Continuous infusion versus intermittent administration of cefepime in patients with Gram-negative bacilli bacteraemia

Efficacy of Continuous vs. Intermittent Administration of Cefepime in Adult ICU Patients with Gram-Negative Bacilli Bacteremia: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Study

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to compare the continuous infusion of cefepime with the intermittent infusion in patients with sepsis caused by Gram-negative bacilli (GNB).

METHODS

Randomized 1:1 multicenter double-blinded placebo-controlled study with allocation concealment; multicenter study in the intensive care units of Colombia. Patients with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock, and GNB-suspected bacteremia. Cefepime was administered for 7 to 14 days over 30 m intermittently every 8 h over 24 h plus continuous saline solution (0.9%) (G1) or 3 g administered continuously plus saline solution every 8 h (0.9%) (G2). The percentage of clinical response at 3, 7, and 14 days, relapse at 28 days, and mortality at discharge were measured.

RESULTS

The recruitment was stopped at the suggestion of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) following an FDA alert about cefepime. Thirty-two patients were randomized; 25 received the intervention, and GNB bacteremia was confirmed in 16 (9 G1 and 7 G2). Favorable clinical response in days 3, 7, and 14 was 88.8%, 88.8%, and 77.8% (G1) and was similar for G2 (85.7%). There were no relapses or deaths in G2, while in G1, one relapse and two deaths were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the use of cefepime for the treatment of Gram-negative infections in critically ill patients, but we could not demonstrate differences between continuous or intermittent administration because of the small sample size, given the early suspension of the study.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Cefepime

Cefepime is a broad-spectrum fourth-generation cephalosporin with activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens. It is generally administered as an infusion over 30-60 min or as a prolonged infusion with infusion times from 3 h to continuous administration. Cefepime is widely distributed in biological fluids and tissues with an average volume of distribution of ~ 0.2 L/kg in healthy adults with normal renal function. Protein binding is relatively low (20%), and elimination is mainly renal. About 85% of the dose is excreted unchanged in the urine, with an elimination half-life of 2-2.3 h. The pharmacokinetics of cefepime is altered under certain pathophysiological conditions, resulting in high inter-individual variability in cefepime volume of distribution and clearance, which poses challenges for population dosing approaches. Consequently, therapeutic drug monitoring of cefepime may be beneficial in certain patients including those who are critically ill, have life-threatening infections, or are infected with more resistant pathogens. Cefepime is generally safe and efficacious, with a goal exposure target of 70% time of the free drug concentration over the minimum inhibitory concentration for clinical efficacy. In recent years, reports of neurotoxicity have increased, specifically in patients with impaired renal function. This review summarizes the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and toxicodynamics of cefepime contemporarily in the setting of increasing cefepime exposures. We explore the potential benefits of extended or continuous infusions and therapeutic drug monitoring in special populations.

Intravenous push versus intravenous piggyback beta-lactams for the empiric management of gram-negative bacteremia

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Nationwide shortages of small-volume parenteral solutions (SVPS) compelled hospitals to develop strategies including the use of intravenous push (IVP) administration of antibiotics to reserve SVPS for absolute necessities. It is unknown if administration of beta-lactam antibiotics (BL) via IVP results in worse clinical outcomes compared to intravenous piggyback (IVPB) due to the potential inability to achieve pharmacodynamic targets.

METHODS

Our health-system implemented a mandatory IVP action plan for BL from October 2017 to September 2018. This was a retrospective study of adult patients with GNB who received empiric therapy with IVPB (30 minutes) or IVP (5 minutes) cefepime (FEP) or meropenem (MEM) for at least 2 days. Endpoints included clinical response, microbiological clearance and mortality. All data are presented as n (%) or median (interquartile range).

RESULTS

The final cohort included 213 patients (IVPB n = 105, IVP n = 108). The primary source of bacteremia was urinary, with Escherichia coli being the primary pathogen. Escalation of therapy was similar between groups (15 [14%] vs 11 [10%], P = .36) at a median of 3 days (P = .68). No significant differences were observed in any secondary endpoints including microbiological clearance, bacteremia recurrence, time to defervescence, WBC normalization, vasopressor duration or in-hospital mortality.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest no differences in clinical response with the use of IVP compared to IVPB FEP and MEM for treatment of GNB. This form of administration may be considered as a fluid conservation strategy in times of shortage.

