Аннотация
Исследования in vitro и эксперименты на животных показали, что клиническая эффективность β-лактамных антибиотиков зависит от времени (Т), в течение которого концентрация препарата превышает минимальную подавляющую концентрацию (МПК) его в отношении данного возбудителя (Т > МПК). В среднем считается, что поддержание Т > МПК в течение примерно 50% интервала дозирования позволяет получить удовлетворительные результаты терапии. Эти данные были подтверждены в клинических исследованиях. Для пациентов с иммунодефицитными состояниями необходимо стремиться к более высоким показателям: Т ≥ 5 МПК в течение всего интервала дозирования. Постоянная инфузия (ПИ) позволяет поддерживать необходимую концентрацию антибиотика в крови на протяжении всей инфузии. Клинические исследования у пациентов с муковисцидозом, грамположительными инфекциями, нейтропенической лихорадкой и грамотрицательным сепсисом продемонстрировали, по крайней мере, сходную эффективность этого режима терапии и традиционного интермиттирующего введения (ИВ), а также возможность снижения суточной дозы препарата при одинаковых исходах лечения без увеличения числа нежелательных лекарственных реакций. ПИ имеет определённые фармакокинетические, экономические и, возможно, клинические преимущества перед ИВ. Однако для получения окончательных выводов необходимо проведение дополнительных клинических исследований.
-
1.
Плоткин В.И. Современное лечение антибиотиками.Казанский медицинский журнал 1975; (2):26-9.
-
2.
Shah P., Junghann W., Stille W. Dosis-wirkungs-beziehung, der bacterizide beiE. coli, K. pneumoniaeundStaphylococcus aureus. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1976;101:325-8.
-
3.
Craig W.A., Ebert S.C. Killing and regrowth of bacteriainvitro:a review. Scand J Infect Dis 1991; 74 (Suppl):63-70.
-
4.
Craig W.A., Anders D. Differences in thein vivopharma-codynamics of telithromycin and azithromycin againstStreptococcus pneumoniae. Proceedings of the 40thICAAC; 2000 Sep 17-20; Toronto, Canada. Washington:ASM Press; 2000. Abstract 2141.
-
5.
Craig W.A., Gudmundsson S. Postantibiotic effect. In:Lorian V., editor. Antibiotics in laboratory medicine. 4thed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 199
-
6.
p. 296-329.6. Craig W.A. Pharmacodinamics of antimicrobials: generalconcepts and applications. In: Nightingale C.H.,Murakawa T., Ambrose P.G., editors. Antimicrobialpharmacodynamics in theory and clinical practice. NewYork, Basel: Marcel Decker, Inc; 2002. p. 1-22.
-
7.
Mouton J.W., den Hollander J.G. Killing ofPseudomonasaeruginosaduring continuous and intermittent infusionof ceftazidime in an in vitro pharmacokinetic model.Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38, 931-6.
-
8.
Xiong Y.Q., Potel G., Caillon J., et al. Determination ofthein vivoefficacious serum concentrations of cef-tazidime administered as continuous infusion on anexperimental model ofPseudomonas aeruginosarabbitmodel. Proceeding of the 34th ICAAC; 1994 Oct 4-7;Orlando, Florida. Washington: ASM Press; 1994.Abstract A88.
-
9.
Vogelman B., Gudmundsson S., Leggett J., et al.Correlation of antimicrobial pharmacokinetic parameterswith therapeutic efficacy in an animal model. J Infect Dis1988; 158:831-47.
-
10.
Craig W.A. Interrelationship between pharmacokineticsand pharmacodynamics in determining dosage regimensfor broad-spectrum cephalosporins. Diagn MicrobiolInfect Dis 1995; 22:89-96.
-
11.
Craig W.A. Antimicrobial resistance issues of the future.Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1996; 25:213-7.
-
12.
Onyeji C.O., Nicolau D.P., Nightingale C.H., Quinti-liani R. Optimal times above MICs of ceftibuten andcefaclor in experimental intra-abdominal infections.Antimicrob Agents Chemoter 1994; 38:1112-7.
