Use of Carbapenems in Clinical Practice: When, Which and How Long? | CMAC

Use of Carbapenems in Clinical Practice: When, Which and How Long?

Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2006; 8(4):325-349

​ Bereznyakov I.G.
carbapenems imipenem meropenem ertapenem efficacy safety clinical indications review
Section
Antimicrobials
Type
Journal article
Publication
Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2006; 8(4):325-349

Abstract

Carpabenems (imipenem, meropenem, ertapenem) are currently one of the antibiotic classes that exhibit the broadest spectrum of activity and characterized by the low resistance rates of clinically significant pathogens. This article is an attempt to identify the role of carbapenems in clinical practice and to analyze differences between individual antimicrobials of this class by their primary characteristics. We have reviewed microbiological and clinical data on carbapenems published over the past 20 years and performed their critical analysis using the specified algorithm. Based on the data from randomized controlled trials and available meta-analyses we compared carbapenems in terms of their clinical efficacy (outpatient vs nosocomial infections, severe vs non-severe infections, monotherapy vs combination therapy). A focus was made on evaluation of data on resistance to carbapenems in clinically significant pathogens compared to other antibiotic classes. Expert opinions and consensus papers concerning the issues, such as choice of individual carbapenem and indications for use, are also presented.

  • 1. Белобородов В.Б. Современные подходы к совершенствованию антимикробной терапии тяжелых инфекций. Клин фармакол тер 2005; 14(2):105.
  • 2. Craig W.A. Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic parameters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice and men. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 26:1-12.
  • 3. Jacobs M.R. Building in efficacy: developing solutions to combat drug-resistant S. pneumoniae. Clin Microbiol Infect 2004; 10 (Suppl. 2):18-27.
  • 4. Pfaller M.A., Jones R.N. A review of the in vitro activity of meropenem and comparative antimicrobial agents tested against 30,254 aerobic and anaerobic pathogens isolated world wide. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1997; 28:157-63.
  • 5. Livermore D.M. Of Pseudomonas, porins, pumps and carbapenems. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001; 47:247-50.
  • 6. Turner P.J. Trends in antimicrobial susceptibilities among bacterial pathogens isolated from patients hospitalized in European medical centers: 6-year report 0f the MYSTIC surveillance study (1997-2002). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2005; 51:281-9.
  • 7. Unal S., Masterton R., Goossens H. Bacteraemia in Europe – antimicrobial susceptibility data from the MYSTIC Surveillance Programme. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2004; 23:155-63.
  • 8. Jones R.N., Mendes C., Turner P.J., Masterton R. An overview of the Meropenem Yearly Susceptibility Test Information Collection (MYSTIC) Program: 1997-2004. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2005; 53:247-56.
  • 9. Kaye K.S., Engermann J.J., Fraimow H.S., Abrutyn E. Pathogens resistant to antimicrobial agents: epidemiology, molecular mechanisms, and clinical management. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2004; 18:467-511.
  • 10. Livermore D.M., Patterson D.L. Pocket guide to extended-spectrum β-lactamases in resistance. London: Current Medicine Group Ltd., 2006.
  • 11. Goossens H., Grabein B. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility data for extended-spectrum β-lactamaseand AmpC-producing Enterobacteriaceae from the MYSTIC Program in Europe and United States (19972004). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2005; 53:257-64.
  • 12. Эйдельштейн М.В., Страчунский Л.С., исследовательская группа РОСНЕТ. Динамика распространенности и чувствительности БЛРСпродуцирующих штаммов энтеробактерий к различным антимикробным препаратам в ОРИТ России. Клин микробиол антимикроб химиотер 2005; 7(4):323-36.
  • 13. Patterson D.L. Recommendation for treatment of severe infections caused by Enterobacteriaceae producing extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs). Clin Microbiol Infect 2000; 6:460-3.
  • 14. Colodner R., Rock W., Chazan B., et al. Risk factors for the development of extended-spectrum β-lactamaseproducing bacteria in nonhospitalized patients. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2004; 23:163-7.
  • 15. Gilbert D.N., Moellering R.C., Eliopoulos G.M., Sande M.A., editors. The Sanford guide to antimicrobial therapy 2005. 35rd ed. Hyde Park (VT): Antimicrobial Therapy, Inc.; 2005.
  • 16. Cunha B.A., editor. Antibiotic essentials. 4th ed. Royal Oak (Michigan): Physician’s Press, 2005.
