Augmented renal clearance (ARC) refers to increased solute elimination by the kidneys. ARC has considerable implications for altered drug concentrations. The aims of this study were to describe the prevalence of ARC in a select cohort of patients admitted to a Malaysian intensive care unit (ICU) and to compare measured and calculated creatinine clearances in this group. Patients with an expected ICU stay of <24 hours plus an admission serum creatinine concentration <120 µmol/l, were enrolled from May to July 2013. Twenty-four hour urinary collections and serum creatinine concentrations were used to measure creatinine clearance. A total of 49 patients were included, with a median age of 34 years. Most study participants were male and admitted after trauma. Thirty-nine percent were found to have ARC. These patients were more commonly admitted in emergency (P=0.03), although no other covariants were identified as predicting ARC, likely due to the inclusion criteria and the study being under-powered. Significant imprecision was demonstrated when comparing calculated Cockcroft-Gault creatinine clearance (Crcl) and measured Crcl. Bias was larger in ARC patients, with Cockcroft-Gault Crcl being significantly lower than measured Crcl (P <0.01) and demonstrating poor correlation (rs=-0.04). In conclusion, critically ill patients with 'normal' serum creatinine concentrations have varied Crcl. Many are at risk of ARC, which may necessitate individualised drug dosing. Furthermore, significant bias and imprecision between calculated and measured Crcl exists, suggesting clinicians should carefully consider which method they employ in assessing renal function.
To describe renal replacement therapy (RRT) prescribing practices in Malaysian intensive care units (ICU), and compare this with previously published data from other regions.
Here we describe the pharmacokinetics of piperacillin administered by continuous infusion (CI) versus intermittent bolus (IB) dosing in critically ill patients receiving continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) and compare the frequency of pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic (PK/PD) target attainment with each dosing strategy. This was a prospective pharmacokinetic trial in 16 critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock undergoing CVVH and randomised to receive either CI or IB administration of a standard daily dose of piperacillin/tazobactam (11.25g/day on Day 1 followed by 9g/day). Serial blood samples were measured on two occasions. Piperacillin pharmacokinetics were calculated using a non-compartmental approach. Blood concentrations were compared with established PK/PD targets. On occasion 1 (Days 1-3 of therapy), IB administration resulted in significantly higher piperacillin peak concentrations (169 vs. 89mg/L; P=0.002), whereas significantly higher steady-state concentrations were observed in CI patients (83 vs. 57mg/L; P=0.04). Total clearance and clearance not mediated by CVVH were significantly higher with CI administration [median (interquartile range), 1.0 (0.7-1.1) and 0.8 (0.6-1.0)mL/kg/min; P=0.001 and 0.001, respectively]. The estimated unbound piperacillin concentrations were four times above the target susceptibility breakpoint (16mg/L) for the entire dosing interval (100%fT>4xMIC) in 87.5% of patients receiving CI administration (sampling occasion 1), compared with 62.5% of IB patients achieving the desired target (50%fT>4xMIC). Compared with IB dosing, and despite similar CVVH settings, CI administration of piperacillin results in a pharmacokinetic profile that may optimise outcomes for less susceptible pathogens.
The objective of this study was to describe the pharmacokinetics of meropenem, administered by continuous infusion (CI) or intermittent bolus (IB), in critically ill patients receiving continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) and to evaluate the frequency of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment with each dosing strategy. This was a prospective, randomised controlled trial in critically ill patients receiving CVVH and administered meropenem by CI or IB. Serial meropenem concentrations in plasma and ultrafiltrate were measured after administration of a standard total daily dose (4 g/day on Day 1, followed by 3g/day thereafter) on two occasions during antibiotic therapy. Meropenem pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using a non-compartmental approach. Sixteen critically ill patients receiving CVVH concurrently treated with meropenem were randomised to CI (n = 8) or IB dosing (n = 8). IB administration resulted in higher maximum concentrations (C(max)) [64.7 (58.9-80.3) and 64.8 (48.5-81.8) mg/L, respectively] on both sampling occasions compared with CI (P < 0.01 and P = 0.04, respectively). CI resulted in a higher meropenem steady-state concentration (Css) on occasion 1 [26.0 (24.5-41.6) mg/L] compared with the minimum concentration (C(min)) observed for IB patients [17.0 (15.7-19.8)mg/L; P < 0.01]. CVVH contributed to ca. 50% of meropenem total clearance in these patients. The administered meropenem doses resulted in plasma drug concentrations that were >4× the targeted susceptibility breakpoint (2mg/L) for 100% of the dosing interval, for both groups, on both occasions. CI could be an alternative to IB for meropenem administration in critically ill patients receiving CVVH.