Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16175313›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2005

Physiological modeling for indirect evaluation of drug tissular pharmacokinetics under non-steady-state conditions: an example of antimicrobial prophylaxis during liver surgery.

Franck Lagneau, Jean Marty, Pascale Beyne, Michel Tod

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Franck LagneauDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Henri-Mondor Hospital, 51, Avenue du Maréchal-de-Lattre-de-Tassigny, 94000, Créteil, France. lagneauf@wanadoo.fr
Jean Marty
Pascale Beyne
Michel Tod
Hôpital Beaujon · FRInserm · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cefazolin, a time-dependent first-generation cephalosporin with non-linear binding to albumin, is widely recommended for antimicrobial prophylaxis during liver surgery to decrease the incidence of postoperative wound infections. The recommended protocol (2 g IV at anesthesia induction followed by 1 g 4 h later) is expected to maintain the free cefazolin concentration in exposed intratissular fluids above its minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) for potentially encountered microorganisms, from skin incision to skin closure. Since this dosing protocol fails to take into account either of patients status (total body weight and renal function) or of surgical and anesthetic consequences (variations of cardiac output and regional blood flows, progressive decrease of plasma albumin concentration) on cefazolin tissular pharmacokinetics, a physiological modeling study was conducted to investigate protocol suitability for liver surgery in six populations: obese (body mass index >34), renal insufficiency (GFR = 10, 30 or 50 ml min(-1)) and high intraoperative blood loss (three times that usually observed during this surgery) and none of these features referred to as controls. A previously validated physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PB-PK) model for cefazolin in humans was used and then further adapted to simulate obese or renal insufficiency patients as well as the consequences of general anesthesia and liver surgery on cefazolin pharmacokinetics. Clinical data required for simulation (intraoperative kinetics of percent expired isoflurane and plasma albumin concentration, mean intraoperative blood loss) were obtained from 10 patients who underwent right hepatectomy in our institution. Using a fixed MIC of 2 microg ml(-1) against potentially encountered bacteria, it was concluded that the recommended dosing schedule was suitable in all tested populations, including obese patients, although prolongation of the interval between injections appeared advisable for renal insufficiency patients. Furthermore, when a MIC of 3 microg ml(-1) was considered, the recommended cefazolin-dosing regimen failed to maintain sufficient free cefazolin concentrations in the interstitial fluids during surgery in all tested populations except renal insufficiency patients (GFR < 50 ml min(-1)).

Indexed as

PharmacokineticsAlgorithmsAnesthesia, GeneralAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaBacterial InfectionsBlood Loss, SurgicalBlood ProteinsCefazolinComputer SimulationHumansLiverMicrobial Sensitivity TestsModels, StatisticalPostoperative ComplicationsProtein BindingAnti-Bacterial AgentsBlood ProteinsCefazolin

Identifiers

PMID16175313
OpenAlexW2016224326

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.