Effects of robotic-assisted early mobilization versus conventional mobilization in intensive care unit patients: prospective interventional cohort study with retrospective control group analysis.

BACKGROUND: Approximately one in three survivors of critical illness suffers from intensive-care-unit-acquired weakness, which increases mortality and impairs quality of life. By counteracting immobilization, a known risk factor, active mobilization may mitigate its negative effects on patients. In this single-center trial, the effect of robotic-assisted early mobilization in the intensive care unit (ICU) on patients' outcomes was investigated. METHODS: We enrolled 16 adults scheduled for lung transplantation to receive 20 min of robotic-assisted mobilization and verticalization twice daily during their first week in the ICU (intervention group: IG). A control group (CG) of 13 conventionally mobilized patients after lung transplantation was recruited retrospectively. Outcome measures included the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, muscle parameters evaluated by ultrasound, and quality of life after three months. RESULTS: During the first week in the ICU, the intervention group received a median of 6 (interquartile range 3-8) robotic-assisted sessions of early mobilization and verticalization. There were no statistically significant differences in the duration of mechanical ventilation (IG: median 126 vs. CG: 78 h), length of ICU stay, muscle parameters evaluated by ultrasound, and quality of life after three months between the IG and CG. CONCLUSION: In this study, robotic-assisted mobilization was successfully implemented in the ICU setting. No significant differences in patients' outcomes were observed between conventional and robotic-assisted mobilization. However, randomized and larger studies are necessary to validate the adequacy of robotic mobilization in other cohorts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This single-center interventional trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov as NCT05071248 on 27/08/2021.

Robot-assisted early mobilization for intensive care unit patients: Feasibility and first-time clinical use.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilization is only carried out to a limited extent in the intensive care unit. To address this issue, the robotic assistance system VEMOTION® was developed to facilitate (early) mobilization measures more easily. This paper describes the first integration of robotic assistance systems in acute clinical intensive care units. OBJECTIVE: Feasibility test of robotic assistance in early mobilization of intensive care patients in routine clinical practice. SETTING: Two intensive care units guided by anesthesiology at a German university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who underwent elective surgery with postoperative treatment in the intensive care unit and had an estimated ventilation time over 48 h. METHODS: Participants underwent robot-assisted mobilization, scheduled for twenty-minute sessions twice a day, ten times or one week, conducted by nursing staff under actual operational conditions on the units. No randomization or blinding took place. We assessed data regarding feasible cutoff points (in brackets): the possibility of enrollment (x ≥ 50 %), duration (pre- and post-setup (x ≤ 25 min), therapy duration (x = 20 min), and intervention-related parameters (number of mobilizing professionals (x ≤ 2), intensity of training, events that led to adverse events, errors or discontinuation). Mobilizing professionals rated each mobilization regarding their physical stress (x ≤ 3) and feasibility (x ≥ 4) on a 7 Point Likert Scale. An estimated sample size of at least twenty patients was calculated. We analyzed the data descriptively. RESULTS: Within 6 months, we screened thirty-two patients for enrollment. 23 patients were included in the study and 16 underwent mobilization using robotic assistance, 7 dropped out (enrollment eligibility = 69 %). On average, 1.9 nurses were involved per therapy unit. Participants received 5.6 robot-assisted mobilizations in mean. Pre- and post-setup had a mean duration of 18 min, therapy a mean of 21 min. The robot-assisted mobilization was started after a median of 18 h after admission to the intensive care unit. We documented two adverse events (pain), twelve errors in handling, and seven unexpected events that led to interruptions or discontinuation. No serious adverse events occurred. The mobilizing nurses rated their physical stress as low (mean 2.0 ±â€¯1.3) and the intervention as feasible (mean 5.3 ±â€¯1.6). CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted mobilization was feasible, but specific safety measures should be implemented to prevent errors. Robotic-assisted mobilization requires process adjustments and consideration of unit staffing levels, as the intervention does not save staff resources or time. REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.org TRN: NCT05071248; Date: 2021/10/08; URL https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05071248. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Robot-assisted early mobilization in intensive care patients is feasible and no adverse event occurred.