-
13.
Nightingale C.H., Murakawa T. Microbiology and phar-macokinetics. In: Nightingale C.H., Murakawa T.,Ambrose P.G., editors. Antimicrobial pharmacodynamicsin theory and clinical practice. New York, Basel: MarcelDecker, Inc; 2002. p. 23-39.
-
14.
Vogelman B., Gudmundsson S., Turnidge J., et al.In vivopostantibiotic effect in a thigh infection in neutropenicmice. J Infect Dis 1988; 157:287-98.
-
15.
Craig W.A. Post-antibiotic effects in experimental infec-tion models: relationship toin6vitrophenomena and totreatment of infections in man. J Antimicrob Chemother1993; 31 (Suppl D):149-58.
-
16.
Tauber M.G., Zak O., Scheld W.M., et al. The postantibi-otic effect in the treatment of experimental meningitiscaused byStreptococcus pneumoniaein rabbits. J InfectDis 1984; 149:575-83.
-
17.
Bustamante C.I., Drusano G.L., Tatem B.A., StandifordH.C. Post-antibiotic effect of imipenem onPseudomonasaeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1984; 26:678-82.
-
18.
Nadler H.L., Pitkin D.H., Sheikh W. The postantibioticeffect of meropenem and imipenem on selected bacteria. JAntimicrob Chemother 1989; 24 (Suppl A):225-31.
-
19.
Odenholt-Tornqvist I. Studies on the postantibioticeffect and the postantibiotic sub-MIC effect of meropen-em. J Antimicrob Chemother 1993; 31:881-92.
-
20.
Bernard E., Breilh D., Bru J.P., et al. Is there a rationale for the continuous infusion of cefepime? A multidiscipli-nary approach. Clin Microbiol Infect 2003; 9:339-48.
-
21.
Craig W.A. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic para-meters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice andmen. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 26:1-12.
-
22.
Anders D. Antimicrobial pharmacokinetics and pharma-codynamics. In: Baddour L. M., Gorbach S. L., editors.Therapy of infectious diseases. Philadelphia, Pennsyl-vania: W.B. Saunders Company; 2003. p. 1-22.
-
23.
Craig W.A., Anders D. Pharmacokinetics and pharmaco-dynamics of antibiotics in otitis media. Pediatr Infect DisJ 1996; 15:255-9.
-
24.
Vogelman B., Craig W.A. Kinetics of antimicrobial activ-ity. J Pediatr 1986:108; 835-40.
-
25.
Mouton J.W., Vinks A.A. Is continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics worthwhile? – efficacy and pharmaco-kinetic considerations. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996;38:5-15.
-
26.
A Consensus Document by the PharmPK List. Continu-ous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics: a potential strat-egy to improve parenteral antimicrobial therapy.Available from URL: http://www.boomer.org/pkin/con-sensus/bl.html
-
27.
Speers D. Continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics.Available from URL: http://www.usyd.edu.au
-
28.
Quintiliani R., Nicolau D.P., Nightingale C.H.Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles inantibiotic usage. In.: Johnson J.T., Yu V.L., editors.Infectious diseases and antimicrobial therapy of the ears,nose and throat. 1st ed. Philadelphia: W.B. SaundersCompany; 1997. p. 48-55.
-
29.
Tessier P.R., Nicolau D.P., Onyeji C.O., Nightingale C.H.Pharmacodynamics of intermittent- and continuous-infusion cefepime alone and in combination with once-daily tobramycin againstPseudomonas aeruginosain anin vitroinfection model. Chemotherapy 1999; 45:284-95.
-
30.
Cappelletty D.M., Kang S.L., Palmer S.M., Rybak M.J.Pharmacodynamics of ceftazidime administered as con-tinuous infusion or intermittent bolus alone and in com-bination with single daily-dose amikacin againstPseudomonas aeruginosain anin vitroinfection model.Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39:1797-801.
-
31.
