Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11600370›Full record

Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2001

Pharmacokinetics of cefepime during continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients.

R S Malone, D N Fish, E Abraham, I Teitelbaum

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cefepime Extraction by Extracorporeal Life Support Circuits.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Profiles of Cefiderocol, a Novel Siderophore Cephalosporin.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2019
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

R S MaloneDepartment of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Arizona Health Sciences Center, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
D N Fish
E Abraham
I Teitelbaum
IS practice · BEPulmonary and Critical Care Associates · USUniversity of Arizona · USUniversity of Colorado Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pharmacokinetics of cefepime were studied in 12 adult patients in intensive care units during continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) or continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) with a Multiflow60 AN69HF 0.60-m(2) polyacrylonitrile hollow-fiber membrane (Hospal Industrie, Meyzieu, France). Patients (mean age, 52.0 +/- 13.0 years [standard deviation]; mean weight, 96.7 +/- 18.4 kg) received 1 or 2 g of cefepime every 12 or 24 h (total daily doses of 1 to 4 g/day) by intravenous infusion over 15 to 30 min. Pre- and postmembrane blood (serum) samples and corresponding ultrafiltrate or dialysate samples were collected 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 or 24 h (depending on dosing interval) after completion of the drug infusion. Drug concentrations were measured using validated high-performance liquid chromatography methods. Mean systemic clearance (CL(S)) and elimination half-life (t(1/2)) of cefepime were 35.9 +/- 6.0 ml/min and 12.9 +/- 2.6 h during CVVH versus 46.8 +/- 12.4 ml/min and 8.6 +/- 1.4 h during CVVHDF, respectively. Cefepime clearance was substantially increased during both CVVH and CVVHDF, with membrane clearance representing 40 and 59% of CL(S), respectively. The results of this study confirm that continuous renal replacement therapy contributes substantially to total CL(S) of cefepime and that CVVHDF appears to remove cefepime more efficiently than CVVH. Cefepime doses of 2 g/day (either 2 g once daily or 1 g twice daily) appear to achieve concentrations adequate to treat most common gram-negative pathogens (MIC <or= 8 microg/ml) during CVVH or CVVHDF.

Indexed as

HemofiltrationAdultAgedArea Under CurveCefepimeCephalosporinsChromatography, High Pressure LiquidCritical IllnessFemaleHumansKidney Failure, ChronicMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSpectrophotometry, UltravioletCefepimeCephalosporins

Identifiers

PMID11600370
PMCPMC90796
OpenAlexW2152986721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.