Extracorporeal adsorption of protective and toxic bile acids and bilirubin in patients with cholestatic liver dysfunction: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The release of toxic bile acids (BAs) in the blood of critically ill patients with cholestatic liver dysfunction might lead to the damage of various organs. Their extracorporeal elimination using the cytokine adsorber Cytosorb® (CS) (adsorption of especially hydrophobic molecules < 60 kDa) might be promising, but data proving a potential adsorption are missing so far. METHODS: The prospective Cyto-SOVLE study (NCT04913298) included 20 intensive care patients with cholestatic liver dysfunction, continuous kidney replacement therapy, total bilirubin concentration > 10 mg/dl and the application of CS into the dialysis circuit. Bilirubin and different BAs were measured pre- and post-CS at defined timepoints (10 min, 1, 3, 6, and 12 h after initiation). Relative reduction (RR, %) was calculated with: [Formula: see text]. RESULTS: The median RR for total and conjugated bilirubin after initiation was - 31.8% and - 30.3%, respectively, and decreased to - 4.5% and - 4.8% after 6 h. A high initial RR was observed for the toxic BAs GCA (- 97.4%), TCA (- 94.9%), GCDCA (- 82.5%), and TCDCA (- 86.0%), decreasing after 6 h to - 32.9%, - 32.7%, - 12.8%, and - 14.3%, respectively. The protective hydrophilic BAs showed a comparable RR after initiation (UDCA: - 77.7%, GUDCA: - 83.0%, TUDCA: - 91.3%) dropping after 6 h to - 7.4%, - 8.5%, and - 12.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cytosorb® can adsorb bilirubin and toxic as well as protective BAs. However, a fast saturation of the adsorber resulting in a rapid decrease of the RR was observed. Furthermore, no relevant difference between hydrophobic toxic and hydrophilic protective BAs was detected regarding the adsorption amount. The clinical benefit or harm of the BA adsorption needs to be evaluated in the future.

The effect of cytosorb® application on kidney recovery in critically ill patients with severe rhabdomyolysis: a propensity score matching analysis.

Severe rhabdomyolysis frequently results in acute kidney injury (AKI) due to myoglobin accumulation with the need of kidney replacement therapy (KRT). The present study investigated whether the application of Cytosorb® (CS) led to an increased rate of kidney recovery in patients with KRT due to severe rhabdomyolysis. Adult patients with a myoglobin-concentration >10,000 ng/ml and KRT were included from 2014 to 2021. Exclusion criteria were chronic kidney disease and CS-treatment before study inclusion. Groups 1 and 2 were defined as KRT with and without CS, respectively. The primary outcome parameter was independence from KRT after 30 days. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed (predictors: myoglobin, SAPS-II, and age), and the chi2-test was used. 35 pairings could be matched (mean age: 57 vs. 56 years; mean myoglobin: 27,218 vs. 26,872 ng/ml; mean SAPS-II: 77 vs. 76). The probability of kidney recovery was significantly (p = .04) higher in group 1 (31.4 vs. 11.4%, mean difference: 20.0%, odds ratio (OR): 3.6). Considering patients who survived 30 days, kidney recovery was also significantly (p = .03) higher in patients treated with CS (61.1 vs. 23.5%, mean difference: 37.6%, OR: 5.1). In conclusion, the use of CS might positively affect renal recovery in patients with severe rhabdomyolysis. A prospective randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Towards model-informed precision dosing of piperacillin: multicenter systematic external evaluation of pharmacokinetic models in critically ill adults with a focus on Bayesian forecasting.

PURPOSE: Inadequate piperacillin (PIP) exposure in intensive care unit (ICU) patients threatens therapeutic success. Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) might be promising to individualize dosing; however, the transferability of published models to external populations is uncertain. This study aimed to externally evaluate the available PIP population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) models. METHODS: A multicenter dataset of 561 ICU patients (11 centers/3654 concentrations) was used for the evaluation of 24 identified models. Model performance was investigated for a priori (A) predictions, i.e., considering dosing records and patient characteristics only, and for Bayesian forecasting, i.e., additionally including the first (B1) or first and second (B2) therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) samples per patient. Median relative prediction error (MPE) [%] and median absolute relative prediction error (MAPE) [%] were calculated to quantify accuracy and precision. RESULTS: The evaluation revealed a large inter-model variability (A: MPE - 135.6-78.3% and MAPE 35.7-135.6%). Integration of TDM data improved all model predictions (B1/B2 relative improvement vs. A: |MPE|median_all_models 45.1/67.5%; MAPEmedian_all_models 29/39%). The model by Kim et al. was identified to be most appropriate for the total dataset (A/B1/B2: MPE - 9.8/- 5.9/- 0.9%; MAPE 37/27.3/23.7%), Udy et al. performed best in patients receiving intermittent infusion, and Klastrup et al. best predicted patients receiving continuous infusion. Additional evaluations stratified by sex and renal replacement therapy revealed further promising models. CONCLUSION: The predictive performance of published PIP models in ICU patients varied considerably, highlighting the relevance of appropriate model selection for MIPD. Our differentiated external evaluation identified specific models suitable for clinical use, especially in combination with TDM.