  • 17. Справочник по антимикробной терапии. Страчунский Л.С., ред. Вып. 1. Смоленск: МАКМАХ, 2006.
  • 18. American Thoracic Society. Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilatorassociated, and health-care associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005; 171:388-416.
  • 19. Чучалин А.Г., Синопальников А.И., Страчунский Л.С., и соавт. Нозокомиальная пневмония у взрослых: практические рекомендации по диагностике, лечению, профилактике (пособие для врачей). Утверждено Министерством здравоохранения и социального развития России. Москва, 2005.
  • 20. ESC guidelines. Guidelines on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of infective endocarditis. Eur Heart J 2004; 25:267-76.
  • 21. Deaney N.B., Tate H. A meta-analysis of clinical studies of imipenem-cilastatin for empirically treating febrile neutropenic patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 37:975-86.
  • 22. Березняков И.Г. Карбапенемы: мифы и действительность. Клин микробиол антимикроб химиотер 2003; 5(2):126-43.
  • 23. Alvarez-Lerma F. Modification of empiric antibiotic treatment in patients with pneumonia acquired in the intensive care unit. ICU-Acquired Pneumonia Study Group. Intens Care Med 1996; 22:387-94.
  • 24. Luna C.M., Vujacich P., Niederman M.S., et al. Impact of BAL data on the therapy and outcome of ventilatorassociated pneumonia. Chest 1997; 111:676-85.
  • 25. Rello J., Gallego M., Mariscal D., et al. The value of routine microbial investigation in ventilator-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997; 156:196200.
  • 26. Kollef M.H., Ward S. The influence of mini-BAL cultures on patient outcomes: implications for the antibiotic management of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest 1998; 113:412-20.
  • 27. Leibovici L., Shraga I., Drucker M., et al. The benefit of appropriate empirical antibiotic treatment in patients with bloodstream infection. J Intern Med 1998; 244:37986.
  • 28. Kollef M.H., Sherman G., Ward S., Frazer V.J. Inadequate antimicrobial treatment of infections: a risk factor for hospital mortality among critically ill patients. Chest 1999; 115:462-74.
  • 29. Ibrahim E.H., Sherman G., Ward S., et al. The influence of inadequate antimicrobial treatment of bloodstream infections on patient outcomes in the ICU setting. Chest 2000; 118:146-55.
  • 30. Kollef M. Appropriate empirical antibacterial therapy for nosocomial infections: getting it right the first time. Drugs 2000; 63:2157-68.
  • 31. Vincent J.L., Bihari D.J., Suter P.M., et al. The prevalence of nosocomial infection in intensive care units in Europe. Results of the European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC) Study. EPIC International Advisory Committee. J Am Med Ass 1995; 274:639-44.
  • 32. Richards M.J., Edwards J.R., Culver D.H., Gaynes R.P. Nosocomial infections in medical ICUs in the United States: National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:887-92.
  • 33. Blot S.I., Vanderwoude K.H., Colardyn F. A. Evaluation of outcome in critically ill patients with nosocomial Enterobacter bacteremia: results of a matched cohort study. Chest 2003; 123:1208-13.
  • 34. Kollef M.H., Sharpless L., Vlasnik J., et al. The impact of nosocomial infections on patients outcomes following cardiac surgery. Chest 1997; 112:666-75.
  • 35. Iregui M., Ward S., Sherman G., et al. Clinical importance of delays in the initiation of appropriate antibiotic treatment for ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest 2002; 122:262-8.
  • 36. Colardyn F. Appropriate and timely empirical antimicrobial treatment of ICU infections – a role for carbapenems. Acta Clinica Belgica 2005; 60:51-62.
  • 37. Lautenbach E., Strom B.L., Bilker W.B., et al. Epidemiological investigation of fluoroquinolone resistance in infections due to extended-spectrum β-lactamase– producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33:1288-94.
  • 38. Paterson D.L., Mulazimoglu L., Casellas J.M., et al. Epidemiology of ciprofloxacin resistance and its relationship to extended-spectrum β-lactamase production in Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates causing bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 30:473-8.
  • 39. Paterson D.L. “Collateral damage” from cephalosporin or quinolone antibiotic therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 38 (Suppl. 4):S341-5.
  • 40. Jones R.N. Resistance patterns among nosocomial pathogens: trends over the past few years. Chest 2001; 119:397S-404S.
  • 41. Mutnick A.H., Rhomberg P.R., Sader H.S., Jones R.N. Antimicrobial usage and resistance trend relationships from the MYSTIC Programme in North America (19992001). J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 53:290-6.
