Ricerca avanzata

Home > Riviste > Minerva Anestesiologica > Fascicoli precedenti > Minerva Anestesiologica 2014 Dicembre;80(12) > Minerva Anestesiologica 2014 Dicembre;80(12):1302-9



Rivista di Anestesia, Rianimazione, Terapia Antalgica e Terapia Intensiva

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Anesthesiology, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care
Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,036

Periodicità: Mensile

ISSN 0375-9393

Online ISSN 1827-1596


Minerva Anestesiologica 2014 Dicembre;80(12):1302-9


Extended versus bolus infusion of meropenem and piperacillin: a pharmacokinetic analysis

De Waele J. 1, Carlier M. 2, Hoste E. 1, Depuydt P. 1, Decruyenaere J. 1, Wallis S. C. 3, Lipman J. 4, Roberts J. A. 5

1 Department of Critical Care Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium;
2 Department of Clinical Chemistry, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium;
3 Burns Trauma and Critical Care Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Australia;
4 Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Burns Trauma Critical Care Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Australia;
5 Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital and Burns Trauma Critical Care Research Centre, University of Queensland, Australia

BACKGROUND: Extended infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics has been advocated as a method for optimizing antibiotic exposure in critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of extended infusion versus bolus infusion of piperacillin and meropenem in critically ill patients with normal renal function.
METHODS: A prospective study of 3 hours extended infusion of meropenem and piperacillin in critically ill patients without renal dysfunction. Results from the extended infusion cohort were compared to previously published bolus infusion data in critically ill patients.
RESULTS: Twenty extended infusion patients (15 piperacillin, 5 meropenem) were compared with 13 bolus infusion patients (8 piperacillin, 5 meropenem). The demographic and clinical characteristics between both groups were not statistically different. Significant pharmacokinetic differences were observed in median (interquartile range) Cmax for both meropenem (extended infusion 17 [12.6-21.9] vs. bolus 85.2 [66.7-140.3]; P=0.01) and piperacillin (extended infusion 76.2 [57.7-92.6] vs. bolus 240.2 [168.5-275.4]; P=0.001). Considerable pharmacokinetic variability existed in each group for both drugs. Compared to bolus infusion, fT>MIC using extended infusion was higher for both drugs: 96% (IQR 71-100%) compared to 77% (IQR 41-93%) for piperacillin (P=0.05) and 82% (IQR 63-89%) compared to 51% (IQR 48-63%) for meropenem (P=0.095); assuming a MIC of 16 mg/L and 2 mg/L respectively.
CONCLUSION: This study confirms that extended infusion in critically ill patients result in advantageous pharmacokinetic profiles by increasing the fT>MIC for piperacillin and meropenem. In a significant subpopulation of critically ill patients with normal renal function, a 100% fT>MIC target is not reached, even with 3-hour extended infusions.

lingua: Inglese


inizio pagina