Cefepime Population Pharmacokinetics, Antibacterial Target Attainment, and Estimated Probability of Neurotoxicity in Critically Ill Patients.

Cefepime has been reported to cause concentration-related neurotoxicity, especially in critically ill patients with renal failure. This evaluation aimed to identify a dosing regimen providing a sufficient probability of target attainment (PTA) and the lowest justifiable risk of neurotoxicity in critically ill patients. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed based on plasma concentrations over four consecutive days obtained from 14 intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The patients received a median dose of 2,000 mg cefepime by 30-min intravenous infusions with dosing intervals of every 8 h (q8h) to q24h. A time that the free drug concentration exceeds the MIC over the dosing interval (fT>MIC) of 65% and an fT>2×MIC of 100% were defined as treatment targets. Monte Carlo simulations were carried out to identify a dosing regimen for a PTA of 90% and a probability of neurotoxicity not exceeding 20%. A two-compartment model with linear elimination best described the data. Estimated creatinine clearance was significantly related to the clearance of cefepime in nondialysis patients. Interoccasion variability on clearance improved the model, reflecting dynamic clearance changes. The evaluations suggested combining thrice-daily administration as an appropriate choice. In patients with normal renal function (creatinine clearance, 120 mL/min), for the pharmacodynamics target of 100% fT>2×MIC and a PTA of 90%, a dose of 1,333 mg q8h was found to be related to a probability of neurotoxicity of ≤20% and to cover MICs up to 2 mg/L. Continuous infusion appears to be superior to other dosing regimens by providing higher efficacy and a low risk of neurotoxicity. The model makes it possible to improve the predicted balance between cefepime efficacy and neurotoxicity in critically ill patients. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01793012).

Plasma and Cerebrospinal Fluid Population Pharmacokinetics of Vancomycin in Patients with External Ventricular Drain.

Vancomycin is a commonly used antibacterial agent in patients with primary central nervous system (CNS) infection. This study aims to examine predictors of vancomycin penetration into cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in patients with external ventricular drainage and the feasibility of CSF sampling from the distal drainage port for therapeutic drug monitoring. Fourteen adult patients (9 with primary CNS infection) were treated with vancomycin intravenously. The vancomycin concentrations in blood and CSF (from proximal [CSF_P] and distal [CSF_D] drainage ports) were evaluated by population pharmacokinetics. Model-based simulations were conducted to compare various infusion modes. A three-compartment model with first-order elimination best described the vancomycin data. Estimated parameters included clearance (CL, 4.53 L/h), central compartment volume (Vc, 24.0 L), apparent CSF compartment volume (VCSF, 0.445 L), and clearance between central and CSF compartments (QCSF, 0.00322 L/h and 0.00135 L/h for patients with and without primary CNS infection, respectively). Creatinine clearance was a significant covariate on vancomycin CL. CSF protein was the primary covariate to explain the variability of QCSF. There was no detectable difference between the data for sampling from the proximal and the distal port. Intermittent infusion and continuous infusion with a loading dose reached the CSF target concentration faster than continuous infusion only. All infusion schedules reached similar CSF trough concentrations. Beyond adjusting doses according to renal function, starting treatment with a loading dose in patients with primary CSF infection is recommended. Occasionally, very high and possibly toxic doses would be required to achieve adequate CSF concentrations, which calls for more investigation of direct intraventricular administration of vancomycin. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT04426383).

Systematic Evaluation of Pharmacokinetic Models for Model-Informed Precision Dosing of Meropenem in Critically Ill Patients Undergoing Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy.

