The pharmacokinetics of meropenem in surgical patients with moderate or severe infections

Methods for Determination of Meropenem Concentration in Biological Samples

Measuring the concentration of antibiotics in biological samples allow implementation of therapeutic monitoring of these drugs and contribute to the adjustment of the dosing regimen in patients. This increases the effectiveness of antimicrobial therapy, reduces the toxicity of these drugs and prevents the development of bacterial resistance. This review article summarizes current knowledge on methods for determining concentration of meropenem, an antibiotic drug from the group of carbapenems, in different biological samples. It provides a brief discussion of the chemical structure, physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties of meropenem, different sample preparation techniques, use of apparatus and equipment, knowledge of the advantages and limitations of available methods, as well as directions in which new methods should be developed. This review should facilitate clinical laboratories to select and apply one of the established methods for measuring of meropenem, as well as to provide them with the necessary knowledge to develop new methods for quantification of meropenem in biological samples according to their needs.

Scaling beta-lactam antimicrobial pharmacokinetics from early life to old age

AIMS

Beta-lactam dose optimization in critical care is a current priority. We aimed to review the pharmacokinetics (PK) of three commonly used beta-lactams (amoxicillin ± clavulanate, piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem) to compare PK parameters reported in critically and noncritically ill neonates, children and adults, and to investigate whether allometric and maturation scaling principles could be applied to describe changes in PK parameters through life.

METHODS

A systematic review of PK studies of the three drugs was undertaken using MEDLINE and EMBASE. PK parameters and summary statistics were extracted and scaled using allometric principles to 70 kg individual for comparison. Pooled data were used to model clearance maturation and decline using a sigmoidal (Hill) function.

RESULTS

A total of 130 papers were identified. Age ranged from 29 weeks to 82 years and weight from 0.9-200 kg. PK parameters from critically ill populations were reported with wider confidence intervals than those in healthy volunteers, indicating greater PK variability in critical illness. The standard allometric size and sigmoidal maturation model adequately described increasing clearance in neonates, and a sigmoidal model was also used to describe decline in older age. Adult weight-adjusted clearance was achieved at approximately 2 years postmenstrual age. Changes in volume of distribution were well described by the standard allometric model, although amoxicillin data suggested a relatively higher volume of distribution in neonates.

CONCLUSIONS

Critical illness is associated with greater PK variability than in healthy volunteers. The maturation models presented will be useful for optimizing beta-lactam dosing, although a prospective, age-inclusive study is warranted for external validation.

Dosing regimen of meropenem for adults with severe burns: a population pharmacokinetic study with Monte Carlo simulations

OBJECTIVES

To develop a population model to describe the pharmacokinetics (PK) of intravenous meropenem in adult patients with severe burns and investigate potential relationships between dosage regimens and antimicrobial efficacy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A dose of 1 g every 8 h was administered to adult patients with total body surface area burns of ≥15%. Doses for subsequent courses were determined using results from the initial course and the patient's clinical condition. Five plasma meropenem concentrations were typically measured over the dosage interval on one to four occasions. An open, two-compartment PK model was fitted to the meropenem concentrations using NONMEM and the effect of covariates on meropenem PK was investigated. Monte Carlo simulations investigated dosage regimens to achieve a target T>MIC for ≥40%, ≥60% or ≥80% of the dose interval.

RESULTS

Data comprised 113 meropenem concentration measurements from 20 dosage intervals in 12 patients. The parameters were CL (L/h) = 0.196 L/h/kg × [1 - 0.023 × (age - 46)] × [1 - 0.049 × (albumin - 15)], V1 = 0.273 L/kg × [1 - 0.049 × (albumin - 15)], Q = 0.199 L/h/kg and V2 = 0.309 L/kg × [1 - 0.049 × (albumin - 15)]. For a target of ≥80% T>MIC, the breakpoint was 8 mg/L for doses of 1 g every 4 h and 2 g every 8 h given over 3 h, but only 4 mg/L if given over 5 min.