  • 42. Страчунский Л.С. Профиль чувствительности проблемных микроорганизмов в отделениях реанимации и интенсивной терапии. Consilium Medicum (Экстравыпуск) 2002; 6-9.
  • 43. Решедько Г.К., Рябкова Е.Л., Фаращук А.Н., Страчунский Л.С., исследовательская группа РОСНЕТ. Неферментирующие грамотрицательные возбудители нозокомиальных инфекций в ОРИТ России: проблемы антибиотикорезистентности. Клин микробиол антимикроб химиотер 2006; 8(3):24359.
  • 44. Friedland I., Misson L.A., Majumdar A., et al. In vitro activity of ertapenem against common clinical isolates in relation to human pharmacokinetics. J Chemother 2002; 14:483-91.
  • 45. Livermore D.M., Carter M.W., Bagel S., et al. In vitro activities of ertapenem (MK-0826) against recent clinical bacteria collected in Europe and Australia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001; 45:1860-7.
  • 46. De Rosa F.G., Craven D.E. Ventilator-associated pneumonia: current management strategies. Infect Med 2003; 20:248-59.
  • 47. Hurst M., Lamb H.M. Meropenem. A review of its use in patients in intensive care. Drugs 2000; 59:653-80.
  • 48. Mazuski J.E., Sawyer R.G., Nathens A.B., et al. The surgical infection society guidelines on antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections: evidence for the recommendations. Surg Infect 2002; 3:175-233.
  • 49. Mazuski J.E., Sawyer R.G., Nathens A.B., et al. The surgical infection society guidelines on antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections: an executive summary. Surg Infect 2002; 3:161-73.
  • 50. Solomkin J.S., Mazuski J.E., Baron E.J., et al. Guidelines for the selection of anti-infective agents for complicated intra-abdominal infections. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 37:9971005.
  • 51. Bailey J.A., Virgo K.S., DiPiro J.T., et al. Aminoglycosides for intra-abdominal infections: equal to the challenge? Surg Infect 2002; 3:315-35.
  • 52. Solomkin J.S., Hemsell D.L., Sweet R., et al. Evaluation of new anti-infective drugs for the treatment of intraabdominal infections. Clin Infect Dis 1992; 15(Suppl 1):S33-S42.
  • 53. Niederman M.S. Appropriate use of antimicrobial agents: challenges and strategies for improvement. Crit Care Med 2003; 31:608-16.
  • 54. Tellado J.M., Wilson S.E. Empiric treatment of nosocomial intra-abdominal infections: a focus on the carbapenems. Surg Infect 2005; 6:329-43.
  • 55. Wade J.J., Rolando N., Williams R., Casewell M.W. Serious infections caused by multiply-resistant Enterococcus faecium. Microb Drug Resist 1995; 1:241-3.
  • 56. Chang D.C., Wilson S.E. Meta-analysis of the clinical outcome of carbapenem monotherapy in the adjunctive treatment of intra-abdominal infections. Am J Surg 1997; 174:284-90.
  • 57. Lowe M.N., Lamb H.M. Meropenem. An updated review of its use in the management of intra-abdominal infections. Drugs 2000; 60:619-46.
  • 58. Brismar B., Malmborg A.S., Tunevall G., et al. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of intraabdominal infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 35:139-48.
  • 59. Basoli A, Meli EZ, Mazzocchi P, Speranza V. Imipenem/ cilastatin (1.5 g daily) versus meropenem (3.0 g daily) in patients with intra-abdominal infections: results of a prospective, randomized, multicentre trial. Scand J Infect Dis 1997; 29:503-8.
  • 60. Zanetti G., Harbarth S.J., Trampuz A., et al. Meropenem (1.5 g/day) is as effective as imipenem/cilastatin (2 g/ day) for the treatment of moderately severe intraabdominal infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 1999; 11:107-13.
  • 61. Kanellakopoulou K., Giamarellou H., Papadothomakos P., et al. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of intraabdominal infections requiring surgery. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1993; 12:44953.
  • 62. Geroulanos S.J., Meropenem Study Group. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in intra-abdomonal infections requiring surgery. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 36 (Suppl. A):191-205.
  • 63. Tonelli F. [Meropenem (Merrem) vs imipenem/cilastatin in hospital treatment of intra-abdominal infections. A multicenter study]. Minerva Chir 1997; 52:317-26.