The altered pharmacokinetics of renally cleared drugs such as meropenem in critically ill patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) might impact target attainment. Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) is applied to individualize meropenem dosing. However, most population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) models developed to date have not yet been evaluated for MIPD. Eight PopPK models based on adult CRRT patients were identified in a systematic literature research and encoded in NONMEM 7.4. A data set of 73 CRRT patients from two different study centers was used to evaluate the predictive performance of the models using simulation and prediction-based diagnostics for i) a priori dosing based on patient characteristics only and ii) Bayesian dosing by including the first measured trough concentration. Median prediction error (MPE) for accuracy within |20%| (95% confidence intervals including zero) and median absolute prediction error (MAPE) for precision ≤ 30% were considered clinically acceptable. For a priori dosing, most models (n = 5) showed accuracy and precision MPE within |20%| and MAPE <35%. The integration of the first measured meropenem concentration improved the predictive performance of all models (median MAPE decreased from 35.4 to 25.0%; median MPE decreased from 21.8 to 4.6%). The best predictive performance for intermittent infusion was observed for the O'Jeanson model, including residual diuresis as covariate (a priori and Bayesian dosing MPE within |2%|, MAPE <30%). Our study revealed the O'Jeanson model as the best-predicting model for intermittent infusion. However, most of the selected PopPK models are suitable for MIPD in CRRT patients when one therapeutic drug monitoring sample is available.

Hand hygiene compliance in the intensive care unit: Hand hygiene and glove changes.

BACKGROUND: Hand disinfection (HD) is known to be the single most effective prevention measure to avoid nosocomial infections, but the compliance rate (CR) remains low. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of HD opportunities and the CR during the treatment of critically ill patients. One special focus was on glove usage to determine whether gloves were substituted for HD. METHODS: This is a single-blinded direct observation of employees of an.ßintensive care unit. One specially educated observer recorded all hand hygiene indications over a period of 21 8-hour shifts as well as performed HD and study of glove use behavior. RESULTS: Over a period of 168.ßhours, 2,036 HDs should be performed during the care for 1 intensive care unit patient. In total, only 690 HDs occurred, resulting in a CR of 33.9%. With regard to the nurses, there was an HD opportunity around the clock every 6.ßminutes on average. About 17% of the total working time would have to be applied for 100% correct hand hygiene application. Donning or changing of gloves took place in 38.2% of all indications for HD. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that HD opportunities occur in high frequency during the treatment of critically ill patients. The compliance with HD remains too low, even when a 100% CR seems to be unachievable. Improvements should focus on aseptic procedures, combining the lowest CR with the highest procedural risk for the patient. The Healthcare Personal (HCP) uses gloves when an HD opportunity occurs. Implementing glove disinfection strategies in daily routine might help optimize patient care.

Barriers and facilitators in the implementation of mobilization robots in hospitals from the perspective of clinical experts and developers.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilization can help reduce severe side effects such as muscle atrophy that occur during hospitalization. However, due to time and staff shortages in intensive and critical care as well as safety risks for patients, it is often difficult to adhere to the recommended therapy time of twenty minutes twice a day. New robotic technologies might be one approach to achieve early mobilization effectively for patients and also relieve users from physical effort. Nevertheless, currently there is a lack of knowledge regarding the factors that are important for integrating of these technologies into complex treatment settings like intensive care units or rehabilitation units. METHODS: European experts from science, technical development and end-users of robotic systems (n = 13) were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guideline to identify barriers and facilitating factors for the integration of robotic systems into daily clinical practice. They were asked about structural, personnel and environmental factors that had an impact on integration and how they had solved challenges. A latent content analysis was performed regarding the COREQ criteria. RESULTS: We found relevant factors regarding the development, introduction, and routine of the robotic system. In this context, costs, process adjustments, a lack of exemptions, and a lack of support from the manufacturers/developers were identified as challenges. Easy handling, joint decision making between the end-users and the decision makers in the hospital, an accurate process design and the joint development of the robotic system of end-users and technical experts were found to be facilitating factors. CONCLUSION: The integration and preparation for the integration of robotic assistance systems into the inpatient setting is a complex intervention that involves many parties. This study provides evidence for hospitals or manufacturers to simplify the planning of integrations for permanent use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS-ID: DRKS00023848; registered 10/12/2020.