Continuous infusion of cefepime and neurotoxicity: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Neurotoxicity related to cefepime is increasingly reported in the literature but specific data concerning continuous infusion (CI) of the drug are still lacking. Our primary objective was to evaluate the incidence of neurotoxicity related to CI of cefepime and the associated risk factors. Our secondary objectives were to analyse the plasma cefepime concentrations and to define the threshold above which neurotoxicity occurs.

METHODS

In this single-centre retrospective cohort study, all adult patients who underwent at least one cefepime therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) and were treated with CI of 4 g/day between January 2017 and June 2019 were included. Neurotoxicity was evaluated according to a strict definition and was correlated with steady-state concentration at the time of toxicity presentation.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients with 201 cefepime TDM studies were included, with an incidence of neurotoxicity of 14.3% (14/98). Patients with neurotoxicity had more often underlying brain disease (35.7% (5/14) vs 11.9% (10/84), p = 0.030)) and higher steady-state concentrations (mean ± standard deviation 71.8 ± 32.9 mg/L vs 49.6 ± 30.6, p = 0.036) than the others. A receiver operating characteristic curve analysis yielded a cefepime steady-state concentration of 63.2 mg/L as the best cut-off point between patients with or without neurotoxicity. A mean steady-state concentration of 46.4 mg/L was achieved if the dosages of cefepime were adapted to renal function which was under our threshold concentration but above our highest pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target of 32-40 mg/L.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that 4 g/day of cefepime adapted to renal function and infused over 24 h is a trade-off for the risk/benefit ratio, when used empirically.

Transport of Vancomycin and Cefepime Into Human Intervertebral Discs: Quantitative Analyses

STUDY DESIGN

Simulation of antibiotics transport into human intervertebral disc with intravenous infusion.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to quantitatively investigate antibiotic concentrations in the disc.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Intravenous infusion of antibiotics is typically used to treat intervertebral disc infection in clinics. However, it is difficult to evaluate the drug concentrations within discs in vivo.

METHODS

A computational model was used in this study. The variation of drug charge with pH was considered in the model. Thirty-minute infusions of two commonly used antibiotics in clinic-vancomycin and cefepime-were numerically investigated. Spatial and temporal concentration distributions of these drugs in both nondegenerated and moderately degenerated discs were calculated.

RESULTS

For intravenous infusion of 1 g vancomycin and 2 g cefepime in 30 minutes repeated every 12 hours, it was predicted that vancomycin concentration in the disc fluctuated between 17.0 and 31.0 times of its minimum inhibitory concentration (1 ug/mL) and cefepime concentration fluctuated between 1.1 and 4.2 times of its minimum inhibitory concentration (i.e., 8 ug/mL) in about 2 days. It was also found that vancomycin concentration in moderately degenerated disc was lower than that in the nondegenerated disc.

CONCLUSION

This study provides quantitative guidance on selecting proper dosage for treating disc infection. The method used in this study could be used to provide quantitative information on transport of other antibiotics and drugs in discs as well.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Cefepime Intravenous Push Versus Intravenous Piggyback on Time to Administration of First-Dose Vancomycin in the Emergency Department

STUDY OBJECTIVE:

The combination of cefepime and vancomycin is commonly used as an empiric antimicrobial regimen. Time to first-dose antibiotics is associated with survival benefit. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether cefepime intravenous push (IVP) is associated with a shorter time to vancomycin administration in the emergency department (ED) compared with cefepime intravenous piggyback (IVPB) infusion.

METHODS:

This was a retrospective chart review of records of patients who were treated with the vancomycin-cefepime combination in the ED.

RESULTS:

A total of 1071 charts from April 2013 to January 2015 were reviewed. Included in the pre-(IVBP) group was 536 subjects and 535 subjects in the post-(IVP) group. The indications for antibiotic therapy were sepsis alone (28.3%), pneumonia alone (30.7%), sepsis with pneumonia (36.5%), and other (4.6%). The median time from administration of cefepime to vancomycin were 63.5 minutes and 2.0 minutes in the IVPB and IVP cohorts, respectively ( P < .001).

CONCLUSION:

The use of first-dose cefepime IVP in the ED resulted in a statistically significant decrease in time to vancomycin administration of over 1 hour.

