22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Beta-lactam dosing in critically ill patients with septic shock and continuous renal replacement therapy

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Although early and appropriate antibiotic therapy remains the most important intervention for successful treatment of septic shock, data guiding optimization of beta-lactam prescription in critically ill patients prescribed with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) are still limited. Being small hydrophilic molecules, beta-lactams are likely to be cleared by CRRT to a significant extent. As a result, additional variability may be introduced to the per se variable antibiotic concentrations in critically ill patients. This article aims to describe the current clinical scenario for beta-lactam dosing in critically ill patients with septic shock and CRRT, to highlight the sources of variability among the different studies that reduce extrapolation to clinical practice, and to identify the opportunities for future research and improvement in this field. Three frequently prescribed beta-lactams (meropenem, piperacillin and ceftriaxone) were chosen for review. Our findings showed that present dosing recommendations are based on studies with drawbacks limiting their applicability in the clinical setting. In general, current antibiotic dosing regimens for CRRT follow a one-size-fits-all fashion despite emerging clinical data suggesting that drug clearance is partially dependent on CRRT modality and intensity. Moreover, some studies pool data from heterogeneous populations with CRRT that may exhibit different pharmacokinetics (for example, admission diagnoses different to septic shock, such as trauma), which also limit their extrapolation to critically ill patients with septic shock. Finally, there is still no consensus regarding the %T >MIC (percentage of dosing interval when concentration of the antibiotic is above the minimum inhibitory concentration of the pathogen) value that should be chosen as the pharmacodynamic target for antibiotic therapy in patients with septic shock and CRRT. For empirically optimized dosing, during the first day a loading dose is required to compensate the increased volume of distribution, regardless of impaired organ function. An additional loading dose may be required when CRRT is initiated due to steady-state equilibrium breakage driven by clearance variation. From day 2, dosing must be adjusted to CRRT settings and residual renal function. Therapeutic drug monitoring of beta-lactams may be regarded as a useful tool to daily individualize dosing and to ensure optimal antibiotic exposure.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effects of different doses in continuous veno-venous haemofiltration on outcomes of acute renal failure: a prospective randomised trial.

          Continuous veno-venous haemofiltration is increasingly used to treat acute renal failure in critically ill patients, but a clear definition of an adequate treatment dose has not been established. We undertook a prospective randomised study of the impact different ultrafiltration doses in continuous renal replacement therapy on survival. We enrolled 425 patients, with a mean age of 61 years, in intensive care who had acute renal failure. Patients were randomly assigned ultrafiltration at 20 mL h(-1) kg(-1) (group 1, n=146), 35 mL h(-1) kg(-1) (group 2, n=139), or 45 mL h(-1) kg(-1) (group 3, n=140). The primary endpoint was survival at 15 days after stopping haemofiltration. We also assessed recovery of renal function and frequency of complications during treatment. Analysis was by intention to treat. Survival in group 1 was significantly lower than in groups 2 (p=0.0007) and 3 (p=0.0013). Survival in groups 2 and 3 did not differ significantly (p=0.87). Adjustment for possible confounding factors did not change the pattern of differences among the groups. Survivors in all groups had lower concentrations of blood urea nitrogen before continuous haemofiltration was started than non-survivors. 95%, 92%, and 90% of survivors in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, had full recovery of renal function. The frequency of complications was similarly low in all groups. Mortality among these critically ill patients was high, but increase in the rate of ultrafiltration improved survival significantly. We recommend that ultrafiltration should be prescribed according to patient's bodyweight and should reach at least 35 mL h(-1) kg(-1).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Pharmacokinetic issues for antibiotics in the critically ill patient.