CONCLUSIONS

Although 1 g 8 hourly should be effective against Escherichia coli and CoNS, higher doses, ideally with a longer infusion time, would be more appropriate for empirical therapy, mixed infections and bacteria with MIC values ≥4 mg/L.

Assessment of pharmacokinetic changes of meropenem during therapy in septic critically ill patients

Background

Meropenem is a carbapenem antibiotic commonly used in critically ill patients to treat severe infections. The available pharmacokinetic (PK) data has been mostly obtained from healthy volunteers as well as from clinical studies addressing selected populations, often excluding the elderly and also patients with renal failure. Our aim was to study PK of meropenem in a broader population of septic critically ill patients.

Methods

We characterized the PK of meropenem in 15 critically ill patients during the first 36 hrs of therapy. Aditionally, whenever possible, we collected a second set of late plasma samples after 5 days of therapy to evaluate PK intra-patient variability and its correlation with clinical course.

Patients received meropenem (1 g every 8 hrs IV). Drug plasma profiles were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. The PK of meropenem was characterized and compared with clinical parameters.

Results

Fifteen septic critically ill patients (8 male, median age 73 yrs) were included. The geometric mean of the volume of distribution at the steady state (V_ss)/weight was 0.20 (0.15-0.27) L/kg. No correlation of V_ss/weight with severity or comorbidity scores was found. However the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score correlated with the V_ss/weight of the peripheral compartment (r² = 0.55, p = 0.021). The median meropenem clearance (Cl) was 73.3 (45–120) mL/min correlated with the creatinine (Cr) Cl (r² = 0.35, p = 0.033).

After 5 days (N = 7) although V_ss remained stable, a decrease in the proportion of the peripheral compartment (V_ss2) was found, from 61.3 (42.5-88.5)% to 51.7 (36.6-73.1)%. No drug accumulation was noted.

Conclusions

In this cohort of septic, unselected, critically ill patients, large meropenem PK heterogeneity was noted, although neither underdosing nor accumulation was found. However, Cr Cl correlated to meropenem Cl and the V_ss2 decreased with patient’s improvement.

Can changes in renal function predict variations in β-lactam concentrations in septic patients?

This study investigated whether variations in creatinine clearance (CLCr) are correlated with changes in β-lactam concentrations or pharmacokinetics in septic patients. Data for 56 adult patients admitted to the ICU in whom routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of broad-spectrum β-lactams (ceftazidime, cefepime, piperacillin or meropenem) was performed were reviewed. Patients were included if they had at least two TDM during their ICU stay for the same antibiotic and were not concomitantly treated with any extracorporeal replacement therapy. Serum drug concentrations were measured by HPLC-UV. Antibiotic pharmacokinetics were calculated using a one-compartment model and the percentage of time spent above four times the MIC (%T>4×MIC) for Pseudomonas aeruginosa and the antibiotic clearance (ATB-CL) were obtained. CLCr was measured on the same day as the TDM using 24-h urine collection. The %T>4×MIC and ATB-CL were significantly correlated with CLCr at the first (r=-0.41, P=0.002; r=0.56, P<0.001, respectively) and second (r=-0.61, P<0.001; r=0.63, P<0.001, respectively) TDM. However, changes in ATB-CL were only weakly correlated with changes in CLCr (r=0.34, P=0.01). The proportion of patients with insufficient β-lactam concentrations at the first and second TDM were 39% and 30%, respectively, and increased proportionally to CLCr. Although CLCr was significantly correlated with concentrations and clearance of broad-spectrum β-lactams, changes in CLCr did not reliably predict variations in drug pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics. Routine TDM should be considered to adapt β-lactam doses in this setting.

Imipenem and meropenem: Comparison of in vitro activity, pharmacokinetics, clinical trials and adverse effects

OBJECTIVE

To compare and contrast imipenem and meropenem in terms of in vitro activity, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and adverse effects.