Elkhaili H., Peter J.D., Pompei D., et al. Pharmaco-kineticsin vivoand pharmacodynamicsex vivo/in vitroofmeropenem and cefpirome in the Yucatan micropigmodel: continuous infusion versus intermittent injection.Clin Microbiol Infect 1998; 4:18-26.
-
32.
MacGowan A.P., Bowker K.E. Continuous infusion ofbeta-lactam antibiotics. Clin Pharmacokinet 1998; 35:391-402.
-
33.
Roosendaal R., Bakker-Woudenberg I.A., van denBerg J.C., Michel M.F. Therapeutic efficacy of continu-ous versus intermittent administration of ceftazidime inan experimentalKlebsiella pneumoniaepneumonia inrats. J Infect Dis 1985; 152:373-8.
-
34.
Roosendaal R., Bakker-Woudenberg I.A., van denBerghe-van Raffe M., Michel M.F. Continuous versusintermittent administration of ceftazidime in experimen-talKlebsiella pneumoniaepneumonia in normal andleukopenic rats. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1986;30:403-8.
-
35.
Bakker-Woudenberg I.A., van den Berg J.C., Fontijne P.,Michel M.F. Efficacy of continuous versus intermittentadministration of penicillin G inStreptococcus pneumoni6aepneumonia in normal and immunodeficient rats. Eur JClin Microbiol 1984; 3:131-5.
-
36.
Thauvin C., Eliopoulos G.M., Willey S., et al.Continuous-infusion ampicillin therapy of enterococcalendocarditis in rats. Antimicrob Agents Chemother1987; 31:139-43.
-
37.
Livingston D.H., Wang M.T. Continuous infusion ofcefazolin is superior to intermittent dosing in decreasinginfection after hemorrhagic shock. Am J Surg 1993;165:203-7.
-
38.
Robaux M.A., Dube L., Caillon J., et al.In vivoefficacy ofcontinuous infusion versus intermittent dosing of cef-tazidime alone or in combination with amikacin relativeto human kinetic profiles in aPseudomonas aeruginosarabbit endocarditis model. J Antimicrob Chemother2001; 47:617-22.
-
39.
Naziri W., Cheadle W.G., Trachtenberg L.S., et al.Second place winner of the Conrad Jobst Award in thegold medal paper competition. Increased antibiotic effec-tiveness in a model of surgical infection through continu-ous infusion. Am Surg 1995; 61:11-5.
-
40.
Hellinger W.C., Rouse M.S., Rabadan P.M., et al.Continuous intravenous versus intermittent ampicillintherapy of experimental endocarditis caused by amino-glycoside-resistant enterococci. Antimicrob AgentsChemother 1992; 36:1272-5.
-
41.
Hanes S.D., Wood G.C., Herring V., et al. Intermittentand continuous ceftazidime infusion for critically ill trau-ma patients. Am J Surg 2000; 179:436-40.
-
42.
Couldry R., Sanborn M., Klutman N.E., Strayer A.H.Continuous infusion of ceftazidime with an elastomericinfusion device. Am J Health Syst Pharm 1998; 55:145-9.
-
43.
Burgess D.S., Summers K.K., Hardin T.C. Pharmaco-kinetics and pharmacodynamics of aztreonam adminis-tered by continuous intravenous infusion. Clin Ther1999; 21:1882-9.
-
44.
Nicolau D.P., Nightingale C.H., Banevicius M.A., et al.Serum bactericidal activity of ceftazidime: continuousinfusion versus intermittent injections. AntimicrobAgents Chemother 1996; 40:61-4.
-
45.
Lemmen S.W., Engels I., Daschner F.D. Serum bacterici-dal activity of ceftazidime administered as continuousinfusion of 3 g over 24 h versus intermittent bolus infu-sion of 2 g againstPseudomonas aeruginosain healthyvolunteers [letter]. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997;39:841-2.
-
46.
Burgess D.S., Hastings R.W., Hardin T.C. Pharmaco-kinetics and pharmacodynamics of cefepime adminis-tered by intermittent and continuous infusion. Clin Ther2000; 22:66-75.
-
47.