  • 64. Colardyn F., Faulkner K.L., Meropenem Serious Infection Study Group. Intravenous meropenem versus imipenem/ cilastatin in the treatment of serious bacterial infections in hospitalized patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 38:523-37.
  • 65. Verwaest C; Belgian Multicenter Study Group. Mero­penem versus imipenem/cilastatin as empirical monotherapy for serious bacterial infections in the intensive care unit. Clin Microbiol Infect 2000; 6:294302.
  • 66. Чучалин А.Г., Синопальников А.И., Страчунский Л.С. и соавт. Внебольничная пневмония у взрослых: практические рекомендации по диагностике, лечению, профилактике. Клин микробиол антимикроб химиотер 2006; 8:54-86.
  • 67. Ortiz-Ruiz G., Caballero-Lopez J., Friedland I.R., et al. Protocol 018 Ertapenem Community-Acquired Pneumonia Study Group. A study evaluating the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ertapenem versus ceftriaxone for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34:1076-83.
  • 68. American Thoracic Society. Hospital-acquired pneumonia in adults: diagnosis, assessment of severity, initial antimicrobial therapy, and preventive strategies [consensus statement]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996; 153:1711-25.
  • 69. Hilf M., Yu V.L., Sharp J., et al. Antibiotic therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: outcome correlations in a prospective study of 200 patients. Am J Med 1989; 87:540-6.
  • 70. Paul M., Benuri-Silbiger I., Soares-Weiser K., Liebovici L. β-Lactam monotherapy versus β-lactam–aminoglycoside combination therapy for sepsis in immunocompetent patients: systematic review and metaanalysis of randomised trials. Brit Med J 2004; 328:668.
  • 71. Kollef M.H. Appropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy of nosocomial pneumonia – the role of the carbapenems. Resp Care 2004; 49:1530-41.
  • 72. Hartenauer U., Kljucar S., Bender H.-J., et al. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin for the treatment of serious bacterial infections at ICU. Antiinfect Drugs Chemother 1997; 15:65-70.
  • 73. Verwaest C.; Belgian Multicenter Study Group. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin as empirical monotherapy for serious bacterial infections in the intensive care unit. Clin Microbiol Infect 2000; 6:294302.
  • 74. Edwards S. J., Emmas C.E., Campbell H.E. Systematic review comparing meropenem with imipenem plus cilastatin in the treatment of severe infections. Curr Med Research Opinion 2005; 21:785-94.
  • 75. Novelli A., Adembri C., Livi P., et al. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of meropenem and imipenem in critically ill patients with sepsis. Clin Pharmacokinet 2005; 44:53949.
  • 76. Norrby S.R., Faulkner K.L., Newell P.A. Mini review. Differentiating meropenem and imipenem/cilastatin. Infect Dis Clin Pract 1997; 6:291-303.
  • 77. Norrby S.R., Gildon K.M. Safety profile of meropenem: a review of nearly 5,000 patients treated with meropenem. Scand J Infect Dis 1999; 31:3-10.
  • 78. Birnbaum J., Kahan F.M., Kropp H., MacDonald J.S. Carbapenems, a new class of beta-lactam antibiotics. Discovery and development of imipenem/cilastatin. Am J Med 1985; 78:3-21.
  • 79. Gruss E., Tomas J.F., Bernis C., et al. Nephroprotective effect of cilastatin in allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Results from a retrospective analysis. Bone Marrow Transplant 1996; 18:761-5.
  • 80. Marquina M.C., Giráldez J., Idoate A. [The pharmacoeconomics of meropenem versus imipenem/ cilastatin]. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 1997; 15(Suppl.1):45-50.
  • 81. Plumridge R.J. Cost analysis of infusion versus injection delivery of imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem. Clin Drug Invest 1997; 14:132-6.
  • 82. Smyth E.T.M., Barr J.G., Hogg G.M. An assessment of hidden costs on total prescribing cost of courses of meropenem and imipenem/cilastatin. Br J Med Econ 1996; 10:325-40.
  • 83. Attanasio E., Russo P., Carunchio G., et al. Costeffectiveness study of imipenem/cilastatin versus meropenem in intra-abdominal infections. Dig Surg 2000; 17:164-72.
  • 84. Яковлев С.В., Белобородов В.Б., Сидоренко С.В. и соавт. Анализ адекватности стартовых эмпирических режимов антибактериальной терапии при тяжелых нозокомиальных инфекциях (исследование АСЭТ). Клин фармакол тер 2006; 15:1421.
Views
0 Abstract
0 PDF
0 Crossref citations
Shared