DATA SELECTION

MEDLINE search from 1975 to 1997 and follow-up of references.

DATA EXTRACTION

Clinical trials comparing imipenem with meropenem, or either imipenem or meropenem with standard therapy in the treatment of serious infections were selected.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Imipenem, the first carbapenem, was first marketed in 1987; meropenem was introduced to the market in 1996. In general, imipenem is more active against Gram-positive cocci while meropenem is more active against Gram-negative bacilli. The agents display similar pharmacokinetics. Clinical studies in patients with serious infections (intra-abdominal infection, respiratory infection, septicemia, febrile neutropenia) report similar bacteriological and clinical cure rates with imipenem and meropenem. Meropenem is approved for the treatment of bacterial meningitis, whereas imipenem is not. Adverse effects are similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Current literature supports the use of imipenem at a dose of 500 mg every 6 h and meropenem at 1 g every 8 h for the treatment of severe infections. For the treatment of serious infections, imipenem (500 mg every 6 h or 2 g/day [$98/day]) is more economical than meropenem (1 g every 8 h or 3 g/day [$142/day]) based on acquisition cost.

Antibiotics in critically ill patients: a systematic review of the pharmacokinetics of β-lactams

INTRODUCTION

Several reports have shown marked heterogeneity of antibiotic pharmacokinetics (PK) in patients admitted to ICUs, which might potentially affect outcomes. Therefore, the pharmacodynamic (PD) parameter of the efficacy of β-lactam antibiotics, that is, the time that its concentration is above the bacteria minimal inhibitory concentration (T > MIC), cannot be safely extrapolated from data derived from the PK of healthy volunteers.

METHODS

We performed a full review of published studies addressing the PK of intravenous β-lactam antibiotics given to infected ICU patients. Study selection comprised a comprehensive bibliographic search of the PubMed database and bibliographic references in relevant reviews from January 1966 to December 2010. We selected only English-language articles reporting studies addressing β-lactam antibiotics that had been described in at least five previously published studies. Studies of the PK of patients undergoing renal replacement therapy were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 57 studies addressing six different β-lactam antibiotics (meropenem, imipenem, piperacillin, cefpirome, cefepime and ceftazidime) were selected. Significant PK heterogeneity was noted, with a broad, more than twofold variation both of volume of distribution and of drug clearance (Cl). The correlation of antibiotic Cl with creatinine clearance was usually reported. Consequently, in ICU patients, β-lactam antibiotic half-life and T > MIC were virtually unpredictable, especially in those patients with normal renal function. A better PD profile was usually obtained by prolonged or even continuous infusion. Tissue penetration was also found to be compromised in critically ill patients with septic shock.

CONCLUSIONS

The PK of β-lactam antibiotics are heterogeneous and largely unpredictable in ICU patients. Consequently, the dosing of antibiotics should be supported by PK concepts, including data derived from studies of the PK of ICU patients and therapeutic drug monitoring.