Klepser M.E., Marangos M.N., Zhu Z., et al. Comparisonof the bactericidal activities of piperacillin-tazobactam,ticarcillin-clavulanate, and ampicillin-sulbactam againstclinical isolates of Bacteroides fragilis,Enterococcus faecalis,Escherichia coliandPseudomonas aeruginosa.Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1997; 41:435-9.
-
48.
Bui K.Q., Ambrose P.G., Grant E.M., et al. Pharmaco-kinetics and pharmacoeconomic evaluation of ticarcillin-clavulanate administered either as continuous or inter-mittent infusion with once-daily gentamicin. Inf Dis ClinPract 1999; 8:449-55.
-
49.
Hollenstein U., Brunner M., Mayer B.X., et al. Targetsite concentrations after continuous infusion and bolusinjection of cefpirome to healthy volunteers. ClinPharmacol Ther 2000; 67:229-36.
-
50.
Benko A.S., Cappelletty D.M., Kruse J.A., Rybak M.J.Continuous infusion versus intermittent administrationof ceftazidime in critically ill patients with suspectedgram-negative infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother1996; 40:691-5.
-
51.
Houlihan H.H., Mercier R.C., McKinnon P.S. Continu-ous infusion versus intermittent administration of cef-tazidime in critically ill patients with gram-negativeinfection. Proceeding of the 37th ICAAC; 1997 Sep 28-Oct 1; Toronto, Canada. Washington: ASM Press; 1997.Abstract A-42.
-
52.
Lipman J., Gomersall C.D., Gin T., et al. Continuousinfusion ceftazidime in intensive care: a randomized con-trolled trial. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999; 43:309-11.
-
53.
Angus B.J., Smith M.D., Suputtamongkol Y., et al. Phar-macokinetic-pharmacodynamic evaluation of ceftazidimecontinuous infusion vs intermittent bolus injection insepticaemic melioidosis. Br J Clin Pharmacol2000;50:184-91.
-
54.
Buijk S.E., Gyssens I.C., Mouton J.W., et al. Pharmaco-kinetics of ceftazidime in serum and peritoneal exudateduring continuous versus intermittent administration topatients with severe intra-abdominal infections. JAntimicrob Chemother 2002; 49:121-8.
-
55.
Thalhammer F., Traunmuller F., Menyawi I.E., et al.Continuous infusion versus intermittent administrationof meropenem in critically ill patients. J AntimicrobChemother 1999; 43:523-7.
-
56.
Boselli E., Allaouchiche B., Breilh D., et al. Diffusion intolung tissue of cefepime administrated in continuous infu-sion in patients with nosocomial pneumonia. Proceedingof the 42nd ICAAC; 2002 Sep 27-30; San Diego, USA.Washington: ASM Press; 2002. Abstract A-1260.
-
57.
Boselli E., Breilh D., Rimmele T., et al. Diffusion intolung tissue of ceftazidime administrated in continuousinfusion to critically ill patients with severe nosocomialpneumonia. Proceeding of the 43rd ICAAC; 2003 Sep 14-17; Chicago, USA. Washington: ASM Press; 2003.Abstract A-32.
-
58.
Castagnola E. Temporary interruption of ceftazidimecontinuous infusion without reduction of activity: a com-puter-assisted simulation. J Chemother 2001; 13:395-401.
-
59.
Kuti J.L., Nightingale C.H., Quintiliani R., Nicolau D.P.Pharmacodynamic profiling of continuously infusedpiperacillin/tazobactam againstPseudomonas aeruginosausing Monte Carlo analysis. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis2002; 44:51-7.
-
60.
Lipman J., Wallis S.C., Rickard C. Low plasma cefepimelevels in critically ill septic patients: pharmacokineticmodeling indicates improved troughs with revised dos-ing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43:2559-61.
-
61.
Daenen S., Erjavec Z., Uges D.R., et al. Continuous infu-sion of ceftazidime in febrile neutropenic patients withacute myeloid leukemia. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis1995; 14:188-92.
-
62.
Marshall E., Smith D.B., O’Reilly S.M., et al. Low-dosecontinuous-infusion ceftazidime monotherapy in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients. Support Care Cancer2000; 8:198-202.
