Dose Timing of Aminoglycosides in Hemodialysis Patients: A Pharmacology View

Intermittent hemodialysis: a review of the top antimicrobial stewardship practices to be employed

The vulnerability of patients on hemodialysis (HD) to infections is evident by their increased susceptibility to infections in general and to resistant organisms in particular. Unnecessary, inappropriate, or suboptimal antimicrobial prescribing is common in dialysis units. This underscores the need for dedicated antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions that can be implemented both in the inpatient and outpatient settings. In this review, we provide a comprehensive approach for clinicians with the most updated coordinated AMS principles in HD setting in six areas: prevention, diagnosis, treatment, education and empowerment, monitoring, and research.

Gentamicin Administration in Dialysis Patients: Before or After Hemodialysis?

BACKGROUND

Gentamicin is used to treat severe infections and has a small therapeutic window. This study aimed to optimize the dosing strategy of gentamicin in intermittently hemodialyzed patients by simulating concentration-time profiles during pre- and postdialysis dosing, based on a published pharmacokinetic model.

METHODS

Pharmacokinetic simulations were performed with virtual patients, including septic patients, who were treated with gentamicin and received weekly hemodialysis with an interval of 48 h-48 h-72 h. The following dosing regimens were simulated: for nonseptic patients, 5 mg/kg gentamicin was given 1 h or 2 h before dialysis or a starting dose of 2.5 mg/kg and a maintenance dose of 1.5 mg/kg immediately after dialysis were given; for septic patients, 6 mg/kg gentamicin was given 1 h or 2 h before dialysis or a starting dose of 3 mg/kg and a maintenance dose of 1.8 mg/kg immediately were given after dialysis. The mean maximum concentration (C max ), area under the curve (AUC) 24 h , and target attainment (TA) of pharmacodynamic targets were calculated and compared. The following targets were adopted from the literature: C max >8 mg/L and <20 mg/L and AUC 24 h >70 mg·h/L and <120 mg·h/L.

RESULTS

In nonseptic patients, postdialysis dosing resulted in a TA of 35% for C max of >8 mg/L, 100% for <20 mg/L and AUC 24 h >70 mg·h/L, and 45% for <120 mg·h/L. Dosing 2 h before dialysis resulted in a TA of 100% for C max of >8 mg/L, 40% for <20 mg/L, 65% for AUC 24 h >70 mg·h/L, and 77% for <120 mg·h/L. Simulations of septic patients resulted in comparable outcomes with higher TAs for C max <20 mg/L (96%), AUC 24 h >70 mg·h/L (90%), and AUC 24 h <120 mg·h/L (53%) for dosing 1 h before dialysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Postdialysis dosing resulted in a low TA of C max >8 mg/L; however, predialysis dosing ensured a high TA of C max >8 mg/L and acceptable TA of C max <20 mg/L, AUC 24 h >70 mg·h/L, and AUC 24 h <120 mg·h/L, which could increase the efficacy of gentamicin. Therefore, clinicians should consider predialysis dosing of gentamicin in patients undergoing intermittent hemodialysis.

Pharmacokinetics of Tobramycin Administered at the Beginning of Intermittent Hemodialysis Session (ESRD Study)

Background and Objectives:

There is a renewed interest in the successful use of aminoglycosides due to increasing resistance in gram-negative infections. Few studies to date have examined the pharmacokinetics (PK) of intradialytic infusions of tobramycin. This study sought to characterize the pharmacokinetic profile of intradialytically administered tobramycin in infected patients receiving chronic intermittent hemodialysis and to determine whether it is possible to achieve favorable PK targets.

Design, Setting, Participants, and Measurements:

In this prospective pharmacokinetic study, a single dose (5 mg/kg) of tobramycin was administered intradialytically to 11 noncritically ill patients undergoing chronic intermittent hemodialysis. Blood samples were collected at selected time to determine tobramycin serum concentrations. The PK analysis was performed using Phoenix™ NLME. The efficacy exposure outcome for nonsevere gram-negative infections sensitive to tobramycin with a minimum inhibitory concentration ≤1 were maximum concentration (Cmax ≥ 10 mg/L) and area under the curve (AUC24 h > 30 mg⋅h/L). For toxicity, the goal was to identify plasma trough concentrations <2 mg/L.

