
| 2 (1) | 2 (1) | 0 (0) |
|
| 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 0 (0) |
|
| 3 (3) | 0 (0) | 3 (3) |
| Outcome | |||
| Microbiological cure | 22 (51.2%) | 10 (58.8%) | 12 (46.2%) |
| ICU mortality | 20 (46.5%) | 8 (47.1%) | 12 (46.2%) |
| 30-day mortality | 20 (46.5%) | 8 (47.1%) | 12 (46.2%) |
* Resistant strains intended to be ESBL producers. ** Resistant strains intended to be MDR or XDR isolates according to the classification proposed by Magiorakos et al. [23]. *** Resistant strains intended to be carbapenem-resistant.
Figure 2Relationship between pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment (expressed as the average Css/MIC ratio) and microbiological outcome for critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with CI meropenem in monotherapy (panel a) or combination therapy (panel b). Green box, microbiological eradication; red box, microbiological failure; white box, absence of specific type of infection. Each row corresponds to a single patient. The Css/MIC ratio is shown for each patient and defined as optimal if ≥4, quasi-optimal if between 1 and 4, and suboptimal if <1. BSI: bloodstream infection; Css: meropenem average steady-state concentrations; cUTI: complicated urinary tract infection; MIC: minimum inhibitory concentration; VAP: ventilator-associated pneumonia.
Figure 3Microbiological outcome according to specific Gram-negative isolates. The Y-axis refers to the total number of clinical isolates for each Gram-negative pathogen described on the X-axis. The white part of each bar refers to the number of microbiological eradications, whereas the black part refers to the number of microbiological failures.