Meropenem: a review of its use in the treatment of serious bacterial infections

Meropenem (Merrem, Meronem) is a broad-spectrum antibacterial agent of the carbapenem family, indicated as empirical therapy prior to the identification of causative organisms, or for disease caused by single or multiple susceptible bacteria in both adults and children with a broad range of serious infections. Meropenem is approved for use in complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) and bacterial meningitis (in paediatric patients aged > or = 3 months) in the US, and in most other countries for nosocomial pneumonia, cIAI, septicaemia, febrile neutropenia, cSSSI, bacterial meningitis, complicated urinary tract infection (UTI), obstetric and gynaecological infections, in cystic fibrosis patients with pulmonary exacerbations, and for the treatment of severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Meropenem has a broad spectrum of in vitro activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens, including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)- and AmpC-producing Enterobacteriaceae. It has similar efficacy to comparator antibacterial agents, including: imipenem/cilastatin in cIAI, cSSSI, febrile neutropenia, complicated UTI, obstetric or gynaecological infections and severe CAP; clindamycin plus tobramycin or gentamicin in cIAI or obstetric/gynaecological infections; cefotaxime plus metronidazole in cIAI; cefepime and ceftazidime plus amikacin in septicaemia or febrile neutropenia; and ceftazidime, clarithromycin plus ceftriaxone or amikacin in severe CAP. Meropenem has also shown similar efficacy to cefotaxime in paediatric and adult patients with bacterial meningitis, and to ceftazidime when both agents were administered with or without tobramycin in patients with cystic fibrosis experiencing acute pulmonary exacerbations. Meropenem showed greater efficacy than ceftazidime or piperacillin/tazobactam in febrile neutropenia, and greater efficacy than ceftazidime plus amikacin or tobramycin in patients with nosocomial pneumonia. Meropenem is well tolerated and has the advantage of being suitable for administration as an intravenous bolus or infusion. Its low propensity for inducing seizures means that it is suitable for treating bacterial meningitis and is the only carbapenem approved in this indication. Thus, meropenem continues to be an important option for the empirical treatment of serious bacterial infections in hospitalized patients.

Pharmacokinetics of meropenem determined by microdialysis in the peritoneal fluid of patients with severe peritonitis associated with septic shock

Our objective was to describe the pharmacokinetics of meropenem in the peritoneal fluid (PF) of six patients with severe peritonitis and septic shock and to relate measured concentrations to the minimum inhibitory concentration of bacteria. Microdialysis catheters were placed into the peritoneal space during surgery. Meropenem concentrations in plasma and in PF were analyzed using compartmental modeling. Meropenem areas under the concentration-time curve were lower in PF than in plasma (average ratio, 73.8+/-15%) because of degradation confirmed ex vivo. Compartment modeling with elimination from a peripheral compartment described the data adequately, and was used to simulate steady-state concentration profiles in plasma and PF during various dosing regimens. At the currently recommended dosing regimen of 1 g infused over 20 min every 8 h, PF concentrations of meropenem in patients with severe peritonitis associated with septic shock reach values sufficient for antibacterial effects against susceptible, but not always against intermediately susceptible, bacteria.

Meropenem and continuous renal replacement therapy: in vitro permeability of 2 continuous renal replacement therapy membranes and influence of patient renal function on the pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients

The pharmacokinetics of meropenem were characterized in 20 patients with different degrees of renal function who underwent continuous renal replacement therapy. Previously, no differences were detected in vitro in the removal of meropenem by continuous venovenous hemofiltration or continuous venovenous hemodialysis or when AN69 or polysulfone membranes were compared. In patients, no significant differences in the sieving coefficient or the saturation coefficient with the renal function were found, and the mean sieving coefficient/saturation coefficient value (0.80 +/- 0.12) was similar to the unbound fraction (0.79 +/- 0.08). An increase in total clearance and a decrease in elimination half-life were observed to the extent that the patient's creatinine clearance was higher. Likewise, the contribution of continuous renal replacement therapy to total clearance diminished in patients with less renal impairment. The results suggest that the renal function of the patient may influence meropenem pharmacokinetics during continuous renal replacement therapy. The lower trough plasma levels observed in nonrenal patients would not lead to adequate time during which serum drug concentrations are above the minimum inhibitory concentration values in many infections.

Comparison of pharmacodynamic target attainment between healthy subjects and patients for ceftazidime and meropenem

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the pharmacodynamics of two beta-lactams--ceftazidime and meropenem--in healthy subjects versus patients.

DESIGN

Monte Carlo simulation based on published pharmacokinetic studies.

