A Nonparametric Pharmacokinetic Approach to Determine the Optimal Dosing Regimen for 30-Minute and 3-Hour Meropenem Infusions in Critically Ill Patients

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 593-599

  Mathew, Sumith K ^a   Mathew, Binu S ^a   Neely, Michael N ^b   Naik, Girish S ^a,c   Prabha, Ratna ^a   Jacob, Gijoe G ^a   Subramani, K ^a   Fleming, Denise H ^a  

^a CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE   (India)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c Biocon Park   (India)

Author keywords

3 hour infusion; intensive care; meropenem; Pmetrics; population pharmacokinetics

Indexed keywords

CREATININE; MEROPENEM; ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; THIENAMYCIN DERIVATIVE;

ADULT; ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; CHRONOPHARMACOLOGY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARTMENT MODEL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CREATININE CLEARANCE; CRITICALLY ILL PATIENT; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG DOSE REGIMEN; DRUG INFUSION; DRUG MONITORING; DRUG STORAGE; ELIMINATION RATE CONSTANT; FEMALE; HIGH PERFORMANCE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; MALE; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; MULTIPLE TRAUMA; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OPTIMAL DRUG DOSE; PHARMACOKINETIC ASSAY; PLASMA CONCENTRATION-TIME CURVE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEPSIS; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; VOLUME OF DISTRIBUTION; BLOOD; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CRITICAL ILLNESS; DRUG ADMINISTRATION; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CRITICAL ILLNESS; DRUG ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFUSIONS, INTRAVENOUS; MALE; MONTE CARLO METHOD; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; THIENAMYCINS;

EID: 84979508813     PISSN: 01634356     EISSN: 15363694     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/FTD.0000000000000323     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Kitzis MD, Acar JF, Gutmann L. Antibacterial activity of meropenem against gram-negative bacteria with a permeability defect and against staphylococci. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1989; 24(suppl A): 125-132.
2. Niederman MS. Use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials for the treatment of pneumonia in seriously ill patients: maximizing clinical outcomes and minimizing selection of resistant organisms. Clin Infect Dis. 2006; 42(suppl 2): S72-S81.
3. Nicolau DP. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of meropenem. Clin Infect Dis. 2008; 47(suppl 1): S32-S40.
4. Perrott J, Mabasa VH, Ensom MHH. Comparing outcomes of meropenem administration strategies based on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles: a qualitative systematic review. Ann Pharmacother. 2010; 44: 557-564.
5. Roberts JA, Webb S, Paterson D, et al. A systematic review on clinical benefits of continuous administration of beta-lactam antibiotics. Crit Care Med. 2009; 37: 2071-2078.
6. Li C, Du X, Kuti JL, et al. Clinical pharmacodynamics of meropenem in patients with lower respiratory tract infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007; 51: 1725-1730.
7. Roberts JA, Lipman J. Pharmacokinetic issues for antibiotics in the critically ill patient. Crit Care Med. 2009; 37: 840-851.
8. Pea F, Viale P. Bench-to-bedside review: appropriate antibiotic therapy in severe sepsis and septic shock-does the dose matter? Crit Care. 2009; 13: 214.
9. Lorente L, Lorenzo L, Martín MM, et al. Meropenem by continuous versus intermittent infusion in ventilator-associated pneumonia due to gram-negative bacilli. Ann Pharmacother. 2006; 40: 219-223.
10. Carlier M, Carrette S, Roberts JA, et al. Meropenem and piperacillin/ tazobactam prescribing in critically ill patients: does augmented renal clearance affect pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment when extended infusions are used? Crit Care Lond Engl. 2013; 17: R84.
11. Lee LS, Kinzig-Schippers M, Nafziger AN, et al. Comparison of 30-min and 3-h infusion regimens for imipenem/cilastatin and for meropenem evaluated by Monte Carlo simulation. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010; 68: 251-258.
12. Jaruratanasirikul S, Sriwiriyajan S, Punyo J. Comparison of the pharmacodynamics of meropenem in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia following administration by 3-hour infusion or bolus injection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005; 49: 1337-1339.
13. Neely MN, van Guilder MG, Yamada WM, et al. Accurate detection of outliers and subpopulations with Pmetrics, a nonparametric and parametric pharmacometric modeling and simulation package for R. Ther Drug Monit. 2012; 34: 467-476.
14. Isla A, Rodríguez-Gascón A, Trocóniz IF, et al. Population pharmacokinetics of meropenem in critically ill patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2008; 47: 173-180.
15. Doh K, Woo H, Hur J, et al. Population pharmacokinetics of meropenem in burn patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010; 65: 2428-2435.
16. Goncalves-Pereira J, Silva NE, Mateus A, et al. Assessment of pharmacokinetic changes of meropenem during therapy in septic critically ill patients. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2014; 15: 21.
17. Leroy A, Fillastre JP, Borsa-Lebas F, et al. Pharmacokinetics of meropenem (ICI 194, 660) and its metabolite (ICI 213, 689) in healthy subjects and in patients with renal impairment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992; 36: 2794-2798.
18. Nilsson-Ehle l, Hutchison M, Haworth SJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics of meropenem compared to imipenem-cilastatin in young, healthy males. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1991; 10: 85-88.
19. Jaruratanasirikul S, Sriwiriyajan S. Stability of meropenem in normal saline solution after storage at room temperature. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2003; 34: 627-629.
20. Langgartner J, Vasold A, Glück T, et al. Pharmacokinetics of meropenem during intermittent and continuous intravenous application in patients treated by continuous renal replacement therapy. Intensive Care Med. 2008; 34: 1091-1096.