Integrated pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling to evaluate antimicrobial prophylaxis in abdominal surgery
S A Zelenitsky1, C Lawson2, D Calic2
1College of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Department of Pharmacy, St. Boniface Hospital, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada zelenits@umanitoba.ca.
Objectives:
To use Monte Carlo simulation with an integrated pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model to evaluate guideline-recommended antimicrobial prophylaxis (AP) regimens with anaerobic coverage in abdominal surgery.
Methods:
AP regimens were tested in simulated subjects undergoing elective abdominal surgery using relevant PK models and pathogen distributions in surgical site infections (SSIs). Predicted cumulative target attainment was the percentage of simulated subjects with free (unbound) antimicrobial plasma concentrations above the MICs for potential SSI pathogens.
Results:
Cefazolin plus metronidazole covered SSI aerobes in 70% and the Bacteroides fragilis group in 99% of subjects, whereas cefoxitin only covered aerobes and anaerobes in 63% and 27% of cases, respectively. The broad-spectrum ceftriaxone plus metronidazole covered aerobes in 82% and anaerobes in 99% of simulations, while ertapenem covered aerobes in 88% and anaerobes in 90% of cases. Clindamycin covered the B. fragilis group in only 11% of cases. For cefazolin, 2 g doses maintained target attainment in simulated subjects from 80 to 120 kg, whereas 1 g doses were associated with lower target attainment against potential Gram-negative pathogens even in those <80 kg. For gentamicin, 3 mg/kg doses were comparable to the suggested 5 mg/kg, but superior to the traditional 1.5 mg/kg.
Conclusions:
This study demonstrates the use of PK-PD to inform decisions regarding AP in abdominal surgery. In this case, the findings support avoiding cefoxitin, avoiding clindamycin for anaerobic coverage, selecting 2 g doses of cefazolin even in patients <80 kg and using 3 mg/kg doses of gentamicin.
More Related Videos
11:17Multiplex Therapeutic Drug Monitoring by Isotope-dilution HPLC-MS/MS of Antibiotics in Critical Illnesses
Published on: August 30, 2018
09:26Antibiotic Efficacy Testing in an Ex vivo Model of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms in the Cystic Fibrosis Lung
Published on: January 22, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Impact of Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Models: Regulatory Decisions
Pharmacodynamic Models: Overview
Physiological Pharmacokinetic Models: Incorporating Hepatic Transporter-Mediated Clearance
A recent model describes pravastatin's hepatobiliary excretion,...
Pharmacokinetic Models: Overview
There are three primary types of models: empirical, compartment, and physiological. Empirical models, with minimal...
Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Relationship: Problems
Pharmacokinetic Models: Comparison and Selection Criterion
Physiological models take a detailed approach by considering specific molecular processes. They can predict drug distribution, metabolism, and elimination changes, providing a comprehensive understanding of how drugs interact with the body.
