4.7 Article

Influence of β-Lactam Infusion Strategy on Acute Kidney Injury

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00871-17

关键词

acute kidney injury; beta-lactams; extended infusion

资金

  1. NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences [UL1TR001998]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Limited literature is available assessing nephrotoxicity with prolonged beta-lactam infusions. This study compared the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) associated with a prolonged beta-lactam infusion or an intermittent infusion. This was a retrospective, matched-cohort study at an academic medical center from July 2006 to September 2015. Adult patients who received piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP), cefepime (FEP), or meropenem (MEM) for at least 48 h were evaluated. Patients were excluded for preexisting renal dysfunction or pregnancy. The primary outcome was difference in incidence of AKI evaluated using the RIFLE (risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage) criteria. Patients in the intermittent group were matched 3:1 to patients in the prolonged-infusion group based on the following: beta-lactam agent, age, gender, Charlson comorbidity index, baseline creatinine clearance, hypotension, receipt of vancomycin, and treatment in an intensive care unit. A total of 2,390 patients were included in the matched analysis, with 1,700 receiving intermittent infusions and 690 receiving prolonged infusion. The incidence of AKI was similar in the prolonged-infusion group to that in the intermittent-infusion group (21.6% versus 18.6%; P = 0.1). After multivariate regression, prolonged infusion was not associated with increased odds of AKI (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]. 0.83 to 1.39). Independent predictors of AKI included TZP therapy, concomitant nephrotoxins, hypotension, and heart failure. Although AKIs were numerically more common in patients receiving prolonged beta-lactam infusions than those receiving intermittent infusions, prolonged infusion was not an independent risk factor for AKI.

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

4.7
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