Literature DB >> 8239608

Pharmacodynamic effects of extended dosing intervals of imipenem alone and in combination with amikacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in an in vitro model.

B J McGrath1, K C Lamp, M J Rybak.   

Abstract

The pharmacodynamic effects of extended imipenem dosing intervals were studied against two strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 27853 and an imipenem-resistant mutant, 27853R) in an in vitro model of infection. Imipenem was administered as monotherapy (simulated 1-g bolus every 8 or every 12 h) and in combination with amikacin (7.5-mg/kg bolus every 12 h or a 15-mg/kg bolus once). Monotherapy with imipenem administered every 8 h was equally bactericidal at 24 h compared with regimens combined with amikacin for ATCC 27853. Imipenem administered every 12 h against the sensitive strain and both imipenem monotherapy regimens against the resistant strain demonstrated regrowth at 24 h. Although both amikacin regimens administered as monotherapy resulted in rapid bacterial killing activity with respect to time to a 99.9% reduction in log10 CFU/milliliter, regrowth at 24 h was observed at levels reaching or exceeding the initial inoculum. All combination regimens resulted in no detectable growth by 24 h regardless of dosing interval for either drug or initial susceptibility to imipenem. Results from this study indicate the potential for several novel dosing regimens against P. aeruginosa. Monotherapy with imipenem, 1 g every 8 h, was effective against a sensitive strain of P. aeruginosa. Combination therapy with imipenem and once-daily or twice-daily amikacin resulted in increased killing activity against imipenem-resistant P. aeruginosa. Once-daily or twice-daily amikacin in combination therapy, regardless of P. aeruginosa susceptibility, allowed for extension of imipenem dosing intervals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8239608      PMCID: PMC188095          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.37.9.1931

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  38 in total

1.  Antimicrobial synergism--an elusive concept.

Authors:  R C Moellering
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1979-10       Impact factor: 5.226

2.  Synergy of antibacterial substances by apparently known mechanisms.

Authors:  L D Sabath
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda)       Date:  1967

Review 3.  Antibiotic synergism and antimicrobial combinations in clinical infections.

Authors:  G M Eliopoulos; R C Moellering
Journal:  Rev Infect Dis       Date:  1982 Mar-Apr

4.  Problems in determination of antibiotic synergism in vitro.

Authors:  C W Norden
Journal:  Rev Infect Dis       Date:  1982 Mar-Apr

5.  Single versus combination antibiotic therapy for pneumonia due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa in neutropenic guinea pigs.

Authors:  M G Rusnak; T A Drake; C J Hackbarth; M A Sande
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1984-06       Impact factor: 5.226

6.  Comparative in vitro activity of N-formimidoyl thienamycin against gram-positive and gram-negative aerobic and anaerobic species and its beta-lactamase stability.

Authors:  H C Neu; P Labthavikul
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Efficacy of amikacin and ceftazidime in experimental aortic valve endocarditis due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  A S Bayer; D Norman; K S Kim
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 8.  Synergistic combinations of antibiotics in gram-negative bacillary infections.

Authors:  J Klastersky; S H Zinner
Journal:  Rev Infect Dis       Date:  1982 Mar-Apr

9.  Once-daily vs. continuous aminoglycoside dosing: efficacy and toxicity in animal and clinical studies of gentamicin, netilmicin, and tobramycin.

Authors:  S H Powell; W L Thompson; M A Luthe; R C Stern; D A Grossniklaus; D D Bloxham; D L Groden; M R Jacobs; A O DiScenna; H A Cash; J D Klinger
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 5.226

Review 10.  Infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  G P Bodey; R Bolivar; V Fainstein; L Jadeja
Journal:  Rev Infect Dis       Date:  1983 Mar-Apr
View more
  9 in total

1.  Relationships between antimicrobial effect and area under the concentration-time curve as a basis for comparison of modes of antibiotic administration: meropenem bolus injections versus continuous infusions.

Authors:  A A Firsov; H Mattie
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Evaluation of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships of PD-0162819, a biotin carboxylase inhibitor representing a new class of antibacterial compounds, using in vitro infection models.

Authors:  Adam Ogden; Michael Kuhn; Michael Dority; Susan Buist; Shawn Mehrens; Tong Zhu; Deqing Xiao; J Richard Miller; Debra Hanna
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2011-10-10       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Activities of antibiotic combinations against resistant strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a model of infected THP-1 monocytes.

Authors:  Julien M Buyck; Paul M Tulkens; Françoise Van Bambeke
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2014-10-27       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Amikacin Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Analysis in Pediatric Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Ali A Alhadab; Mariam A Ahmed; Richard C Brundage
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Synergism between tobramycin and ceftazidime against a resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain, tested in an in vitro pharmacokinetic model.

Authors:  J G den Hollander; A M Horrevorts; M L van Goor; H A Verbrugh; J W Mouton
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Activities of LY333328 and vancomycin administered alone or in combination with gentamicin against three strains of vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro pharmacodynamic infection model.

Authors:  J R Aeschlimann; G P Allen; E Hershberger; M J Rybak
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Bactericidal activities of teicoplanin, vancomycin, and gentamicin alone and in combination against Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model of endocarditis.

Authors:  B J McGrath; S L Kang; G W Kaatz; M J Rybak
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Once-daily gentamicin administration for community-associated methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model: preliminary reports for the advantages for optimizing pharmacodynamic index.

Authors:  Sun Woo Kim; Dong-Gun Lee; Su-Mi Choi; Chulmin Park; Jae-Cheol Kwon; Si-Hyun Kim; Sun Hee Park; Jung-Hyun Choi; Jin-Hong Yoo; Wan-Shik Shin
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.759

Review 9.  Treatment of sepsis: What is the antibiotic choice in bacteremia due to carbapenem resistant Enterobacteriaceae?

Authors:  Fatema Alhashem; Nicolette Leonie Tiren-Verbeet; Emine Alp; Mehmet Doganay
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 1.337

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.