Evaluating outcomes of alternative dosing strategies for cefepime: a qualitative systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To perform a qualitative systematic review of the evidence comparing traditional with prolonged intermittent or continuous infusions of cefepime based on clinical and pharmacodynamic outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed (1946 to October 2014), EMBASE (1980 to October 2014), CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to October 2014) were searched using the terms cefepime, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug administration, intravenous infusions, intravenous drug administration, continuous infusion, extended infusion, and intermittent therapy. Reference lists from relevant materials were reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Articles evaluating administration regimens of cefepime, one of which included the traditional, manufacturer-recommended 0.5-hour infusion and the other a prolonged or continuous infusion were included. Prespecified clinical outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, clinical cure, and adverse events. The primary pharmacodynamic outcome was percentage time of unbound drug concentration remaining above the minimum inhibitory concentration.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In all, 18 studies were included; 6 studies assessed clinical outcomes, and 12 assessed pharmacodynamic outcomes. Prolonged or continuous infusions of cefepime achieved the pharmacodynamic targets more often than traditional infusions. The association of improved clinical outcomes with prolonged or continuous infusions is unclear. All-cause mortality was significantly decreased with the use of a prolonged cefepime infusion in a retrospective study. Two prospective, randomized studies demonstrated no statistically significant difference in mortality between prolonged and intermittent infusions.

CONCLUSIONS

The available literature on prolonged and continuous infusions of cefepime demonstrated an improved achievement of pharmacodynamic targets; however, the effect on clinical outcomes is inconclusive. Well-designed prospective studies are required to determine optimal dosing and administration strategies.

Continuous versus intermittent infusion of cefepime in neurosurgical patients with post-operative intracranial infections

Cefepime is administered as an intermittent infusion (II); however, continuous infusion (CI) may be advantageous because β-lactam antibiotics exhibit time-dependent antibacterial activity. This retrospective, non-randomised, comparative study included 68 neurosurgical patients with post-operative intracranial infections treated with 4g/day cefepime over 24h as a CI (n=34) or 2g every 12h as II (n=34). CI controlled the intracranial infection more rapidly and effectively than II (6.6±1.9 days vs. 7.8±2.6 days; P=0.036). By considering the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) to be 4μg/mL and 8μg/mL, the percentage of time when the cefepime plasma or CSF concentrations were higher than the MIC (%T>MIC) was calculated for each patient. For plasma cefepime concentrations, the %T(>MIC) in the CI group was higher than in the II group (for MICs of 8μg/mL, 100% vs. 75%, respectively). The mean calculated area under the curve (AUC) in the CI group was similar to the II group (1197.99±72.15μgh/mL vs. 890.84±140.78μgh/mL; P=0.655). For CSF cefepime concentrations, the %T(>MIC) in the CI group was higher than in the II group (for MICs of 4μg/mL and 8μg/mL, 83.3% and 75% vs. 25% and 0%, respectively). The mean calculated AUC for the CI group was higher than the II group (220.56±13.59μgh/mL vs. 86.34±5.69μgh/mL; P=0.003). Therefore, CI of cefepime significantly enhanced the antibacterial effect and reduced the treatment duration in neurosurgical patients with post-operative intracranial infections.

Optimization of continuous infusion of piperacillin-tazobactam in children with fever and neutropenia

The study through Monte Carlo simulation of β-lactam pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment and determination of subsequent serum concentrations of piperacillin-tazobactam administered through continuous infusion to children treated for fever and neutropenia shows that 400 mg/kg/day has the highest probability of target attainment against Pseudomonas aeurginosa in our oncology ward compared with the standard regimen of 300 mg/kg/day.

Continuous versus intermittent infusions of antibiotics for the treatment of severe acute infections

BACKGROUND

Intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics are indicated for the treatment of severe infections. However, the emergence of infections caused by multi-drug resistant organisms in conjunction with a lack of novel antibiotics has prompted the investigation of alternative dosing strategies to improve clinical efficacy and tolerability. To optimise pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic antibiotic parameters, continuous antibiotic infusions have been compared to traditional intermittent antibiotic infusions.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of continuous intravenous administration of concentration-dependent and time-dependent antibiotics to traditional intermittent intravenous administration in adults with severe acute bacterial infections.

