Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35740164›Full record

ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Evaluation of a Meropenem and Piperacillin Monitoring Program in Intensive Care Unit Patients Calls for the Regular Assessment of Empirical Targets and Easy-to-Use Dosing Decision Tools.

Ferdinand Anton Weinelt, Miriam Songa Stegemann, Anja Theloe, Frieder Pfäfflin, Stephan Achterberg, Franz Weber, Lucas Dübel, Agata Mikolajewska, Alexander Uhrig, Peggy Kiessling and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. 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
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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

14 authors.

Ferdinand Anton WeineltDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Kelchstr. 31, 12169 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3024-3890
Miriam Songa StegemannDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité-Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universitaet Berlin, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Anja TheloePharmacy Department, Charité-Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universitaet Berlin, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Frieder PfäfflinDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité-Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universitaet Berlin, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Stephan AchterbergDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité-Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universitaet Berlin, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Franz WeberDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Kelchstr. 31, 12169 Berlin, Germany.
Lucas DübelDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Kelchstr. 31, 12169 Berlin, Germany.
Agata MikolajewskaDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité-Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universitaet Berlin, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Alexander UhrigDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité-Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universitaet Berlin, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Peggy KiesslingLabor Berlin-Charité Vivantes GmbH, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Wilhelm HuisingaInstitute of Mathematics, Universität Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, 14476 Potsdam, Germany.
Robin MicheletDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Kelchstr. 31, 12169 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5485-607X
Stefanie HennigDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Kelchstr. 31, 12169 Berlin, Germany.
Charlotte KloftDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Kelchstr. 31, 12169 Berlin, Germany.

Funding

Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Experienced Research FellowFreie Universität Berlin Open Access Funding
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The drug concentrations targeted in meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam therapy also depend on the susceptibility of the pathogen. Yet, the pathogen is often unknown, and antibiotic therapy is guided by empirical targets. To reliably achieve the targeted concentrations, dosing needs to be adjusted for renal function. We aimed to evaluate a meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam monitoring program in intensive care unit (ICU) patients by assessing (i) the adequacy of locally selected empirical targets, (ii) if dosing is adequately adjusted for renal function and individual target, and (iii) if dosing is adjusted in target attainment (TA) failure. In a prospective, observational clinical trial of drug concentrations, relevant patient characteristics and microbiological data (pathogen, minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC)) for patients receiving meropenem or piperacillin/tazobactam treatment were collected. If the MIC value was available, a target range of 1-5 × MIC was selected for minimum drug concentrations of both drugs. If the MIC value was not available, 8-40 mg/L and 16-80 mg/L were selected as empirical target ranges for meropenem and piperacillin, respectively. A total of 356 meropenem and 216 piperacillin samples were collected from 108 and 96 ICU patients, respectively. The vast majority of observed MIC values was lower than the empirical target (meropenem: 90.0%, piperacillin: 93.9%), suggesting empirical target value reductions. TA was found to be low (meropenem: 35.7%, piperacillin 50.5%) with the lowest TA for severely impaired renal function (meropenem: 13.9%, piperacillin: 29.2%), and observed drug concentrations did not significantly differ between patients with different targets, indicating dosing was not adequately adjusted for renal function or target. Dosing adjustments were rare for both drugs (meropenem: 6.13%, piperacillin: 4.78%) and for meropenem irrespective of TA, revealing that concentration monitoring alone was insufficient to guide dosing adjustment. Empirical targets should regularly be assessed and adjusted based on local susceptibility data. To improve TA, scientific knowledge should be translated into easy-to-use dosing strategies guiding antibiotic dosing.

Indexed as

antibioticsantimicrobial stewardshipcritically illmeropenempharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamicpiperacillin/tazobactam

Identifiers

PMID35740164
PMCPMC9219867

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.