Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2015
Drug concentrations in the serum and cerebrospinal fluid of patients treated with cefoperazone/sulbactam after craniotomy.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review on the potential of modulating the IRE arm of the UPR in U87 and U251 glioblastoma cells for improved therapeutic efficacy.Molecular biology research communications · 2026Review
- The Blood-Brain Barrier and Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Optimization of Antibiotics for the Treatment of Central Nervous System Infections in Adults.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Tissue Penetration of Antimicrobials in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review-Part I.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Pharmacokinetics of cefoperazone/sulbactam in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid in patients with intraventricular hemorrhage after external ventricular drains.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Article
- Pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics issues relevant for the clinical use of beta-lactam antibiotics in critically ill patients.Critical care (London, England) · 2018Review
- Drug concentrations in the serum and cerebrospinal fluid of patients treated with norvancomycin after craniotomy.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017Observational
- Tracking Cefoperazone/Sulbactam Resistance Development In vivo in A. baumannii Isolated from a Patient with Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia by Whole-Genome Sequencing.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo identify changes in cefoperazone/sulbactam penetration into cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) after craniotomy and to investigate preliminarily whether cefoperazone/sulbactam CSF concentration can reach therapeutic level when administered intravenously after neurosurgical operation.
methodsNeurosurgical patients with an indwelling ventricular drainage pipe who received prophylactic cefoperazone/sulbactam for the treatment of intracranial infection were received a cefoperazone/sulbactam 2:1, 3.0-g infusion for 3 hours every 6 hours for 24 h. Venous blood and CSF specimens were collected to determine cefoperazone/sulbactam concentrations.
resultsThe cefoperazone and sulbactam concentrations in serum were highest at the second hour (237.54 ± 336.72 mg/L and 66.52 ± 80.38 mg/L, respectively) and then decreased. The cefoperazone and sulbactam concentrations in CSF were highest at the 4th hour (39.22 ± 75.55 mg/L and 6.24 ± 8.35 mg/L, respectively) and then decreased. CSF penetration measured by the ratio of peak concentrations (CSF/serum) was 8.6% ± 7.2% for cefoperazone and 13.5% ± 11.9% for sulbactam, CSF penetration measured by the ratio of trough concentrations (CSF/serum) was 13.4% ± 5.3% for cefoperazone and 106.5% ± 87.5% for sulbactam. CSF penetration represented by the ratio of area under the curve (AUC) of CSF and serum was 14.5% for cefoperazone and 22.6% for sulbactam. Neurosurgical impairment of the blood-brain barrier may improve the CSF penetration of these drugs, but it is difficult to reach the MIC90 of resistant bacteria. If single intravenous administration time was extended to 3 hours, the serum concentrations of drugs were able to meet the PK/PD standard (T> MIC%> 50%) for treating common, highly resistant bacteria.
conclusionsThe CSF penetration of cefoperazone/sulbactam may be enhanced after neurosurgical impairment of the blood-brain barrier. This study is a pilot research of cefoperazone/sulbactam using in neurosurgical individuals, However, it needs to be confirmed by further large-scale studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.