Meropenem dosing in critically ill patients with sepsis and without renal dysfunction: intermittent bolus versus continuous administration? Monte Carlo dosing simulations and subcutaneous tissue distribution.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the plasma and subcutaneous tissue concentration-time profiles of meropenem administered by intermittent bolus dosing or continuous infusion to critically ill patients with sepsis and without renal dysfunction, and to use population pharmacokinetic modelling and Monte Carlo simulations to assess the cumulative fraction of response (CFR) against Gram-negative pathogens likely to be encountered in critical care units.


METHODS
We randomized 10 patients with sepsis to receive meropenem by intermittent bolus administration (n = 5; 1 g 8 hourly) or an equal dose administered by continuous infusion (n = 5). Serial subcutaneous tissue concentrations were determined using microdialysis and compared with plasma data for first-dose and steady-state pharmacokinetics. Population pharmacokinetic modelling of plasma data and Monte Carlo simulations were then undertaken with NONMEM.


RESULTS
It was found that continuous infusion maintains higher median trough concentrations, in both plasma (intermittent bolus 0 versus infusion 7 mg/L) and subcutaneous tissue (0 versus 4 mg/L). All simulated intermittent bolus, extended and continuous infusion dosing achieved 100% of pharmacodynamic targets against most Gram-negative pathogens. Superior obtainment of pharmacodynamic targets was achieved using administration by extended or continuous infusion against less susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter species.


CONCLUSIONS
This is the first study to compare the relative concentration-time data of bolus and continuous administration of meropenem at the subcutaneous tissue and plasma levels. We found that the administration of meropenem by continuous infusion maintains higher concentrations in subcutaneous tissue and plasma than by intermittent bolus dosing. Administration by extended or continuous infusion will achieve superior CFR against less-susceptible organisms in patients without renal dysfunction.
Roberts
Jason A
JA
Burns, Trauma and Critical Care Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. j.roberts2@uq.edu.au
Kirkpatrick
Carl M J
CM
Roberts
Michael S
MS
Robertson
Thomas A
TA
Dalley
Andrew J
AJ
Lipman
Jeffrey
J
D000151:Acinetobacter Infections / Q000188:drug therapy; D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000493:pharmacokinetics*; D016638:Critical Illness; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D000077731:Meropenem; D008875:Middle Aged; D015233:Models, Statistical; D009010:Monte Carlo Method; D010949:Plasma / Q000737:chemistry; D011552:Pseudomonas Infections / Q000188:drug therapy; D018805:Sepsis / Q000188:drug therapy*; D040521:Subcutaneous Tissue / Q000737:chemistry; D013845:Thienamycins / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000493:pharmacokinetics*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents; D013845:Thienamycins; D000077731:Meropenem