Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 20, 2026

Determining Ciliary Function and Membrane Impermeability of the Pseudostratified Lung Airway Epithelium
Published on: February 21, 2025
Pulmonary epithelial lining fluid concentrations after use of systemic amphotericin B lipid formulations
Stefan Weiler1, Gerda Falkensammer, Angelika Hammerer-Lercher
1Inflammation Research Laboratory, Department of Internal Medicine I, Innsbruck Medical University, Anichstrasse 35, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Abstract:
Amphotericin B (AMB) concentrations were determined in pulmonary epithelial lining fluid (ELF) of 44 critically ill patients, who were receiving treatment with liposomal AMB (LAMB) (n = 11), AMB colloidal dispersion (ABCD) (n = 28), or AMB lipid complex (ABLC) (n = 5). Mean AMB levels (+/- standard errors of the means) in ELF amounted to 1.60 +/- 0.58, 0.38 +/- 0.07, and 1.29 +/- 0.71 microg/ml in LAMB-, ABCD-, and ABLC-treated patients, respectively (differences are not significant).
Insights
Amphotericin B concentrations in lung fluid varied across different formulations in critically ill patients. Liposomal AMB and AMB lipid complex showed higher levels than AMB colloidal dispersion, though not significantly different.
Area of Science:
- Pharmacology
- Critical Care Medicine
- Pulmonary Medicine
Background:
- Amphotericin B (AMB) is a critical antifungal agent.
- Different formulations of AMB exist, including liposomal AMB (LAMB), AMB colloidal dispersion (ABCD), and AMB lipid complex (ABLC).
- Understanding drug concentrations in specific body compartments, like pulmonary epithelial lining fluid (ELF), is crucial for optimizing treatment efficacy in critically ill patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To quantify and compare Amphotericin B concentrations in the pulmonary epithelial lining fluid (ELF) of critically ill patients receiving different AMB formulations.
- To assess potential differences in drug distribution among LAMB, ABCD, and ABLC in the ELF.
Main Methods:
- Pulmonary epithelial lining fluid (ELF) samples were collected from 44 critically ill patients.
- Patients were treated with one of three AMB formulations: LAMB (n=11), ABCD (n=28), or ABLC (n=5).
- AMB concentrations in ELF were measured using standardized assays.
Main Results:
- Mean AMB concentrations in ELF were 1.60 ± 0.58 µg/ml for LAMB, 0.38 ± 0.07 µg/ml for ABCD, and 1.29 ± 0.71 µg/ml for ABLC.
- Despite observed differences, the variations in mean AMB levels across the three formulations in ELF were not statistically significant.
- This suggests comparable distribution into the ELF for these AMB formulations in this patient cohort.
Conclusions:
- The study determined AMB concentrations in ELF across different formulations in critically ill patients.
- While LAMB and ABLC showed numerically higher ELF concentrations than ABCD, these differences were not statistically significant.
- Further research may be needed to explore clinical implications and optimal dosing strategies for each AMB formulation in severe infections.
Related Concept Videos
Antifungal Agents
Determination of Multiple Dosing Parameters: Steady-State, Minimum and Maximum Concentrations

