Infection Control Programme, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Rue Gabrielle Perret-Gentil 4, 1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland.
Infection Control Programme, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Rue Gabrielle Perret-Gentil 4, 1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland.
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2015 Apr;45(4):385-92. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2014.12.017. Epub 2015 Jan 19.
Whilst augmented renal clearance (ARC) is associated with reduced β-lactam plasma concentrations, its impact on clinical outcomes is unclear. This single-centre prospective, observational, cohort study included non-pregnant, critically ill patients aged 18-60 years with presumed severe infection treated with imipenem, meropenem, piperacillin/tazobactam or cefepime and with creatinine clearance (CL(Cr)) ≥60 mL/min. Peak, intermediate and trough levels of β-lactams were drawn on Days 1-3 and 5. Concentrations were deemed 'subthreshold' if they did not meet EUCAST-defined non-species-related breakpoints. Primary and secondary endpoints were clinical response 28 days after inclusion, and ARC prevalence (CL(Cr)≥130 mL/min) and subthreshold and undetectable concentrations, respectively. Logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between ARC, antibiotic concentrations and clinical failure. From 2010 to 2013, 100 patients were enrolled (mean age, 45 years; median CL(Cr) at inclusion, 144.1 mL/min). ARC was present in 64 (64%) of the patients. Most patients received imipenem/cilastatin (54%). Moreover, 86% and 27% of patients had at least one subthreshold or undetectable trough level, respectively. Among imipenem and piperacillin trough levels, 77% and 61% were subthreshold, respectively, but intermediate levels of both antibiotics were largely above threshold. ARC strongly predicted undetectable trough concentrations (OR=3.3, 95% CI 1.11-9.94). A link between ARC and clinical failure (18/98; 18%) was not observed. ARC and subthreshold β-lactam antibiotic concentrations were widespread but were not associated with clinical failure. Larger studies are necessary to determine whether standard dosing regimens in the presence of ARC impact negatively on clinical outcome and antibiotic resistance.
虽然增强的肾清除率(ARC)与β-内酰胺类药物的血浆浓度降低有关,但它对临床结局的影响尚不清楚。这项单中心前瞻性观察性队列研究纳入了年龄在 18-60 岁之间、无妊娠、患有严重感染的危重病患者,给予亚胺培南、美罗培南、哌拉西林/他唑巴坦或头孢吡肟治疗,且肌酐清除率(CL(Cr))≥60mL/min。在第 1-3 天和第 5 天采集β-内酰胺类药物的峰、中、谷浓度。如果浓度未达到 EUCAST 定义的非种相关折点,则认为“亚治疗浓度”。主要和次要终点分别为纳入后 28 天的临床反应和 ARC 的流行率(CL(Cr)≥130mL/min)以及亚治疗浓度和未检测浓度。使用逻辑回归评估 ARC、抗生素浓度与临床失败之间的关系。2010 年至 2013 年,共纳入 100 例患者(平均年龄 45 岁;纳入时的中位 CL(Cr)为 144.1mL/min)。64 例(64%)患者存在 ARC。大多数患者接受亚胺培南/西司他丁(54%)治疗。此外,分别有 86%和 27%的患者至少有一次谷浓度处于亚治疗或未检测水平。亚胺培南和哌拉西林的谷浓度中,分别有 77%和 61%处于亚治疗浓度,而两种抗生素的中浓度均大大高于阈值。ARC 强烈预测谷浓度无法检测(OR=3.3,95%CI 1.11-9.94)。未观察到 ARC 与临床失败(18/98;18%)之间存在关联。ARC 和β-内酰胺类抗生素的亚治疗浓度很常见,但与临床失败无关。需要更大规模的研究来确定在存在 ARC 的情况下,标准的给药方案是否会对临床结局和抗生素耐药性产生负面影响。