SUBJECTS

One hundred and ninety-seven participants (75 healthy volunteers and 122 patients) from published pharmacokinetic studies of ceftazidime or meropenem.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Data on total body clearance and volume of distribution for ceftazidime and meropenem in healthy subjects and patients were obtained from published studies. Monte Carlo simulations were performed based on the pharmacokinetics from each study for ceftazidime 1000 mg every 8 hours and meropenem 1000 mg every 8 hours against isolates of Escherichia coli , Klebsiella pneumoniae , Acinetobacter baumannii , and Pseudomonas aeruginosa collected from North and South America. We calculated the likelihood of obtaining bactericidal exposures (50% time above the minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] for ceftazidime and 40% time above the MIC for meropenem) for each combination of pharmacokinetic study data and MIC distribution. Linear regression was used to compare target attainments for healthy subjects versus patients. Only three drug-pathogen combinations differed in target attainment between healthy subjects and patients: ceftazidime against P. aeruginosa in North America and meropenem against E. coli and P. aeruginosa in South America. The regression line of target attainment for patients versus healthy subjects had a slope of 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.983-1.093) and a y intercept of -3.73 (95% CI -8.265-0.827, r2 = 0.992). The beta values for slope and intercept did not differ to a statistically significant extent between the regression line and the line of identity (p=0.264).

CONCLUSION

The pharmacodynamic target attainment calculated with healthy subject pharmacokinetic data was predictive of patient target target attainment for ceftazidime and meropenem.

Evaluation by monte carlo simulation of the pharmacokinetics of two doses of meropenem administered intermittently or as a continuous infusion in healthy volunteers

Meropenem is a broad-spectrum carbapenem antibacterial agent. In order to optimize levels in plasma relative to the MICs, the ideal dose level and dosage regimen need to be determined. The pharmacokinetics of meropenem were studied in two groups, each comprising eight healthy volunteers who received the following doses: 500 mg as an intravenous infusion over 30 min three times a day (t.i.d.) versus a 250-mg loading dose followed by a 1,500 mg continuous infusion over 24 h for group A and 1,000 mg as an intravenous infusion over 30 min t.i.d. versus a 500-mg loading dose followed by a 3,000-mg continuous infusion over 24 h for group B. Meropenem concentrations in plasma and urine were determined by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry and high-performance liquid chromatography with UV detection, respectively. Pharmacokinetic calculations were done by use of a two-compartment open model, and the data were extrapolated by Monte Carlo simulations for 10,000 simulated subjects for pharmacodynamic evaluation. There were no significant differences in total clearance and renal clearance between group A and group B or between the intermittent treatment and the continuous infusion. The analyses of the probability of target attainment by MIC for the high- and low-dose continuous infusions were robust up to MICs of 4 mg/liter and 2 mg/liter, respectively. The corresponding values for intermittent infusions were only 0.5 mg/liter and 0.25 mg/liter. When these observations were correlated with MICs obtained from the MYSTIC database, intermittent infusion results in adequate activity against two of the most common nosocomially acquired pathogens, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Enterobacter cloacae. However, against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, the evaluation shows a clear advantage of high-dose therapy administered as a continuous infusion. We believe that in the empirical therapy situation, the continuous-infusion mode of administration is most worth the extra efforts. We conclude that clinical trials for evaluation of the continuous infusions of meropenem in critically ill patients are warranted.

Determination of meropenem in plasma and filtrate-dialysate from patients under continuous veno-venous haemodiafiltration by SPE-LC