SEARCH METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched in September 2012: The Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), CINAHL, ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S). The reference lists of all relevant material, the Internet and the trials registry www.clinicaltrials.gov for completed and ongoing trials were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials in adults with a bacterial infection requiring intravenous antibiotic therapy comparing continuous versus intermittent infusions of antibiotics were included. Both time-dependent and concentration-dependent antibiotics were considered.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three independent authors performed data extraction for the included studies. All data was cross-checked and disagreements resolved by consensus. An intention to treat analysis was conducted using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies met inclusion criteria with a combined total of over 1,600 patients. The majority of included studies were judged to be at unclear or high risk of bias with regard to randomisation sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, management of incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting, and other potential threats to validity. No studies were judged to be at low risk of bias for all methodological quality items assessed. There were no differences in all-cause mortality (n=1241, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67 - 1.20, p=0.45), infection recurrence (n=398, RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.35 - 4.19, p=0.76), clinical cure (n=975, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 - 1.08, p=0.98), and superinfection post-therapy (n=813, RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.60 - 1.94, p=0.79). There were no differences in safety outcomes including adverse events (n=575, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 - 1.12, p=0.63), serious adverse events (n=871, RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.80 - 2.30, p=0.26), and withdrawal due to adverse events (n=871, RR 2.03, 95% CI 0.52 - 7.95, p=0.31). A difference was observed in the subgroup analyses of clinical cure in septic versus non-septic patients, where intermittent antibiotic infusions were favoured for clinical cure in septic patients. However, this effect was not consistent between random-effects and fixed-effects analyses. No differences were found in sensitivity analyses conducted.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in mortality, infection recurrence, clinical cure, superinfection post-therapy, and safety outcomes when comparing continuous infusions of intravenous antibiotics to traditional intermittent infusions of antibiotics. However, the wide confidence intervals suggest that beneficial or harmful effects cannot be ruled out for all outcomes. Therefore, the current evidence is insufficient to recommend the widespread adoption of continuous infusion antibiotics in the place of intermittent infusions of antibiotics. Further large prospective randomised trials, with consistent and complete reporting of clinical outcome measures, conducted with concurrent pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies in special populations are required to determine whether adoption of continuous antibiotic infusions is warranted in specific circumstances.

Continuous beta-lactam infusion in critically ill patients: the clinical evidence

There is controversy over whether traditional intermittent bolus dosing or continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics is preferable in critically ill patients. No significant difference between these two dosing strategies in terms of patient outcomes has been shown yet. This is despite compelling in vitro and in vivo pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) data. A lack of significance in clinical outcome studies may be due to several methodological flaws potentially masking the benefits of continuous infusion observed in preclinical studies. In this review, we explore the methodological shortcomings of the published clinical studies and describe the criteria that should be considered for performing a definitive clinical trial. We found that most trials utilized inconsistent antibiotic doses and recruited only small numbers of heterogeneous patient groups. The results of these trials suggest that continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics may have variable efficacy in different patient groups. Patients who may benefit from continuous infusion are critically ill patients with a high level of illness severity. Thus, future trials should test the potential clinical advantages of continuous infusion in this patient population. To further ascertain whether benefits of continuous infusion in critically ill patients do exist, a large-scale, prospective, multinational trial with a robust design is required.

Continuous infusion of antibiotics in the critically ill: The new holy grail for beta-lactams and vancomycin?

The alarming global rise of antimicrobial resistance combined with the lack of new antimicrobial agents has led to a renewed interest in optimization of our current antibiotics. Continuous infusion (CI) of time-dependent antibiotics has certain theoretical advantages toward efficacy based on pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic principles. We reviewed the available clinical studies concerning continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics and vancomycin in critically ill patients. We conclude that CI of beta-lactam antibiotics is not necessarily more advantageous for all patients. Continuous infusion is only likely to have clinical benefits in subpopulations of patients where intermittent infusion is unable to achieve an adequate time above the minimal inhibitory concentration (T > MIC). For example, in patients with infections caused by organisms with elevated MICs, patients with altered pharmacokinetics (such as the critically ill) and possibly also immunocompromised patients. For vancomycin CI can be chosen, not always for better clinical efficacy, but because it is practical, cheaper, associated with less AUC_24h (area under the curve >24 h)-variability, and easier to monitor.

Pharmacokinetic issues for antibiotics in the critically ill patient

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the altered pharmacokinetic properties of selected antibiotics in critically ill patients and to develop basic dose adjustment principles for this patient population.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane-Controlled Trial Register.

