...
首页> 外文期刊>International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics >Cefepime in critically ill patients: continuous infusion vs. an intermittent dosing regimen.
【24h】

Cefepime in critically ill patients: continuous infusion vs. an intermittent dosing regimen.

机译:危重患者的头孢吡肟:连续输注与间歇给药方案。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters of a continuous infusion of cefepime vs. an intermittent regimen in critically ill adult patients with Gram-negative bacilli infection. The prospective randomized parallel study was carried out in 50 patients with severe pneumonia (n = 41) or bacteremia (n = 9). They received cefepime 4 g/d either as a continuous infusion or intermittent administration 2 x 2 g in combination with amikacin. Patient characteristics and the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the isolated bacteria were comparable. Clinical outcomes were assessed along with pharmacodynamic indices and compared in both groups (chi2 and Mann-Whitney U-tests). Mechanical ventilation, clinical outcome and bacteriological eradication did not significantly differ between the two groups. Also, the area under the plasma cefepime concentration curve at steady state (AUCss: 612 +/- 369 vs. 623 +/- 319 mg x 1(-1) x h), AUCss > MIC (595 +/- 364 vs. 606 +/- 316 mg x 1(-1) x h) and the area under the inhibitory concentration curve (AUICss: 4258 +/- 5819 vs. 5194 +/- 7465 mg x 1(-1) x h) were similar. If the time above MIC (t > MIC) was not significantly higher in Group 1 (100 +/- 0%) than in Group 2 (90 +/- 11%), t > five-fold MIC in Group 1 (100 +/- 0%) was significantly higher (p < 0.01) than in Group 2 (82 +/- 25%). The mean time over the French breakpoint (4 mg/l) was 100 +/- 0% and 72 +/- 27% in Group 1 and 2 (p < 0.001), respectively. In contrast to intermittent cefepime administration, continuous infusion of cefepime consistently maintained a serum concentration > 5 x the MIC of typical Gram-negative nosocomial pathogens. This results in greater bactericidal activity against organisms with a higher (2 mg/l) cefepime breakpoint even if the clinical outcome is not significantly modified.
机译:这项研究的目的是比较重症成年革兰氏阴性杆菌感染的成人患者连续输注头孢吡肟与间歇治疗的药代动力学和药效学参数。前瞻性随机平行研究在50例重症肺炎(n = 41)或菌血症(n = 9)的患者中进行。他们接受阿米卡星与头孢吡肟4 g / d的连续输注或2 g 2 g的间歇给药。患者特征和分离细菌的最低抑菌浓度(MIC)相当。评估了临床结局以及药效学指标,并在两组中进行了比较(chi2和Mann-Whitney U检验)。两组之间的机械通气,临床结局和细菌根除没有显着差异。同样,稳态时血浆头孢吡肟浓度曲线下的面积(AUCss:612 +/- 369 vs. 623 +/- 319 mg x 1(-1)xh),AUCss> MIC(595 +/- 364 vs.606 +/- 316 mg x 1(-1)xh)和抑制浓度曲线下的面积(AUICss:4258 +/- 5819 vs. 5194 +/- 7465 mg x 1(-1)xh)相似。如果第1组(100 +/- 0%)的高于MIC的时间(t> MIC)没有明显高于第2组的(90 +/- 11%),则第1组的t> 5倍MIC(100 + /-0%)显着高于第2组(82 +/- 25%)(p <0.01)。第一组和第二组中超过法国断点(4 mg / l)的平均时间分别为100 +/- 0%和72 +/- 27%(p <0.001)。与间歇性头孢吡肟的给药相反,头孢吡肟的持续输注始终使血清浓度保持> 5倍于典型革兰氏阴性医院病原体的MIC。即使临床结果没有明显改变,这也会导致对头孢吡肟断裂点较高(2 mg / l)的生物体具有更大的杀菌活性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号