Meropenem, a carbapenem antibiotic displaying a broad spectrum of antibacterial activity, is administered in Medical Intensive Care Unit to critically ill patients undergoing continuous veno-venous haemodiafiltration (CVVHDF). However, there are limited data available to substantial rational dosing decisions in this condition. In an attempt to refine our knowledge and propose a rationally designed dosage regimen, we have developed a HPLC method to determine meropenem after solid-phase extraction (SPE) of plasma and dialysate fluids obtained from patients under CVVHDF. The assay comprises the simultaneous measurement of meropenem's open-ring metabolite UK-1a, whose fate has never been studied in CVVHDF patients. The clean-up procedure involved a SPE on C18 cartridge. Matrix components were eliminated with phosphate buffer pH 7.4 followed by 15:85 MeOH-phosphate buffer pH 7.4. Meropenem and UK-1a were subsequently desorbed with MeOH. The eluates were evaporated under nitrogen at room temperature (RT) and reconstituted in phosphate buffer pH 7.4. Separation was performed at RT on a Nucleosil 100-5 microm C18 AB cartridge column (125 x 4 mm I.D.) equipped with a guard column (8 x 4 mm I.D.) with UV-DAD detection set at 208 nm. The mobile phase was 1 ml min(-1), using a step-wise gradient elution program: %MeOH/0.005 M tetrabutylammonium chloride pH 7.4; 10/90-50/50 in 27 min. Over the range of 5-100 microg ml(-1), the regression coefficient of the calibration curves (plasma and dialysate) were >0.998. The absolute extraction recoveries of meropenem and UK-1a in plasma and filtrate-dialysate were stable and ranged from 88-93 to 72-77% for meropenem, and from 95-104 to 75-82% for UK-1a. In plasma and filtrate-dialysate, respectively, the mean intra-assay precision was 4.1 and 2.6% for meropenem and 4.2 and 3.7% for UK-1a. The inter-assay variability was 2.8 and 3.6% for meropenem and 2.3 and 2.8% for UK-1a. The accuracy was satisfactory for both meropenem and UK-1a with deviation never exceeding 9.0% of the nominal concentrations. The stability of meropenem, studied in biological samples left at RT and at +4 degrees C, was satisfactory with < 5% degradation after 1.5 h in blood but reached 22% in filtrate-dialysate samples stored at RT for 8 h, precluding accurate measurements of meropenem excreted unchanged in the filtrate-dialysate left at RT during the CVVHDF procedure. The method reported here enables accurate measurements of meropenem in critically ill patients under CVVHDF, making dosage individualisation possible in such patients. The levels of the metabolite UK-1a encountered in this population of patients were higher than those observed in healthy volunteers but was similar to those observed in patients with renal impairment under hemodialysis.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of meropenem in critically ill patients

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of meropenem were investigated in 14 critically ill patients with sepsis. Patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) higher than 50 ml/min received 1 g meropenem three times daily (Group I) and patients with CrCl lower than 50 ml/min received 1 g meropenem twice daily (Group II). Meropenum concentrations in plasma were determined by high performance liquid chromatography with UV detection. The pharmacokinetic parameters differed between the two groups as follows, Group I, maximal concentration 56.3 +/- 19.1 microg/ml; trough concentration 3.3 +/- 2.5 microg/ml; elimination half life 2.5 +/- 1.2 h; clearance (Cl) 155.8 +/- 40.6 ml/min; MRT 2.2 +/- 0.4 h; steady state volume of distribution (V(ss)) 21.7 +/- 5.7 l, and AUC(-8) 119.4 +/- 32.6 microg/ml h. Group II, maximal concentration 71.1 +/- 5.1 microg/ml; trough concentration 3.4 +/- 1.8 microg/ml; elimination half life 3.9 +/- 1.6 h; Cl 77.7 +/- 15.8 ml/min; MRT 3.5 +/- 0.6 h; V(ss), 17.1 +/- 2.1 l, and AUC(0-12) 230.2 +/- 43.3 microg/ml h. The most frequently isolated bacteria from blood and wound infections were Acinetobacter baumanii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli; their meropenem minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) ranged from 0.064 to 3.0 mg/l. In most cases the pharmacodynamic parameters, measured as T>MIC index, were higher than 75%. In both groups, patients with susceptible pathogens (MIC<1 mg/l) had meropenem plasma levels which exceeded the MIC for the whole dosing interval. When pathogens were highly resistant (A. baumanii or P. aeruginosa) the T>MIC indices were lower.