-
63.
Egerer G., Goldschmidt H., Hensel M., et al. Continuousinfusion of ceftazidime for patients with breast cancerand multiple myeloma receiving high-dose chemotherapyand peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. BoneMarrow Transplant 2002; 30:427-31.
-
64.
Dalle J.H., Gnansounou M., Husson M.O., et al.Continuous infusion of ceftazidime in the empiric treat-ment of febrile neutropenic children with cancer. JPediatr Hematol Oncol 2002; 24:714-6.
-
65.
Bakker W., Vinks A.A., Mouton J.W., et al. [Continuousintravenous home treatment of airway infections usingceftazidime administration via portable pump in patientswith cystic fibrosis; a multicenter study][Dutch] NedTijdschr Geneeskd 1993; 137:2486-91.
-
66.
Vinks A.A., Brimicombe R.W., Heijerman H.G., BakkerW. Continuous infusion of ceftazidime in cystic fibrosispatients during home treatment: clinical outcome, micro-biology and pharmacokinetics. J Antimicrob Chemother1997; 40:125-33.
-
67.
Leder K., Turnidge J.D., Korman T.M., Grayson M.L.The clinical efficacy of continuous-infusion flucloxacillinin serious staphylococcal sepsis. J Antimicrob Chemother1999; 43:113-8.
-
68.
Howden B.P., Richards M.J. The efficacy of continuousinfusion flucloxacillin in home therapy for seriousstaphylococcal infections and cellulitis. J AntimicrobChemother 2001; 48:311-4.
-
69.
Pass S.E., Miyagawa C.I., Healy D.P., Ivey T.D. Serumconcentrations of cefuroxime after continuous infusion incoronary bypass graft patients. Ann Pharmacother 2001;35:409-13.
-
70.
Nicolau D.P, McNabb J., Lacy M.K., et al. Continuousversus intermittent administration of ceftazidime inintensive care unit patients with nosocomial pneumonia.Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2001; 17:497-504.
-
71.
Rappaz I., Decosterd L.A., Bille J., et al. Continuous infu-sion of ceftazidime with a portable pump is as effective asthrice-a-day bolus in cystic fibrosis children. Eur JPediatr 2000; 159:919-25.
-
72.
Laterre P.F., Baririan N., Spapen H., et al. Continuousinfusion of ceftazidime vs conventional schedule fortreatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia in inten-sive care units. Proceeding of the 42nd ICAAC; 2002 Sep27-30; San Diego, USA. Washington: ASM Press; 2002.Abstract A-1402.
-
73.
Зайцев А.А., Карпов О.И., Суисси Р. Клинико-эконо-мическая оценка оптимизации введения цефтазидима. Качественная клиническая практика 2003; (2):81-6.
-
74.
Bodey G.P., Ketchel S.J., Rodriguez N. A randomizedstudy of carbenicillin plus cefamandole or tobramycin inthe treatment of febrile episodes in cancer patients. Am JMed 1979; 67:608-16.
-
75.
Lagast H., Meunier-Carpentier F., Klastersky J. Treat-ment of gram-negative bacillary septicemia with cefoper-azone. Eur J Clin Microbiol 1983; 2:554-8.
-
76.
Georges B., Archambaud M., Saivin S., et al. [Continuousversus intermittent cefepime infusion in critical care.Preliminary results][French] Pathol Biol (Paris) 1999;47:483-5.
-
77.
Grant E.M., Kuti J.L., Nicolau D.P., et al. Clinical effica-cy and pharmacoeconomics of a continuous-infusionpiperacillin-tazobactam program in a large communityteaching hospital. Pharmacother 2002; 22:471-83.
-
78.
Owens C.A., Ambrose P.G., Quintiliani R., et al. Infusionphlebitis relative incidence associated with cefuroximeadministered by intermittent and continuous infusion.Clin Drug Invest 1998; 15:531-5.
-
79.