Robot-assisted early mobilization of intensive care patients: a feasibility study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilization positively influences the outcome of critically ill patients, yet in clinical practice, the implementation is sometimes challenging. In this study, an adaptive robotic assistance system will be used for early mobilization in intensive care units. The study aims to evaluate the experience of the mobilizing professionals and the general feasibility of implementing robotic assistance for mobilization in intensive care as well as the effects on patient outcomes as a secondary outcome. METHODS: The study is single-centric, prospective, and interventional and follows a longitudinal study design. To evaluate the feasibility of robotic-assisted early mobilization, the number of patients included, the number of performed VEM (very early mobilization) sessions, and the number and type of adverse events will be collected. The behavior and experience of mobilizing professionals will be evaluated using standardized observations (n > 90) and episodic interviews (n > 36) before implementation, shortly after, and in routine. Patient outcomes such as duration of mechanical ventilation, loss of muscle mass, and physical activity will be measured and compared with a historical patient population. Approximately 30 patients will be included. DISCUSSION: The study will provide information about patient outcomes, feasibility, and the experience of mobilizing professionals. It will show whether robotic systems can increase the early mobilization frequency of critically ill patients. Within ICU structures, early mobilization as therapy could become more of a focus. Effects on the mobilizing professionals such as increased motivation, physical relief, or stress will be evaluated. In addition, this study will focus on whether current structures allow following the recommendation of mobilizing patients twice a day for at least 20 min. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05071248 . Date: 2021/10/21.

Systematic Evaluation of Voriconazole Pharmacokinetic Models without Pharmacogenetic Information for Bayesian Forecasting in Critically Ill Patients.

Voriconazole (VRC) is used as first line antifungal agent against invasive aspergillosis. Model-based approaches might optimize VRC therapy. This study aimed to investigate the predictive performance of pharmacokinetic models of VRC without pharmacogenetic information for their suitability for model-informed precision dosing. Seven PopPK models were selected from a systematic literature review. A total of 66 measured VRC plasma concentrations from 33 critically ill patients was employed for analysis. The second measurement per patient was used to calculate relative Bias (rBias), mean error (ME), relative root mean squared error (rRMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) (i) only based on patient characteristics and dosing history (a priori) and (ii) integrating the first measured concentration to predict the second concentration (Bayesian forecasting). The a priori rBias/ME and rRMSE/MAE varied substantially between the models, ranging from -15.4 to 124.6%/-0.70 to 8.01 mg/L and from 89.3 to 139.1%/1.45 to 8.11 mg/L, respectively. The integration of the first TDM sample improved the predictive performance of all models, with the model by Chen (85.0%) showing the best predictive performance (rRMSE: 85.0%; rBias: 4.0%). Our study revealed a certain degree of imprecision for all investigated models, so their sole use is not recommendable. Models with a higher performance would be necessary for clinical use.

Ecological effects of selective oral decontamination on multidrug-resistance bacteria acquired in the intensive care unit: a case-control study over 5 years.

PURPOSE: This case-control study investigated the long-term evolution of multidrug-resistant bacteria (MDRB) over a 5-year period associated with the use of selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) in the intensive care unit (ICU). In addition, effects on health care-associated infections and ICU mortality were analysed. METHODS: We investigated patients undergoing mechanical ventilation > 48 h in 11 adult ICUs located at 3 campuses of a university hospital. Administrative, clinical, and microbiological data which were routinely recorded electronically served as the basis. We analysed differences in the rates and incidence densities (ID, cases per 1000 patient-days) of MDRB associated with SOD use in all patients and stratified by patient origin (outpatient or inpatient). After propensity score matching, health-care infections and ICU mortality were compared. RESULTS: 5034 patients were eligible for the study. 1694 patients were not given SOD. There were no differences in the incidence density of MDRB when SOD was used, except for more vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (0.72/1000 days vs. 0.31/1000 days, p < 0.01), and fewer ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (0.22/1000 days vs. 0.56/1000 days, p < 0.01). After propensity score matching, SOD was associated with lower incidence rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia and death in the ICU but not with ICU-acquired bacteremia or urinary tract infection. CONCLUSIONS: Comparisons of the ICU-acquired MDRB over a 5-year period revealed no differences in incidence density, except for lower rate of ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae and higher rate of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium with SOD. Incidence rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia and death in the ICU were lower in patients receiving SOD.

