Schwartz J I, Jauregui L E, Bachmann K A, Martin M E, Reitberg D P
St. Vincent Medical Center, Toledo, Ohio 43608.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1988 May;32(5):730-5. doi: 10.1128/AAC.32.5.730.
The pharmacokinetics of cefoperazone and sulbactam in combination were evaluated in six, elderly, seriously ill patients treated with the drug combination for intra-abdominal infections. After giving informed consent, three males and three females aged 63.5 to 77.5 (mean 67.9) years and weighing 54.5 to 86.8 (mean, 67.6) kg were treated with cefoperazone (2.0 g) and sulbactam (1.0 g) infused intravenously every 12 h for at least 5 days. Cefoperazone and sulbactam pharmacokinetics were characterized on both days 1 and 5 of treatment. Eleven serial blood samples were obtained just prior to and following dose 1 on days 1 and 5 of treatment. Mean estimates of cefoperazone maximal concentration in plasma (Cmax), area under the curve of drug concentration in plasma versus time (AUC), half-life (t 1/2), apparent volume of distribution by the area method (Varea), apparent volume of distribution at steady state (Vss), and total body clearance (CL) for day 1 (day 5) were 297.5 237.5) micrograms/ml, 1,247 (1,063) micrograms.h/ml, 7.0 (4.9) h, 16.1 (13.4) liter, 13.1 (14.4) liter, and 28.9 (34.2) ml/min, respectively. Day 1 (day 5) mean values for sulbactam Cmax, AUC, t 1/2, Varea, Vss, and CL were 110.3 (78.0) micrograms/ml, 228 (217) micrograms.h/ml, 3.4 (2.5) h, 26.1 (18.5) liter, 18.9 (15.4) liter, and 97 (94) ml/min, respectively. Both drugs evidenced slower elimination and greater pharmacokinetic variability in these patients compared with values previously reported for normal volunteers. As patients improved during the course of therapy, the only pharmacokinetic parameter significantly changed between days 1 and 5 was a shortened sulbactam t 1/2. Our inability to find substantial evidence of pharmacokinetic normalization may have been related to sample size and study duration. Both drugs were present in potentially therapeutic concentrations for the entire 12-h dosing interval, but without undue accumulation from days 1 to 5.
对6名患有腹腔感染且正在接受头孢哌酮和舒巴坦联合治疗的老年重症患者,评估了两者联合使用时的药代动力学情况。在获得知情同意后,3名男性和3名女性患者,年龄在63.5至77.5岁(平均67.9岁)之间,体重在54.5至86.8千克(平均67.6千克)之间,接受头孢哌酮(2.0克)和舒巴坦(1.0克)治疗,每12小时静脉输注一次,持续至少5天。在治疗的第1天和第5天对头孢哌酮和舒巴坦的药代动力学进行了表征。在治疗第1天和第5天的第1剂给药前和给药后采集了11份连续血样。治疗第1天(第5天)头孢哌酮的血浆最大浓度(Cmax)、血浆药物浓度-时间曲线下面积(AUC)、半衰期(t1/2)、面积法表观分布容积(Varea)、稳态表观分布容积(Vss)和全身清除率(CL)的平均估计值分别为297.5(237.5)微克/毫升、1247(1063)微克·小时/毫升、7.0(4.9)小时、16.1(13.4)升、13.1(14.4)升和28.9(34.2)毫升/分钟。舒巴坦的Cmax、AUC、t1/2、Varea、Vss和CL在第1天(第5天)的平均值分别为110.3(78.0)微克/毫升、228(217)微克·小时/毫升、3.4(2.5)小时、26.1(18.5)升、18.9(15.4)升和97(94)毫升/分钟。与先前报道的正常志愿者的值相比,这两种药物在这些患者中均显示出消除较慢且药代动力学变异性更大。随着患者在治疗过程中病情好转,第1天和第5天之间唯一显著变化的药代动力学参数是舒巴坦的t1/2缩短。我们未能找到药代动力学正常化的实质性证据可能与样本量和研究持续时间有关。在整个12小时给药间隔内,两种药物均处于潜在的治疗浓度,但从第1天到第5天没有过度蓄积。