Continuous vs. intermittent cefotaxime administration in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and respiratory tract infections

Autor: A. R. H. van Zanten, Y. G. Van Der Meer, Kees H. Polderman, M Oudijk, Armand R. J. Girbes, M K E Nohlmans-Paulssen
Přispěvatelé: Intensive care medicine, Surgery
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2007
Předmět:
Zdroj: British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 63(1), 100-9. Wiley-Blackwell
van Zanten, A R H, Oudijk, M, Nohlmans-Paulssen, M K E, van der Meer, Y G, Girbes, A R J & Polderman, K H 2007, ' Continuous vs. intermittent cefotaxime administration in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and respiratory tract infections : pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, bacterial susceptibility and clinical efficacy ', British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 100-9 . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2006.02730.x
ISSN: 0306-5251
Popis: AIM: To compare the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, antibiotic resistance and clinical efficacy of continuous (CA) vs. intermittent administration (IA) of cefotaxime in patients with obstructive pulmonary disease and respiratory infections.METHODS: A randomized controlled prospective nonblinded study was performed in 93 consecutive hospitalized patients requiring antibiotics for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Forty-seven patients received 2 g of cefotaxime intravenously over 24 h plus a loading dose of 1 g, and 46 patients were given the drug intermittently (1 g three times daily).RESULTS: Similar pathogens were identified in both groups, being mostly Haemophilus influenzae (51%), Streptococcus pneumoniae (21%) and Moraxella catharralis (18%). Mean minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) values were also similar before and after treatment in both groups. Clinical cure was achieved in 37/40 (93%) (CA) vs. 40/43 (93%) (IA) of patients (P = 0.93). In microbiologically evaluable patients, criteria such as 70% of treatment time with antibiotic concentrations > or = MIC (CA 100%vs. IA 60% of patients) and/or > or = 5 x MIC (CA 100%vs. IA 55% of patients) were significantly better following continuous administration (P < 0.01). Samples with suboptimal antibiotic concentrations were found in 0% of CA vs. 65% of IA patients (P < 0.01).CONCLUSIONS: Although clinical cure rates were comparable, continuous cefotaxime administration led to significantly greater proportions of concentrations > MIC and > 5 x MIC compared with intermittent dosing. Continuous administration of cefotaxime at a lower dose [2 g (CA) vs. 3 g (CI)] is equally effective pharmacodynamically and microbiologically, may be more cost-effective and offers at least the same clinical efficacy. Based on these observations, we recommend continuous administration of cefotaxime as the preferred mode of administration.
Databáze: OpenAIRE