Osthoff Michael, Siegemund Martin, Balestra Gianmarco, Abdul-Aziz Mohd Hafiz, Roberts Jason A
Division of Infectious Diseases & Hospital Epidemiology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland; Department of Biomedicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Surgical Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Swiss Med Wkly. 2016 Oct 10;146:w14368. doi: 10.4414/smw.2016.14368. eCollection 2016.
Prolonged infusion of β-lactam antibiotics as either extended (over at least 2 hours) or continuous infusion is increasingly applied in intensive care units around the world in an attempt to optimise treatment with this most commonly used class of antibiotics, whose effectiveness is challenged by increasing resistance rates. The pharmacokinetics of β-lactam antibiotics in critically ill patients is profoundly altered secondary to an increased volume of distribution and the presence of altered renal function, including augmented renal clearance. This may lead to a significant decrease in plasma concentrations of β-lactam antibiotics. As a consequence, low pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment, which is described as the percentage of time that the free drug concentration is maintained above the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the causative organism (fT>MIC), has been documented for β-lactam treatment in these patients when using standard intermittent bolus dosing, even for the most conservative target (50% fT>MIC). Prolonged infusion of β-lactams has consistently been shown to improve PK/PD target attainment, particularly in patients with severe infections. However, evidence regarding relevant patient outcomes is still limited. Whereas previous observational studies have suggested a clinical benefit of prolonged infusion, results from two recent randomised controlled trials of continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus administration of β-lactams are conflicting. In particular, the larger, double-blind placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial including 443 patients did not demonstrate any difference in clinical outcomes. We believe that a personalised approach is required to truly optimise β-lactam treatment in critically ill patients. This may include therapeutic drug monitoring with real-time adaptive feedback, rapid MIC determination and the use of antibiotic dosing software tools that incorporate patient parameters, dosing history, drug concentration and site of infection. Universal administration of β-lactam antibiotics as prolonged infusion, even if supported by therapeutic drug monitoring, is not yet ready for "prime time", as evidence for its clinical benefit is modest. There is a need for prospective randomised controlled trials that assess patient-centred outcomes (e.g. mortality) of a personalised approach in selected critically ill patients including prolonged infusion of β-lactams compared with the current standard of care.
β-内酰胺类抗生素的延长输注(至少超过2小时)或持续输注在世界各地的重症监护病房中越来越多地被应用,旨在优化这类最常用抗生素的治疗效果,但其有效性正受到耐药率上升的挑战。重症患者体内β-内酰胺类抗生素的药代动力学因分布容积增加和肾功能改变(包括肾清除率增加)而发生深刻改变。这可能导致β-内酰胺类抗生素的血浆浓度显著降低。因此,在这些患者中,当使用标准间歇推注给药时,β-内酰胺治疗的药代动力学/药效学(PK/PD)目标达标率较低,即游离药物浓度维持在致病菌最低抑菌浓度(MIC)以上的时间百分比(fT>MIC),即使是最保守的目标(50% fT>MIC)也是如此。β-内酰胺类抗生素的延长输注一直被证明能提高PK/PD目标达标率,尤其是在重症感染患者中。然而,关于相关患者预后的证据仍然有限。尽管先前的观察性研究表明延长输注有临床益处,但最近两项关于β-内酰胺类抗生素持续输注与间歇推注给药对比的随机对照试验结果相互矛盾。特别是,纳入443例患者的规模更大的双盲安慰剂对照随机对照试验未显示临床结局有任何差异。我们认为,需要一种个性化的方法来真正优化重症患者的β-内酰胺治疗。这可能包括采用实时自适应反馈的治疗药物监测、快速MIC测定以及使用纳入患者参数、给药史、药物浓度和感染部位的抗生素给药软件工具。即使有治疗药物监测的支持,将β-内酰胺类抗生素普遍作为延长输注给药尚未准备好进入“黄金时代”,因为其临床益处的证据尚不充分。需要进行前瞻性随机对照试验,评估在选定的重症患者中采用个性化方法(包括β-内酰胺类抗生素延长输注)与当前护理标准相比以患者为中心的结局(如死亡率)。