4.5 Article

Pharmacokinetics of linezolid in critically ill patients on continuous renal replacement therapy: Influence of residual renal function on PK/PD target attainment

期刊

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
卷 50, 期 -, 页码 69-76

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.11.016

关键词

Linezolid; Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics; Critically ill patients; Continuous renal replacement therapy; Residual renal function

资金

  1. Pfizer
  2. University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU [PPG17/65, GIU17/32]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To assess the pharmacokinetics of linezolid in septic patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) and investigate whether residual renal function affects the probability of attaining the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target. Material and methods: Prospective study conducted in three Spanish hospitals. Linezolid concentrations were measured in plasma and effluent samples and pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated. The probability of target attainment (PTA) and the cumulative fraction of response (CFR) were calculated considering AUC(24)/MIC>80 and %T->MIC > 85% as the PK/PD indexes related to efficacy. Results: In anuric patients (CrCl<10 mL/min), the contribution of extracorporeal Cl to total Cl was higher (47% vs 16%) than in patients with residual renal function (CrCl >= 10 mL/min). For an MIC of 2 mg/L, AUC(24)/MIC>80 was achieved in >85% of the anuric patients, but in <15% of the patients with residual renal function. Conclusions: The standard close (600 mg q12h) ensures a moderately high probability of treatment success in anuric patients when the infection is due to microorganisms with MIC <= 2 mg/L; although higher doses increase the probability of treatment success, the safety is compromised. In patients with residual renal function, the standard dose is insufficient, but 900 mg q8h provide higher probability of treatment success without compromising the safety. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据