Skip Navigation


JAC Advance Access originally published online on January 13, 2005
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2005 55(2):209-213; doi:10.1093/jac/dkh536
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
55/2/209    most recent
dkh536v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (20)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Alou, L.
Right arrow Articles by Prieto, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Alou, L.
Right arrow Articles by Prieto, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

JAC vol.55 no.2 © The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2005; all rights reserved

Is there a pharmacodynamic need for the use of continuous versus intermittent infusion with ceftazidime against Pseudomonas aeruginosa? An in vitro pharmacodynamic model

Luis Alou, Lorenzo Aguilar, David Sevillano, María-José Giménez, Olatz Echeverría, María-Luisa Gómez-Lus and José Prieto*

Microbiology Department, School of Medicine, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain


* Corresponding author. Tel: +34-91-3941508; Fax: +34-91-3941511; Email: jprieto{at}med.ucm.es

Objectives:

In order to explore the pharmacodynamic need for continuous versus intermittent (three times a day) administration of ceftazidime in critically ill patients, a pharmacokinetic computerized device was used to simulate concentrations of ceftazidime in human serum after 6 g/day.

Methods:

Efficacy was measured as the capability of simulated concentrations over time to reduce initial inoculum against four strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. MICs of the strains matched NCCLS breakpoints: one susceptible strain (MIC=8 mg/L), two intermediate strains (MIC=16 mg/L) and one resistant strain (MIC=32 mg/L). Cmax was 119.97±2.53 mg/L for intermittent bolus and Css (steady-state concentration) was 40.38±0.16 mg/L for continuous infusion. AUC0–24 was similar for both regimens (~950 mg·h/L). Inhibitory quotients were three times higher for the intermittent administration whereas t > MIC was higher for continuous infusion (100%) versus intermittent administration (99.8%, 69% and 47.6% for the susceptible, intermediate and resistant strains, respectively).

Results:

Against the susceptible and intermediate strains, no differences were found between both regimens with ≥ 3 log10 reduction from 8 to 24 h. Against the resistant strain, only the continuous infusion achieved this bactericidal activity in the same time period, minimizing the differences between resistant and susceptible strains. Significantly higher initial inoculum reduction at 32 h was obtained for the continuous versus the intermittent administration (83.35% versus 38.40%, respectively).

Conclusions:

These results stress the importance of optimizing t >MIC, even at peri-MIC concentrations, of ceftazidime against resistant strains. Local prevalence of resistance justifies, on a pharmacodynamic basis, electing for continuous infusion versus intermittent administration.

Keywords: P. aeruginosa , ceftazidime , continuous infusion , pharmacodynamics


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
D. Hubert, E. Le Roux, T. Lavrut, B. Wallaert, P. Scheid, D. Manach, D. Grenet, I. Sermet-Gaudelus, S. Ramel, C. Cracowski, et al.
Continuous versus Intermittent Infusions of Ceftazidime for Treating Exacerbation of Cystic Fibrosis
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., September 1, 2009; 53(9): 3650 - 3656.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
B. Moriyama, S. A Henning, M. M Neuhauser, R. L Danner, and T. J Walsh
Continuous-Infusion {beta}-Lactam Antibiotics During Continuous Venovenous Hemofiltration for the Treatment of Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria
Ann. Pharmacother., July 1, 2009; 43(7): 1324 - 1337.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
F. Lamoth, T. Buclin, C. Csajka, A. Pascual, T. Calandra, and O. Marchetti
Reassessment of Recommended Imipenem Doses in Febrile Neutropenic Patients with Hematological Malignancies
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., February 1, 2009; 53(2): 785 - 787.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
K. Nomura, N. Morikawa, K. Ikawa, K. Ikeda, Y. Fujimoto, D. Shimizu, K. Taniguchi, K. Shimura, Y. Kanbayashi, T. Komori, et al.
Optimized dosage and frequency of cefozopran for patients with febrile neutropenia based on population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., April 1, 2008; 61(4): 892 - 900.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
B. Henrichfreise, I. Wiegand, I. Luhmer-Becker, and B. Wiedemann
Development of Resistance in Wild-Type and Hypermutable Pseudomonas aeruginosa Strains Exposed to Clinical Pharmacokinetic Profiles of Meropenem and Ceftazidime Simulated In Vitro
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., October 1, 2007; 51(10): 3642 - 3649.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
F. Pea, P. Viale, D. Damiani, F. Pavan, F. Cristini, R. Fanin, and M. Furlanut
Ceftazidime in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients with Febrile Neutropenia: Helpfulness of Continuous Intravenous Infusion in Maximizing Pharmacodynamic Exposure
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., August 1, 2005; 49(8): 3550 - 3553.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.