Meropenem: an updated review of its use in the management of intra-abdominal infections

Meropenem is a carbapenem antibacterial agent with a broad spectrum of activity which encompasses gram-negative, gram-positive and anaerobic bacteria. Like other carbapenems, meropenem is stable against chromosomal and extended-spectrum beta-lactamases. In patients with moderate to severe intra-abdominal infections, empirical monotherapy with meropenem achieved clinical response rates ranging from 91 to 100% in 7 randomised comparative trials. Efficacy rates were similar to those of imipenem/cilastatin (94 to 97%), clindamycin plus tobramycin (93%) and, overall, to cefotaxime plus metronidazole (75 to 100%), although there were differences between trials versus this combination regimen. According to limited data, meropenem also achieved clinical response rates of over 80% in patients with severe intra-abdominal infections. Meropenem is well tolerated, the most common adverse events being diarrhoea, rash, nausea/vomiting and inflammation at the injection site which are reported in <2.5% of patients each. Meropenem also has an improved CNS tolerability profile compared with imipenem/cilastatin.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive comparative clinical data demonstrate that meropenem can be used effectively as empirical monotherapy in moderate to severe intra-abdominal infections. It also shows potential in the most severe forms of infection, although experience in this infection type remains limited. Compared with standard combination regimens, meropenem offers the benefits of ease of administration without the need for monitoring. It also offers improved CNS tolerability compared with imipenem/cilastatin with the option of a higher maximum dosage, which may be a particular advantage in patients with severe intra-abdominal infections.

Teicoplanin therapy for Staphylococcus aureus septicaemia: relationship between pre-dose serum concentrations and outcome

Logistic regression analysis was performed on data drawn from a clinical trials database for Staphylococcus aureus septicaemia treated with teicoplanin. Variables analysed were age, body weight, mean pre-dose and post-dose serum teicoplanin concentrations, mean dose (mg or mg/kg body weight) and combination versus monotherapy. Only two variables correlated with clinical outcome at a significance level better than 0.05: age (P = 0.012) and mean pre-dose serum concentration (P = 0.010). The probability of successful treatment declined with age and increased with mean pre-dose serum concentration.

Pharmacokinetics of meropenem in intensive care unit patients receiving continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or hemodiafiltration

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate an intravenous meropenem dosage regimen in adult intensive care patients with acute renal failure treated by continuous renal replacement therapy.

DESIGN

A prospective, clinical study.

SETTING

General intensive care unit of a university hospital.

PATIENTS

Ten critically ill adult patients being treated with meropenem and receiving continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (hemofiltration rates, 1-2 L/hr) (n = 5) or continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (hemofiltration rates, 1-1.5 L/hr; dialysis rates, 1-1.5 L/hr) (n = 5) via a polyacrylonitrile hollow fiber 0.9-m2 filter.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients received a meropenem dose of 1 g iv every 12 hrs as a 5-min bolus.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Meropenem concentrations were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography in serum taken at timed intervals and in ultrafiltrate/dialysate to determine serum concentration-time profiles, derive pharmacokinetic variable estimates, and determine sieving coefficients and filter clearances. The serum concentrations were examined to see whether they were above the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) for pathogens that may be encountered in intensive care patients. Serum concentrations exceeded 4 mg/L (MIC90 for Pseudomonas aeruginosa) during 67% of the dosage period in all patients. Sub-MIC90 concentrations were obtained in three patients immediately before treatment and in one patient 12 hrs after treatment. Mean (SD) (n = 10) pharmacokinetic variable estimates were as follows: elimination half-life, 5.16 hrs (1.83 hrs); volume of distribution, 0.35 L/kg (0.10 L/kg); and total clearance, 4.30 L/hr (1.38 L/hr). A sieving coefficient of 0.93 (0.06) (n = 9) indicated free flow across the filter. The fraction cleared by the extracorporeal route was 48% (13%) (n = 9), which is clinically important.