[Therapeutic drug monitoring and pharmacokinetic models as a strategy for rational antibiotic therapy in intensive care patients]. / Therapeutisches Drugmonitoring und pharmakokinetische Modelle als Strategie zur rationalen Antibiotikatherapie bei IntensivpatientInnen.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Antibiotic dosing in intensive care patients is complex due to pharmacokinetic (PK) alterations. The aim of this article is to illustrate the role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) and PK models to individualize antibiotic dosing. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Guidelines and recommendations are discussed in the context of clinical practice and the prerequisites for routine TDM of different antibiotics are presented. In addition, the benefits and limitations of TDM are discussed. The advantages and disadvantages of TDM and PK models are described and the resulting future options are presented. RESULTS: In the clinical routine, the peak or trough concentrations of antibiotics in blood are measured depending on the antibiotic class. Prerequisites for a purposeful TDM are a coordinated blood sampling and a prompt reporting of findings. As target ranges are not uniformly defined following rules, dosage adjustments are difficult. The PK models offer a valid possibility to individualize the antibiotic therapy of intensive care patients. Areas of application are the calculation of the loading dose and the combination with TDM for treatment control. For whom and how often TDM is necessary and how it can best be combined with PK models or even replace them should be investigated in the future, in addition to evaluation of the optimal target area. CONCLUSION: The routine use of TDM for antibiotics in intensive care patients is only effective under the abovementioned conditions. By combination with PK models the treatment could be optimized in the future.

[Early mobilization in the intensive care unit-Are robot-assisted systems the future?] / Frühmobilisation auf der Intensivstation ­ Sind robotergestützte Systeme die Zukunft?

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU) acquired weakness is associated with reduced physical function, increased mortality and reduced quality of life, and affects about 43% of survivors of critical illness. Lacking therapeutic options, the prevention of known risk factors and implementation of early mobilization is essential. Robotic assistance devices are increasingly being studied in mobilization. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative review synthesizes the evidence of early mobilization in the ICU and focuses on the advantages of robotic assistance devices. RESULTS: Active mobilization should begin early during critical care. Interventions commencing 72 h after admission to the ICU are considered early. Mobilization interventions during critical care have been shown to be safe and reduce the time on mechanical ventilation in the ICU and the length of delirious episodes. Protocolized early mobilization interventions led to more active mobilization and increased functional independence and mobility at hospital discharge. In rehabilitation after stroke, robot-assisted training increases the chance of regaining independent walking ability, especially in more severely impaired patients, seems to be safe and increases muscle strength and quality of life in small trials. CONCLUSION: Early mobilization improves the outcome of the critically ill. Robotic devices support the gait training after stroke and are the subject of ongoing studies on early mobilization and verticalization in the intensive care setting.

Serum linezolid concentrations are reduced in critically ill patients with pulmonary infections: A prospective observational study.

RATIONALE: The concentration-time profile of linezolid varies considerably in critically ill patients. Question of interest is, if the site of infection influences linezolid serum concentrations. METHODS: 68 critically ill patients, treated with linezolid, were included. The concentration-time-profile for linezolid was determined using maximum a-posteriori predictions. A trough concentration (Cmin) between 2 and 10 mg/L was defined as the target. A generalized linear model (GLM) was established to evaluate potential covariates. RESULTS: The indications for linezolid therapy were in descending order: peritonitis (38.2%), pneumonia (25.0%), infectious acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (19.1%), and other non-pulmonary infection (17.7%). 27.2 and 7.9% of Cmin were subtherapeutic and toxic, respectively. In the GLM, ARDS (mean: -2.1 mg/L, CI: -3.0 to -1.2 mg/L) and pneumonia (mean: -2.2 mg/L, CI: -2.8 to -1.6 mg/L) were significant (p < 0.001) determinants of Cmin. Patients with ARDS (mean: 2.3 mg/L, 51.2% subtherapeutic, 0.0% toxic) and pneumonia (mean: 3.5 mg/L, 41.5% subtherapeutic, 7.7% toxic) had significantly (p < 0.001) lower Cmin than those with peritonitis (mean: 5.5 mg/L, 14.4% subtherapeutic, 9.3% toxic) and other non-pulmonary infection (mean: 5.2 mg/L, 3.3% subtherapeutic, 16.5% toxic). CONCLUSION: Linezolid serum concentrations are reduced in patients with pulmonary infections. Future studies should investigate if other linezolid thresholds are needed in those patients due to linezolid pooling in patients´ lung.