Literature DB >> 6097124

Role for dual individualization with cefmenoxime.

J J Schentag, I L Smith, D J Swanson, C DeAngelis, J E Fracasso, A Vari, J W Vance.   

Abstract

Cefmenoxime concentration/effect relationships were retrospectively explored for gram-negative bacteria isolated from 14 critical care patients treated for nosocomial pneumonia. The effects of cefmenoxime concentrations on in vitro growth kinetics of 21 isolated pathogens were studied using the Abbott MS-2 Research System, from which a dynamic response concentration was derived. Serum pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained in each patient. These data were used to calculate the in vivo total area under the curve over dynamic response concentration and the time that cefmenoxime concentrations exceeded the dynamic response concentration for each bacteria. The same determinations were made in 18 patients prospectively treated, except that dosage was optimized on the basis of previous mathematical relations to achieve bacterial eradication in four days. This method of dosage optimization is termed dual individualization. Serial cultures of infected tissues were evaluated to determine the number of days to the eradication of bacteria, and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variables were used to describe the bacteriologic response of the original pathogen isolated in pretreatment culture. Bacterial eradication rates could be described from cefmenoxime pharmacokinetics in the patient and from the relation between concentration and bacterial inhibition. Patients who were prospectively treated using these retrospectively derived relationships had a predictable day of bacterial eradication. This, in turn, was associated with a shorter duration of treatment (p less than 0.05). The success of prospective dual individualization is encouraging and suggests that more precise optimization of antibiotic dosage can yield a predictable rate of bacterial eradication from the infection site.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6097124     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9343(84)80074-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  41 in total

Review 1.  In vitro antibacterial activity and pharmacodynamics of new quinolones.

Authors:  A Dalhoff; F-J Schmitz
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2003-04-01       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 2.  Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic issues in the treatment of bacterial infectious diseases.

Authors:  P S McKinnon; S L Davis
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2004-03-10       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 3.  Optimising dosing strategies of antibacterials utilising pharmacodynamic principles: impact on the development of resistance.

Authors:  C Andrew DeRyke; Su Young Lee; Joseph L Kuti; David P Nicolau
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  Setting and revising antibacterial susceptibility breakpoints.

Authors:  John Turnidge; David L Paterson
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 26.132

Review 5.  Antibiotic tissue penetration and its relevance: impact of tissue penetration on infection response.

Authors:  D E Nix; S D Goodwin; C A Peloquin; D L Rotella; J J Schentag
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 6.  A long journey from minimum inhibitory concentration testing to clinically predictive breakpoints: deterministic and probabilistic approaches in deriving breakpoints.

Authors:  A Dalhoff; P G Ambrose; J W Mouton
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 3.553

7.  Infusion phlebitis: relative incidence associated with cefuroxime administered by intermittent and continuous infusion.

Authors:  C A Owens; P G Ambrose; R Quintiliani; C H Nightingale; D P Nicolau
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.859

8.  Pharmacodynamic evaluation of factors associated with the development of bacterial resistance in acutely ill patients during therapy.

Authors:  J K Thomas; A Forrest; S M Bhavnani; J M Hyatt; A Cheng; C H Ballow; J J Schentag
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Comparative bactericidal activity of ceftazidime against isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa as assessed in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model versus the traditional time-kill method.

Authors:  M Manduru; L B Mihm; R L White; L V Friedrich; P A Flume; J A Bosso
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 10.  Meropenem clinical pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  J W Mouton; J N van den Anker
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 6.447

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.