Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35171317›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2022

Investigation of pharmacokinetic and clinical outcomes of various meropenem regimens in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia and augmented renal clearance.

Sareh Razzazzadeh, Ilad Alavi Darazam, Mohammadreaza Hajiesmaeili, Jamshid Salamzadeh, Arash Mahboubi, Ehsan Sadeghnezhad, Zahra Sahraei

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sareh RazzazzadehDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, P.O. Box, 14155-6153, Tehran, Iran.
Ilad Alavi DarazamDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Loghman Hakim Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammadreaza HajiesmaeiliAnesthesiology Research Center, Loghman Hakim Medical Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Jamshid SalamzadehDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, P.O. Box, 14155-6153, Tehran, Iran.
Arash MahboubiDepartmant of Pharmaceutics, School of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ehsan SadeghnezhadFaculty of Biological Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
Zahra SahraeiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, P.O. Box, 14155-6153, Tehran, Iran. zahra.sahraei@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1015-4444
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRTarbiat Modares University · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAugmented renal clearance (ARC) defined as creatinine clearance (Clcr) above 130 mL/min/1.73m MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this randomized clinical trial, patients with VAP and high risk for ARC were recruited. An 8-h urine collection was performed on the 1st, 3rd, and 5th days of study to measure Clcr. Included patients were divided into three groups: (1) 1 g meropenem, 3-h infusion, (2) 2 g meropenem, 3-h infusion, (3) 1 g meropenem, 6-h infusion. On the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th days of treatment, peak and trough blood samples were collected to undergo HPLC assay. MICs were assessed using microdilution method. Patients were also clinically monitored for 14 days.

resultsForty-five patients were included. Group 3 showed significanty higher rate of patients achieving fT > MIC > 50% (100% for group 3 versus 40% for group 2 and 13% for group 1; p = 0.0001). Mean fT > MIC% was significantly higher in group 3 (78.77 ± 5.87 for group 3 versus 49.6 ± 7.38 for group 2 and 43.2 ± 7.98 for group 1; p = 0.0001). Statistical analysis showed no significant differences among groups regarding clinical improvement.

conclusionAccording to the findings of this trial, prolonged meropenem infusion is an appropriate strategy compared to dose elevation among ARC patients.

Indexed as

Pneumonia, Ventilator-AssociatedRenal InsufficiencyAnti-Bacterial AgentsCritical IllnessHumansMeropenemMicrobial Sensitivity TestsAnti-Bacterial AgentsMeropenemAugmented renal clearancefT > MICMeropenemPK-PD targetVentilator-associated pneumonia

Identifiers

PMID35171317
OpenAlexW4212947429

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.