            To discuss the altered pharmacokinetic properties of selected antibiotics in critically ill patients and to develop basic dose adjustment principles for this patient population. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane-Controlled Trial Register. Relevant papers that reported pharmacokinetics of selected antibiotic classes in critically ill patients and antibiotic pharmacodynamic properties were reviewed. Antibiotics and/or antibiotic classes reviewed included aminoglycosides, beta-lactams (including carbapenems), glycopeptides, fluoroquinolones, tigecycline, linezolid, lincosamides, and colistin. Antibiotics can be broadly categorized according to their solubility characteristics which can, in turn, help describe possible altered pharmacokinetics that can be caused by the pathophysiological changes common to critical illness. Hydrophilic antibiotics (e.g., aminoglycosides, beta-lactams, glycopeptides, and colistin) are mostly affected with the pathphysiological changes observed in critically ill patients with increased volumes of distribution and altered drug clearance (related to changes in creatinine clearance). Lipophilic antibiotics (e.g., fluoroquinolones, macrolides, tigecycline, and lincosamides) have lesser volume of distribution alterations, but may develop altered drug clearances. Using antibiotic pharmacodynamic bacterial kill characteristics, altered dosing regimens can be devised that also account for such pharmacokinetic changes. Knowledge of antibiotic pharmacodynamic properties and the potential altered antibiotic pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients can allow the intensivist to develop individualized dosing regimens. Specifically, for renally cleared drugs, measured creatinine clearance can be used to drive many dose adjustments. Maximizing clinical outcomes and minimizing antibiotic resistance using individualized doses may be best achieved with therapeutic drug monitoring.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              High-volume versus standard-volume haemofiltration for septic shock patients with acute kidney injury (IVOIRE study): a multicentre randomized controlled trial.

              Septic shock is a leading cause of death among critically ill patients, in particular when complicated by acute kidney injury (AKI). Small experimental and human clinical studies have suggested that high-volume haemofiltration (HVHF) may improve haemodynamic profile and mortality. We sought to determine the impact of HVHF on 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with septic shock and AKI. This was a prospective, randomized, open, multicentre clinical trial conducted at 18 intensive care units in France, Belgium and the Netherlands. A total of 140 critically ill patients with septic shock and AKI for less than 24 h were enrolled from October 2005 through March 2010. Patients were randomized to either HVHF at 70 mL/kg/h or standard-volume haemofiltration (SVHF) at 35 mL/kg/h, for a 96-h period. Primary endpoint was 28-day mortality. The trial was stopped prematurely after enrolment of 140 patients because of slow patient accrual and resources no longer being available. A total of 137 patients were analysed (two withdrew consent, one was excluded); 66 patients in the HVHF group and 71 in the SVHF group. Mortality at 28 days was lower than expected but not different between groups (HVHF 37.9 % vs. SVHF 40.8 %, log-rank test p = 0.94). There were no statistically significant differences in any of the secondary endpoints between treatment groups. In the IVOIRE trial, there was no evidence that HVHF at 70 mL/kg/h, when compared with contemporary SVHF at 35 mL/kg/h, leads to a reduction of 28-day mortality or contributes to early improvements in haemodynamic profile or organ function. HVHF, as applied in this trial, cannot be recommended for treatment of septic shock complicated by AKI.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Crit Care
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                2014
                23 June 2014
                23 June 2015
                : 18
                : 3
                : 227
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Fundació Clínic per la Recerca Biomèdica, Villarroel 170, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
                [2 ]Critical Care Department, Corporación Sanitaria Universitaria Parc Tauli, Sabadell University Hospital, Parc Taulí 1, 08208 Sabadell, Barcelona, Spain
                [3 ]School of Medicine, Universitat de Barcelona, Casanova 143, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
                [4 ]Critical Care Department, Joan XXIII University Hospital, Institut d’Investigació Sanitària Pere Virgili, Doctor Mallafre Guasch 4, 43007 Tarragona, Spain
                [5 ]Nursing Department, Universitat Rovira I Virgili, Avinguda Catalunya 35, 43002 Tarragona, Spain
                [6 ]Clinical Pharmacology Department, Corporación Sanitaria Universitaria Parc Tauli, Sabadell University Hospital, Parc Taulí 1, 08208 Sabadell, Barcelona, Spain
                [7 ]Pharmacology, Therapeutics and Toxicology Department, Campus Bellaterra, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Sabadell, Spain
                [8 ]Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
                [9 ]Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer, Rosselló 149-153, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
                [10 ]Pharmacy Department, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
                [11 ]Centro de Investigación Biomédica En Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Madrid, Spain
                Article
                cc13938
                10.1186/cc13938
                4075152
                25042938
                d2f4b769-735b-4d4a-93b5-c66ce0ee5c9e
                Copyright © 2014 Ulldemolins et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                The licensee has exclusive rights to distribute this article, in any medium, for 12 months following its publication. After this time, the article is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                Categories
                Review

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                Emergency medicine & Trauma

                Comments

                Comment on this article