Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Antibiotics Removal during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in Septic Shock Patients: Mixed Modality Versus “Expanded Haemodialysis”
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Antibiotics Removal during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in Septic Shock Patients: Mixed Modality Versus “Expanded Haemodialysis”
Do you wish to request the book?
Antibiotics Removal during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in Septic Shock Patients: Mixed Modality Versus “Expanded Haemodialysis”
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Antibiotics Removal during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in Septic Shock Patients: Mixed Modality Versus “Expanded Haemodialysis”
2024
Overview
Background and Objective
Renal replacement therapy (RRT) plays a critical role in antimicrobial removal, particularly for low-molecular-weight drugs with low plasma protein binding, low distribution volume and hydrophilicity. Medium cut-off (MCO) membranes represent a new generation in dialysis technology, enhancing diffusive modality efficacy and increasing the cut-off from 30 to 45 kDa, crucial for middle molecule removal.
This monocentric randomized crossover pilot study aimed to evaluate the impact of continuous haemodialysis with MCO membrane (MCO-CVVHD) on the removal of piperacillin, tazobactam and meropenem compared with continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration with standard high-flux membrane (HFM-CVVHDF).
Methods
Twenty patients were randomized to undergo MCO-CVVHD followed by HFM-CVVHDF or vice versa. Extraction ratio (ER), effluent clearance (Cl
eff
) and treatment efficiency were assessed at various intervals. Antibiotic nadir plasma levels were measured for both treatment days.
Results
HFM-CVVHDF showed greater ER compared with MCO-CVVHD for meropenem (
β
= − 8.90 (95% CI − 12.9 to − 4.87),
p
< 0.001) and tazobactam (
β
= − 8.29 (95% CI − 13.5 to − 3.08),
p
= 0.002) and Cl
eff
for each antibiotic (meropenem
β
= − 10,206 (95% CI − 14,787 to − 5787),
p
= 0.001); tazobactam (
β
= − 4551 (95% CI − 7781 to − 1322),
p
= 0.012); piperacillin (
β
= − 3913 (95% CI − 6388 to − 1437),
p
= 0.002), even if the carryover effect influenced the Cl
eff
for meropenem and tazobactam. No difference was observed in nadir plasma concentrations or efficiency for any antibiotic. Piperacillin (
β
= − 38.1 (95% CI − 47.9 to − 28.3),
p
< 0.001) and tazobactam (
β
= − 4.45 (95% CI − 6.17 to − 2.72),
p
< 0.001) showed lower nadir plasma concentrations the second day compared with the first day, regardless the filter type.
Conclusion
MCO demonstrated comparable in vivo removal of piperacillin, tazobactam and meropenem to HFM.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing,Springer Nature B.V
Subject
/ Anti-Bacterial Agents - blood
/ Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacokinetics
/ Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use
/ Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy - methods
/ Female
/ Humans
/ Male
/ Medicine
/ Meropenem - administration & dosage
/ Meropenem - pharmacokinetics
/ Patients
/ Piperacillin - administration & dosage
/ Piperacillin - pharmacokinetics
/ Piperacillin - therapeutic use
/ Plasma
/ Sepsis
/ Shock, Septic - drug therapy