Results:

Tobramycin disposition was best described by a one-compartment model using a total clearance composed of the systemic clearance and a transitory hemodialysis clearance. Tobramycin mean (SD) C_max, trough levels, and AUC_24h were 13.1 (1.3) mg/L, 1.32 (0.47) mg/L, and 61 (23) mg⋅h/L, respectively. Monte Carlo simulation run with 1000 virtual patients showed that a 5 mg/kg dose of tobramycin administered intradialytically can outperformed the usual low-dose postdialysis dosing (80% meeting all targets versus <1%, respectively).

Conclusions:

A single high dose of tobramycin can achieve favorable PK outcome when administered using intradialytic infusions in hemodialysis patients. This practical dosing regimen may represent an effective and safer alternative to the usual dosing in the treatment of nonsevere gram-negative infections.

Effect of antimicrobials on Stenotrophomonas maltophilia biofilm

Aim: To evaluate the activity of five antimicrobials against young and mature Stenotrophomonas maltophilia biofilms. Materials & methods: Nineteen clinical strains from hemoculture of hemodialysis patients were tested for biofilm kinetics, MIC and minimum biofilm inhibitory concentration (MBIC) in young and mature biofilms. Results: All strains were moderate biofilm producers. MIC showed total susceptibility to levofloxacin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and partial resistance to ceftazidime (63.2%) and gentamicin (21%). Young and mature biofilms showed the lowest MBIC/MIC ratio for gentamicin, chloramphenicol and levofloxacin, respectively. The highest MBIC/MIC was for trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (young) and ceftazidime (mature). Conclusion: Gentamicin displayed surprising activity against S. maltophilia biofilms. Chloramphenicol was indicated as a good option against young S. maltophilia biofilms, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole showed limited antibiofilm activity.

Gentamicin as Empirical Treatment in Hemodialysis Patients: Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics

The aim of this study was to describe the safety profile and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters in end-stage renal disease patients who received gentamicin as empirical treatment in catheter-related bacteremia when they showed infection signs, regardless of the timing of the next HD. Patients received gentamicin 3 mg/kg before blood culture extraction when they showed infection signs and regardless of the timing of next hemodialysis session. Serum concentrations were collected after the gentamicin administration (peak level) and before the next HD (trough level). Toxicities and adverse drug events were registered. The main pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic goal for Gram-negative infections was peak:minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ≥10. Sixteen patients were included. Nephrotoxicity was not assessed in this population, and no ototoxicity was found. According to microbial isolation and gentamicin susceptibility, the value of peak:MIC was 5.4 ± 2.0. The administration of gentamicin in these conditions was safe. Estimated pharmacokinetic values were consistent with previous studies and appropriate according to peak:MIC goal for Gram-negative organisms with MIC ≤1 mg/L.

Clinical Pharmacology of Antibiotics

Antimicrobial pharmacology and its effect on prescribing is quite complex. Selecting an antibiotic that will optimally treat an infection while minimizing adverse effects and the development of resistance is only the first step, as one must also consider the patient's individual pharmacokinetic alterations and the pharmacodynamic properties of the drug when prescribing it as well. Patients with CKD may have alterations in their protein binding, volumes of distribution, kidney clearance, and nonrenal clearance that necessitates antibiotic dose adjustments to prevent the development of toxicity. Knowledge of a drug's pharmacodynamics, defined as the relationship between drug exposure and antibacterial efficacy, provides some guidance regarding the optimal way to make dose adjustments. Different pharmacodynamic goals, such as maximizing the time that free (unbound) drug concentrations spend above the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for time dependent drugs (e.g., β-lactams) or maximizing the free peak-to-MIC ratio for concentration-dependent antibiotics (e.g., aminoglycosides), require different adjustment strategies; for instance, decreasing the dose while maintaining normal dosing frequency or giving normal (or even larger) doses less frequently, respectively. Patients receiving hemodialysis have other important prescribing considerations as well. The nephrologist or patient may prefer to receive antibiotics that can be administered intravenously toward the end of a dialysis session. Additionally, newer dialysis technologies and filters can increase drug removal more than originally reported. This review will discuss the place in therapy, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and other pharmacologic considerations encountered when prescribing commonly used antibiotics in patients with chronic kidney disease or ESKD.

We Give Aminoglycoside Antibiotics at the End of Hemodialysis

We often administer dialyzable medications after dialysis to ensure that adequate concentrations are maintained in the body until the next session. In the case of aminoglycosides, we may have the opportunity to dose more aggressively predialysis, and then use the clearance of the drug by dialysis to limit toxicities. Predialysis aminoglycoside dosing is intriguing, although studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of this approach are necessary before it can be used routinely.