Pharmacokinetics of a loading dose of amikacin in septic patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy.

Data on the optimal amikacin regimen during continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) are scarce and the proposed loading dose of 10mg/kg may result in inadequate drug levels. The aim of this study was to describe the pharmacokinetics of a 25 mg/kg first dose of amikacin in septic shock patients treated with CRRT. Serum samples were collected before (t=0 h) and at 1 (peak), 1.5, 4.5, 8 and 24 h after a 30-min amikacin infusion in 13 consecutive patients treated with a combination of amikacin and ß-lactam. Blood amikacin levels were measured using a validated fluorescence polarisation immunoassay method. In 9 patients (69%) the peak concentration was >64 mg/L, which corresponds to eight times the minimal inhibitory concentration breakpoints defined by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) for Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (susceptible <8 mg/L, resistant >16 mg/L). The median (range) total volume of distribution was 0.50 L/kg (0.22-4.05 L/kg), the elimination half-life was 6.5h (4.5-279.6h) and total drug clearance (CL) was 1.26 mL/min/kg (0.1-3.30 mL/min/kg). Only three patients had drug concentrations at 24h (C(min)) of <5mg/L and the median predicted time needed to reach this value was 34 h (14-76 h). There was no correlation between CRRT parameters and C(min), CL or the time to C(min)<5mg/L. In septic shock patients treated with CRRT, a first dose of ≥ 25 mg/kg amikacin is therefore required to reach therapeutic peak concentrations. However, as drug clearance is reduced, amikacin concentrations remained above the threshold of renal toxicity at 24h. The therapeutic benefit of high-dose aminoglycoside therapy should be balanced with its potential renal effects in septic patients receiving CRRT.

Insufficient ß-lactam concentrations in the early phase of severe sepsis and septic shock.

INTRODUCTION: Altered pharmacokinetics (PK) in critically ill patients can result in insufficient serum ß-lactam concentrations when standard dosages are administered. Previous studies on ß-lactam PK have generally excluded the most severely ill patients, or were conducted during the steady-state period of treatment. The aim of our study was to determine whether the first dose of piperacillin-tazobactam, ceftazidime, cefepime, and meropenem would result in adequate serum drug concentrations in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. METHODS: Open, prospective, multicenter study in four Belgian intensive care units. All consecutive patients with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock, in whom treatment with the study drugs was indicated, were included. Serum concentrations of the antibiotics were determined by high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) before and 1, 1.5, 4.5 and 6 or 8 hours after administration. RESULTS: 80 patients were treated with piperacillin-tazobactam (n = 27), ceftazidime (n = 18), cefepime (n = 19) or meropenem (n = 16). Serum concentrations remained above 4 times the minimal inhibitory concentration (T > 4 × MIC), corresponding to the clinical breakpoint for Pseudomonas aeruginosa defined by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), for 57% of the dosage interval for meropenem (target MIC = 8 µg/mL), 45% for ceftazidime (MIC = 32 µg/mL), 34% for cefepime (MIC = 32 µg/mL), and 33% for piperacillin-tazobactam (MIC = 64 µg/mL). The number of patients who attained the target PK profile was 12/16 for meropenem (75%), 5/18 for ceftazidime (28%), 3/19 (16%) for cefepime, and 12/27 (44%) for piperacillin-tazobactam. CONCLUSIONS: Serum concentrations of the antibiotic after the first dose were acceptable only for meropenem. Standard dosage regimens for piperacillin-tazobactam, ceftazidime and cefepime may, therefore, be insufficient to empirically cover less susceptible pathogens in the early phase of severe sepsis and septic shock.