Gradelski E., Fung-Tomc J., Huczko E., Kessier R.E.Development of resistance inPseudomonas aeruginosatobroad-spectrum cephalosporins via step-wise mutations.J Antimicrob Chemother 1993; 32 (Suppl B):75-80.
-
80.
Fung-Tomc J., Gradelski E., Huczko E., et al. Differencesin the resistant variants ofEnterobacter cloacaeselectedby extended-spectrum cephalosporins. AntimicrobAgents Chemother 1996; 40:1289-93.
-
81.
Zhao X., Drilca K. Restricting the selecting of antibiotic-resistant mutants: a general strategy derived from fluoro-quinolone studies. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33 (Suppl 3):S147-56.
-
82.
Drusano G.L. Prevention of resistance: a goal for dose se-lection for antimicrobial agents. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 36(Suppl 1):42-50.
-
83.
McNabb J.J., Nightingale C.H., Quintiliani R., NicolauD.P. Cost-effectiveness of ceftazidime by continuousinfusion versus intermittent infusion for nosocomialpneumonia. Pharmacother 2001; 21:549-55.
-
84.
McNabb J.J.β-Lactam pharmacodynamics. In: Nightin-gale C.H., Murakawa T., Ambrose P.G. editors.Antimicrobial pharmacodynamics in theory and clinicalpractice. New York, Basel: Marcel Decker, Inc; 2002. p.99-123.
-
85.
Paladino J.A., Fell R.E. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of cef-menoxime dual individualization in the treatment of noso-comial pneumonia. Ann Pharmacother 1994; 28:384-9.
-
86.
Bryan C.S., Talwani R., Stinson M.S. Penicillin dosingfor pneumococcal pneumonia. Chest 1997; 112:1657-64.
-
87.
Neftel K., Walti M., Spengler H., DeWeek A. Effect ofstorage of penicillin-G solutions on sensitization of peni-cillin-G after intravenous administration. Lancet 1982;1:986-8.
-
88.
Drug information for the health care professional. Vol. 1.23rd ed. Taunton: Micromedex; 2003.
-
89.
Servais H., Tulkens P.M. Stability and compatibility ofceftazidime administered by continuous infusion tointensive care patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother2001; 45:2643-7.
-
90.
Jaruratanasirikul S., Sriwiriyajan S. Stability of ceftazidi-me in normal saline solution after exposure to light. Sout-heast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 2001; 32:216-8.
-
91.
Baririan N., Viaene E., Servais H., et al. Stability andcompatibility of cefepime for administration by continu-ous infusion in cystic fibrosis and intensive care patients.Proceeding of the 42nd ICAAC; 2002 Sep 27-30; SanDiego, USA. Washington: ASM Press; 2002. AbstractA-1399.
-
92.
Sprauten P., Beringer P., Louie S., et al. Stability andantibacterial activity of cefepime during continuous infu-sion. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003; 47:1991-4.
-
93.
Smith H., Dewdney J.M., Wheeier A.W. A comparison ofthe amounts and the antigenicity of polymeric materialsformed in aqueous solutions by some beta-lactam antibi-otics. Immunol 1971; 21:527-33.
-
94.
Hitt C.M., Patel K.B., Nicolau D.P., et al. Influence ofpiperacillin-tazobactam on pharmacokinetics of gentam-icin given once daily. Am J Health Syst Pharm 1997;54:2704-8.
-
95.
Connors J.E., DiPiro J.T., Hayter R.G., et al. Assessmentof cefazolin and cefuroxime tissue penetration by using acontinuous intravenous infusion. Antimicrob AgentsChemother 1990; 34:1128-31.
-
96.
Facca B., Frame B., Triesenberg S. Population pharmaco-kinetics of ceftizoxime administered by continuous infu-sion in clinically ill adult patients. Antimicrob AgentsChemother 1998; 42:1783-7. Erratum in: AntimicrobAgents Chemother 1999;43:197.
-
97.
Negri M.C., Baquero F.In vitroselective concentrationsof cefepime and ceftazidime for AmpCβ-lactamasehyperproducerEnterobactercloacaevariants. Clin Micro-biol Infect 1998; 4:585-8.