Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24903189›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2014

Population pharmacokinetics of imipenem in critically ill patients with suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia and evaluation of dosage regimens.

Camille Couffignal, Olivier Pajot, Cédric Laouénan, Charles Burdet, Arnaud Foucrier, Michel Wolff, Laurence Armand-Lefevre, France Mentré, Laurent Massias

Abstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Population pharmacokinetics and dosing optimisation of imipenem in critically ill patients.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

9 authors.

Camille CouffignalAP-HP, Hop Bichat, Biostatistics Department, Paris, France; IAME, UMR 1137, Univ Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, F-75018, Paris, France; IAME, UMR 1137, INSERM, F-75018, Paris, France.
Olivier Pajot
Cédric Laouénan
Charles Burdet
Arnaud Foucrier
Michel Wolff
Laurence Armand-Lefevre
France Mentré
Laurent Massias

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsSignificant alterations in the pharmacokinetics (PK) of antimicrobials have been reported in critically ill patients. We describe PK parameters of imipenem in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia and evaluate several dosage regimens.

methodsThis French multicentre, prospective, open-label study was conducted in ICU patients with a presumptive diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by Gram-negative bacilli, who empirically received imipenem intravenously every 8 h. Plasma imipenem concentrations were measured during the fourth imipenem infusion using six samples (trough, 0.5, 1, 2, 5 and 8 h). Data were analysed with a population approach using the stochastic approximation expectation maximization algorithm in Monolix 4.2. A Monte Carlo simulation was performed to evaluate the following six dosage regimens: 500, 750 or 1000 mg with administration every 6 or 8 h. The pharmacodynamic target was defined as the probability of achieving a fractional time above the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of >40%.

resultsFifty-one patients were included in the PK analysis. Imipenem concentration data were best described by a two-compartment model with three covariates (creatinine clearance, total bodyweight and serum albumin). Estimated clearance (between-subject variability) was 13.2 l h(-1) (38%) and estimated central volume 20.4 l (31%). At an MIC of 4 μg ml(-1) , the probability of achieving 40% fractional time > MIC was 91.8% for 0.5 h infusions of 750 mg every 6 h, 86.0% for 1000 mg every 8 h and 96.9% for 1000 mg every 6 h.

conclusionsThis population PK model accurately estimated imipenem concentrations in ICU patients. The simulation showed that for these patients, the best dosage regimen of imipenem is 750 mg every 6 h and not 1000 mg every 8 h.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsCritical IllnessDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleGram-Negative BacteriaHumansImipenemInfusions, IntravenousMaleMiddle AgedModels, BiologicalModels, StatisticalMonte Carlo MethodAnti-Bacterial AgentsImipenemcritical careimipenempopulation pharmacokineticsventilator-associated pneumonia

Identifiers

PMID24903189
PMCPMC4243876

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.