STUDY SELECTION

Relevant papers that reported pharmacokinetics of selected antibiotic classes in critically ill patients and antibiotic pharmacodynamic properties were reviewed. Antibiotics and/or antibiotic classes reviewed included aminoglycosides, beta-lactams (including carbapenems), glycopeptides, fluoroquinolones, tigecycline, linezolid, lincosamides, and colistin.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Antibiotics can be broadly categorized according to their solubility characteristics which can, in turn, help describe possible altered pharmacokinetics that can be caused by the pathophysiological changes common to critical illness. Hydrophilic antibiotics (e.g., aminoglycosides, beta-lactams, glycopeptides, and colistin) are mostly affected with the pathphysiological changes observed in critically ill patients with increased volumes of distribution and altered drug clearance (related to changes in creatinine clearance). Lipophilic antibiotics (e.g., fluoroquinolones, macrolides, tigecycline, and lincosamides) have lesser volume of distribution alterations, but may develop altered drug clearances. Using antibiotic pharmacodynamic bacterial kill characteristics, altered dosing regimens can be devised that also account for such pharmacokinetic changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of antibiotic pharmacodynamic properties and the potential altered antibiotic pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients can allow the intensivist to develop individualized dosing regimens. Specifically, for renally cleared drugs, measured creatinine clearance can be used to drive many dose adjustments. Maximizing clinical outcomes and minimizing antibiotic resistance using individualized doses may be best achieved with therapeutic drug monitoring.

Piperacillin penetration into tissue of critically ill patients with sepsis--bolus versus continuous administration?

OBJECTIVE

To describe a pharmacokinetic model of piperacillin concentrations in plasma and subcutaneous tissue when administered by bolus dosing and continuous infusion in critically ill patients with sepsis on days 1 and 2 of antibiotic therapy and to compare results against previous results for piperacillin from a cohort of patients with septic shock.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Eighteen-bed intensive care unit at 918-bed tertiary referral hospital.

PATIENTS

Thirteen critically ill adult patients with known or suspected sepsis in whom the treating physician deemed piperacillin-tazobactam appropriate therapy were conveniently sampled.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive different daily doses of piperacillin-tazobactam by bolus dosing or continuous infusion (continuous infusion--six patients; bolus dosing--seven patients). Serial plasma and tissue concentrations were determined on days 1 and 2 of treatment. Tissue concentrations of piperacillin were determined using a subcutaneously inserted microdialysis catheter. Separate pharmacokinetic models were developed for both bolus and continuous dosing.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

This is the first known article to report concurrent plasma and subcutaneous tissue concentrations of a beta-lactam antibiotic administered by bolus and continuous dosing in critically ill patients with sepsis. With a 25% lower piperacillin dose administered to the continuous infusion group, the infusion group had statistically significantly higher median plasma concentrations than the bolus group on day 2 (16.6 vs. 4.9 mg/L; p = 0.007). There was a trend to higher median plasma concentrations on day 1 in the bolus dosing group (8.9 vs. 4.9 mg/L; p = 0.078). Median tissue concentrations were not statistically different on day 1 (infusion group 2.4 mg/L vs. bolus group 2.2 mg/L; p = 0.48) and day 2 (infusion group 5.2 mg/L vs. bolus group 0.8 mg/L; p = 0.45). A two-compartment pharmacokinetic model was found to describe the data best. Tissue pharmacodynamic targets were achieved more successfully with infusion dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with sepsis do not seem to have the same level of impairment of tissue distribution as described for patients with septic shock. A 25% lower dose of piperacillin administered by continuous infusion seems to maintain higher trough concentrations compared with standard bolus dosing. It is likely that the clinical advantages of continuous infusion are most likely to be evident when treating pathogens with high minimum inhibitory concentration, although without therapeutic drug monitoring and subsequent dose adjustment, infusions may never achieve target concentrations of organisms with very high minimum inhibitory concentrations in a small number of patients.

Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of antibacterials in the Intensive Care Unit: setting appropriate dosing regimens

Patients admitted to Intensive Care Units (ICUs) are at very high risk of developing severe nosocomial infections. Consequently, antimicrobials are among the most important and commonly prescribed drugs in the management of these patients. Critically ill patients in ICUs include representatives of all age groups with a range of organ dysfunction related to severe acute illness that may complicate long-term illness. The range of organ dysfunction, together with drug interactions and other therapeutic interventions (e.g. haemodynamically active drugs and continuous renal replacement therapies), may strongly impact on antimicrobial pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients. In the last decade, it has become apparent that the intrinsic pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties are the major determinants of in vivo efficacy of antimicrobial agents. PK/PD parameters are essential in facilitating the translation of microbiological activity into clinical situations, ensuring a successful outcome. In this review, we analyse the typical patterns of antimicrobial activity and the corresponding PK/PD parameters, with a special focus on a PK/PD dosing approach of the antimicrobial agent classes commonly utilised in the ICU setting.

Continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics in severe infections: a review of its role

Continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics has been widely promoted to optimise their time-dependent activity. Increasing evidence is emerging suggesting potential benefits in patient populations with altered pathophysiology, such as seriously ill patients. From a pharmacokinetic viewpoint, much information supports higher trough concentrations of beta-lactam antibiotics when administered by continuous infusion. This advantage of continuous infusion translates into a superior ability to achieve pharmacodynamic targets, particularly when the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the pathogen is >or=4 mg/L. One drawback of continuous infusion may be limited physicochemical stability. This issue exists particularly for carbapenem antibiotics whereby prolonged infusions (i.e. >3h) can be used to improve the time above the MIC compared with conventional bolus dosing. Few studies have examined clinical outcomes of bolus and continuous dosing of beta-lactam antibiotics in seriously ill patients. No statistically significant differences have been shown for: mortality; time to normalisation of leukocytosis or pyrexia; or duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay or hospital stay. Some evidence suggests improved clinical cure and resolution of illness with continuous infusion in seriously ill patients. Pharmacoeconomic advantages of continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics are well characterised. Available data suggest that seriously ill patients with severe infections requiring significant antibiotic courses (>or=4 days) may be the subgroup that will achieve better outcomes with continuous infusion.

Continuous versus intermittent intravenous administration of antibacterials with time-dependent action: a systematic review of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters

We performed a systematic review of randomised clinical trials to evaluate the comparative pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the continuous versus intermittent mode of intravenous administration of various antibacterials. Data were identified from PubMed (January 1950 to January 2005), Current Contents, the Cochrane central register of controlled trials, and references from relevant articles and reviews. Seventeen randomised clinical trials comparing continuous with intermittent intravenous administration of the same antibacterial regimen and examining the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties were included in this systematic review. We reviewed data regarding the clinical setting, number of participants, antibacterial agents and dosages used, as well as maximum serum concentration (Cmax), trough serum concentration (Cmin), steady-state or plateau serum concentration (Css), area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), time above the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) [T>MIC], AUC: MIC, elimination rate constant, elimination half-life, volume of distribution and systematic clearance. The mean Cmax of the intermittently administered antibacterials was higher compared with Css achieved by the continuous infusion of the same antibacterial in all eligible studies (Cmax was on average 5.5 times higher than Css, range 1.9-11.2). Css was on average 5.8 times higher than the Cmin of the intermittently administered antibacterials (range 1.2-15.6). In three of six studies the length of time that the drug concentration was above the MIC of the responsible pathogens was longer in patients receiving the antibacterials continuously. In conclusion, the reviewed data suggest that the continuous intravenous infusion of antibacterials with time-dependent bacterial killing seems to be superior than the intermittent intravenous administration, from a pharmacodynamic point of view, at least when treating bacteria with high MIC values for the studied antibacterials.

Continuous versus intermittent intravenous administration of antibiotics: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Intermittent intravenous administration of antibiotics is the first-line approach in the management of severe infections worldwide. However, the potential benefits of alternate modes of administration of antibiotics, including continuous intravenous infusion, deserve further evaluation. We did a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing continuous intravenous infusion with intermittent intravenous administration of the same antibiotic regimen. Nine randomised controlled trials studying beta-lactams, aminoglycosides, and vancomycin were included. Clinical failure was lower, although without statistical significance, in patients receiving continuous infusion of antibiotics (pooled OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-1.01); the difference was statistically significant in a subset of randomised controlled trials that used the same total daily antibiotic dose for both intervention arms (0.70, 0.50-0.98, fixed and random effects models). Regarding mortality and nephrotoxicity, no differences were found (mortality 0.89, 0.48-1.64; nephrotoxicity 0.91, 0.56-1.47). In conclusion, the data suggest that the administration of the same total antibiotic dose by continuous intravenous infusion may be more efficient, with regard to clinical effectiveness, compared with the intermittent mode. In an era of gradually increasing resistance among most pathogens, the potential advantages of continuous intravenous administration of antibiotics on several clinical outcomes should be further investigated.