Safety and Efficacy of Extracorporeal Cytokine Hemoadsorption in Septic Shock in Critically Ill Cirrhotics

Author(s):  
Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 76
Author(s):  
Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris ◽  
Christina Bartzavali ◽  
Alexandra Georgakopoulou ◽  
Fevronia Kolonitsiou ◽  
Chrisavgi Papamichail ◽  
...  

Background: The increased frequency of bacteraemias caused by pandrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (PDR-Kp) has significant implications. The aim of the present study was to identify predictors associated with mortality of PDR-Kp bacteraemias. Methods: Patients with monomicrobial bacteraemia due to PDR-Kp were included. K. pneumoniae was considered PDR if it showed resistance to all available groups of antibiotics. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of meropenem, tigecycline, fosfomycin, and ceftazidime/avibactam were determined by Etest, whereas for colistin, the broth microdilution method was applied. blaKPC, blaVIM, blaNDM, and blaOXA genes were detected by PCR. Results: Among 115 PDR-Kp bacteraemias, the majority of infections were primary bacteraemias (53; 46.1%), followed by catheter-related (35; 30.4%). All isolates were resistant to tested antimicrobials. blaKPC was the most prevalent carbapenemase gene (98 isolates; 85.2%). Thirty-day mortality was 39.1%; among 51 patients with septic shock, 30-day mortality was 54.9%. Multivariate analysis identified the development of septic shock, Charlson comorbidity index, and bacteraemia other than primary or catheter-related as independent predictors of mortality, while a combination of at least three antimicrobials was identified as an independent predictor of survival. Conclusions: Mortality of PDR-Kp bloodstream infections was high. Administration of at least three antimicrobials might be beneficial for infections in critically ill patients caused by such pathogens.


2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 1034-1041 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Cohen ◽  
Carel J. Pretorius ◽  
Jacobus P. J. Ungerer ◽  
John Cardinal ◽  
Antje Blumenthal ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 81-94
Author(s):  
Artem V. Marukhov ◽  
Elena V. Murzina ◽  
Mikhail V. Zakharov ◽  
Genrikh A. Sofronov ◽  
Lyudmila V. Buryakova ◽  
...  

The relevance. Meropenem is a broad-spectrum carbapenem antibiotic widely used to treat patients with sepsis / septic shock. Critically ill patients are usually supported with one of the forms extracorporeal blood purification. However, data on the effect of various extracorporeal support techniques on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of meropenem are insufficient or contradictory. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of meropenem dosage regimens in the treatment of septic patients during extracorporeal blood purification. Materials and methods. Plasma concentrations of meropenem were monitored in three critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock. Patients were treated using various extracorporeal support techniques. Meropenem was used as empirical antibacterial mono- or complex therapy (1 g every 8 or 12 hours). Meropenem concentrations in plasma were determined by validated assay methods on Acquity ultraefficient liquid chromatography (UPLC) H-Class system. Results. It is shown that the meropenem plasma concentration in critically ill patients changes significantly. It was found that the standard meropenem dosing regimens in patients with sepsis / septic shock during continuous hemodiafiltration do not ensure the achievement of the PK/PD target of 100% TMIC for sensitive strains (MIC2 mg/L) and for intermediate resistance pathogens (2MIC8 mg/L). Continuous hemofiltration and selective adsorption of lipopolysaccharide have a less pronounced effect on the clearance of meropenem. Conclusion. To increase the effectiveness of antibacterial therapy, it is necessary to conduct research aimed at developing protocols for dosing antibacterial drugs for the treatment of sepsis during extracorporeal blood purification.


This case focuses on the use of intensive insulin therapy with sepsis by asking the question: What are the safety and efficacy of intensive insulin therapy compared with conventional therapy and hydroxyethyl starch (HES) compared with Ringer’s lactate in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock? This study demonstrated that critically ill patients did not benefit from intensive insulin therapy targeting blood glucose levels of 80–110 mg/dL vs. conventional insulin therapy nor from fluid resuscitation with HES vs. Ringer’s lactate. Neither intensive insulin therapy nor fluid resuscitation with HES is currently recommended in major sepsis guidelines.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document