Roberts Jason A, Kirkpatrick Carl M J, Roberts Michael S, Robertson Thomas A, Dalley Andrew J, Lipman Jeffrey
Burns, Trauma and Critical Care Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2009 Jul;64(1):142-50. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkp139. Epub 2009 Apr 27.
To compare the plasma and subcutaneous tissue concentration-time profiles of meropenem administered by intermittent bolus dosing or continuous infusion to critically ill patients with sepsis and without renal dysfunction, and to use population pharmacokinetic modelling and Monte Carlo simulations to assess the cumulative fraction of response (CFR) against Gram-negative pathogens likely to be encountered in critical care units.
We randomized 10 patients with sepsis to receive meropenem by intermittent bolus administration (n = 5; 1 g 8 hourly) or an equal dose administered by continuous infusion (n = 5). Serial subcutaneous tissue concentrations were determined using microdialysis and compared with plasma data for first-dose and steady-state pharmacokinetics. Population pharmacokinetic modelling of plasma data and Monte Carlo simulations were then undertaken with NONMEM.
It was found that continuous infusion maintains higher median trough concentrations, in both plasma (intermittent bolus 0 versus infusion 7 mg/L) and subcutaneous tissue (0 versus 4 mg/L). All simulated intermittent bolus, extended and continuous infusion dosing achieved 100% of pharmacodynamic targets against most Gram-negative pathogens. Superior obtainment of pharmacodynamic targets was achieved using administration by extended or continuous infusion against less susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter species.
This is the first study to compare the relative concentration-time data of bolus and continuous administration of meropenem at the subcutaneous tissue and plasma levels. We found that the administration of meropenem by continuous infusion maintains higher concentrations in subcutaneous tissue and plasma than by intermittent bolus dosing. Administration by extended or continuous infusion will achieve superior CFR against less-susceptible organisms in patients without renal dysfunction.
比较在无肾功能障碍的重症脓毒症患者中,通过间歇性推注给药或持续输注给药的美罗培南的血浆和皮下组织浓度-时间曲线,并使用群体药代动力学建模和蒙特卡洛模拟来评估针对重症监护病房中可能遇到的革兰氏阴性病原体的累积反应分数(CFR)。
我们将10例脓毒症患者随机分为两组,一组接受间歇性推注给药的美罗培南(n = 5;1g,每8小时一次),另一组接受等剂量持续输注给药(n = 5)。使用微透析法测定连续的皮下组织浓度,并与首剂和稳态药代动力学的血浆数据进行比较。然后使用NONMEM对血浆数据进行群体药代动力学建模和蒙特卡洛模拟。
研究发现,持续输注在血浆(间歇性推注为0,输注为7mg/L)和皮下组织(0和4mg/L)中均维持较高的中位谷浓度。所有模拟的间歇性推注、延长输注和持续输注给药针对大多数革兰氏阴性病原体均达到了100%的药效学目标。对于较难药敏的铜绿假单胞菌和不动杆菌属,通过延长输注或持续输注给药能更好地实现药效学目标。
这是第一项比较美罗培南推注和持续给药在皮下组织和血浆水平上相对浓度-时间数据的研究。我们发现,持续输注给药的美罗培南在皮下组织和血浆中的浓度高于间歇性推注给药。对于无肾功能障碍的患者,延长输注或持续输注给药对较难药敏的病原体将实现更高的CFR。