Cargando…

Optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years

BACKGROUND: Sporadic studies in antimicrobial therapy have evaluated the effects of infusion rates on therapeutic and economic outcomes, and new findings may challenge the regular infusion regimen. METHODS: Focusing on studies comparing the outcomes of different infusion regimens, the relevant liter...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Ling-ling, Zhou, Quan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6089111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30127628
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S167616
_version_ 1783346965267873792
author Zhu, Ling-ling
Zhou, Quan
author_facet Zhu, Ling-ling
Zhou, Quan
author_sort Zhu, Ling-ling
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Sporadic studies in antimicrobial therapy have evaluated the effects of infusion rates on therapeutic and economic outcomes, and new findings may challenge the regular infusion regimen. METHODS: Focusing on studies comparing the outcomes of different infusion regimens, the relevant literature was identified by searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from January 1, 2013 to March 1, 2018. Papers were finally chosen using a PRISMA flowchart. RESULTS: Antimicrobials with the superiority of prolonged infusion to standard infusion in terms of efficacy and safety include meropenem, doripenem, imipenem, cefepime, ceftazidime, piperacillin/tazobactam, linezolid, and vancomycin. The strategy of concomitantly reducing total daily dose and prolonging infusion time may cause treatment failure (eg, imipenem). Extended infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam has pharmacoeconomic advantage over standard infusion. Prolonged infusion of voriconazole is inferior to standard infusion because of lower efficacy caused by pharmacokinetic changes. Comparable outcomes following standard infusion and continuous infusion were observed with norvancomycin and nafcillin. Factors determining whether prolonged infusion has a benefit over standard infusion include MIC of bacterial pathogens, bacterial density, diagnosis, disease severity, total daily dose, and renal function. CONCLUSION: To maximally preserve the effectiveness of current antimicrobials, effective interventions should be implemented to enhance the application of optimal infusion strategies. For reducing nephrotoxicity, prolonged infusion of meropenem is better than conventional infusion in neonates with Gram-negative late-onset sepsis, and continuous infusion of vancomycin is superior to intermittent infusion. For increasing efficacy, prolonged or continuous infusion of time-dependent antimicrobials (eg, meropenem, doripenem, imipenem, cefepime, ceftazidime, piperacillin/tazobactam, linezolid, and vancomycin) is an optimal choice. Nevertheless, such advantages may only be demonstrated in special clinical circumstances and special populations (eg, patients with a sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score≥9, respiratory tract infections, urinary or intra-abdominal infections, or infections caused by less susceptible pathogens would benefit from prolonged infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6089111
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60891112018-08-20 Optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years Zhu, Ling-ling Zhou, Quan Infect Drug Resist Review BACKGROUND: Sporadic studies in antimicrobial therapy have evaluated the effects of infusion rates on therapeutic and economic outcomes, and new findings may challenge the regular infusion regimen. METHODS: Focusing on studies comparing the outcomes of different infusion regimens, the relevant literature was identified by searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from January 1, 2013 to March 1, 2018. Papers were finally chosen using a PRISMA flowchart. RESULTS: Antimicrobials with the superiority of prolonged infusion to standard infusion in terms of efficacy and safety include meropenem, doripenem, imipenem, cefepime, ceftazidime, piperacillin/tazobactam, linezolid, and vancomycin. The strategy of concomitantly reducing total daily dose and prolonging infusion time may cause treatment failure (eg, imipenem). Extended infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam has pharmacoeconomic advantage over standard infusion. Prolonged infusion of voriconazole is inferior to standard infusion because of lower efficacy caused by pharmacokinetic changes. Comparable outcomes following standard infusion and continuous infusion were observed with norvancomycin and nafcillin. Factors determining whether prolonged infusion has a benefit over standard infusion include MIC of bacterial pathogens, bacterial density, diagnosis, disease severity, total daily dose, and renal function. CONCLUSION: To maximally preserve the effectiveness of current antimicrobials, effective interventions should be implemented to enhance the application of optimal infusion strategies. For reducing nephrotoxicity, prolonged infusion of meropenem is better than conventional infusion in neonates with Gram-negative late-onset sepsis, and continuous infusion of vancomycin is superior to intermittent infusion. For increasing efficacy, prolonged or continuous infusion of time-dependent antimicrobials (eg, meropenem, doripenem, imipenem, cefepime, ceftazidime, piperacillin/tazobactam, linezolid, and vancomycin) is an optimal choice. Nevertheless, such advantages may only be demonstrated in special clinical circumstances and special populations (eg, patients with a sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score≥9, respiratory tract infections, urinary or intra-abdominal infections, or infections caused by less susceptible pathogens would benefit from prolonged infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam). Dove Medical Press 2018-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6089111/ /pubmed/30127628 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S167616 Text en © 2018 Zhu and Zhou. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Zhu, Ling-ling
Zhou, Quan
Optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years
title Optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years
title_full Optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years
title_fullStr Optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years
title_full_unstemmed Optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years
title_short Optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years
title_sort optimal infusion rate in antimicrobial therapy explosion of evidence in the last five years
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6089111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30127628
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S167616
work_keys_str_mv AT zhulingling optimalinfusionrateinantimicrobialtherapyexplosionofevidenceinthelastfiveyears
AT zhouquan optimalinfusionrateinantimicrobialtherapyexplosionofevidenceinthelastfiveyears