CONCLUSIONS

A meropenem dose of 1g iv every 12 hrs provides adequate serum concentrations in the majority of patients receiving continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or continuous venovenous hemofiltration with a 0.9-m2 polyacrylonitrile filter at combined ultrafiltrate/dialysate flow rates of up to 3 L/hr. A lower dose would not be sufficient for the empirical treatment of potentially life-threatening infections in all patients.

Use of meropenem 3 g once daily for outpatient treatment of infective exacerbations of bronchiectasis

Meropenem administered as a single iv 3 g dose once every 24 h was used to treat nine ambulatory patients with infective exacerbations of bronchiectasis. Serum meropenem concentrations were measured before dosing and at 30 min after each 30 min infusion. Mean pre-dose concentrations were <0.1 mg/L and mean post-dose concentrations 93.9 +/- 29.5 mg/L (95% confidence interval (CI) 86. 2-101.6, n = 59). A pathogen was cultured from sputum in six patients and eradicated (<100 cfu/g sputum) in all but one by day 6 of therapy. Previous work on animals has shown that a bacteriostatic effect is seen with meropenem when t > MIC is greater than 20-30% of the dose interval. In these nine patients, this could be achieved and was associated with successful outcome for pathogens for which MICs are </= 0.5 mg/L. Therefore, once-a-day meropenem therapy may be a useful option for outpatient treatment for isolates for which MICs are </= 0.5 mg/L.

Reevaluation of interpretive criteria for Haemophilus influenzae by using meropenem (10-microgram), imipenem (10-microgram), and ampicillin (2- and 10-microgram) disks

A collection of 300 Haemophilus influenzae clinical strains was used to assess in vitro susceptibility to carbapenems (meropenem, imipenem) by MIC and disk diffusion methods and to compare disk diffusion test results with two potencies of ampicillin disks (2 and 10 micrograms). The isolates included ampicillin-susceptible or- intermediate (167 strains), beta-lactamase-positive (117 strains), and beta-lactamase-negative ampicillin-resistant (BLNAR; 16 strains) organisms. Disk diffusion testing was performed with 10-micrograms meropenem disks from two manufacturers. Meropenem was highly active against H. influenzae strains (MIC50, 0.06 microgram/ml; MIC90, 0.25 microgram/ml; MIC50 and MIC90, MICs at which 50 and 90%, respectively, of strains are inhibited) and was 8- to 16-fold more potent than imipenem (MIC50, 1 microgram/ml; MIC90, 2 micrograms/ml). Five non-imipenem-susceptible strains were identified (MIC, 8 micrograms/ml), but the disk diffusion test indicated susceptibility (zone diameters, 18 to 21 mm). MIC values of meropenem, doxycycline, ceftazidime, and ceftriaxone for BLNAR strains were two- to fourfold greater than those for other strains. The performance of both meropenem disks was comparable and considered acceptable. A single susceptible interpretive zone diameter of > or = 17 mm (MIC, < = or 4 micrograms/ml) was proposed for meropenem. Testing with the 2-micrograms ampicillin disk was preferred because of an excellent correlation between MIC values and zone diameters (r = 0.94) and superior interpretive accuracy with the susceptible criteria at > or = 17 mm (MIC, < or = 1 microgram/ml) and the resistant criteria at < or = 13 mm (MIC, > or = 4 micrograms/ml). Among the BLNAR strains tested, 81.3% were miscategorized as susceptible or intermediate when the 10-micrograms ampicillin disk was used, while the 2-micrograms disk produced only minor interpretive errors (12.5%). Use of these criteria for testing H. influenzae against meropenem and ampicillin should maximize reference test and standardized disk diffusion test performance with the Haemophilus Test Medium. The imipenem disk diffusion test appears compromised and should be used with caution for detecting strains for which imipenem MICs are elevated.